pokersystem question

[darkcore]

this came up in another poker forum and -as a mathnoob- i'd like a quick linecheck for my argument.

consider this pokersystem:

1. you play no-limit
2. you buy in for 100bb (but don't reload when you are below 100bb)
3. you quit a table when you are up or down 50bb
4. you quit a table when you played 60 minutes on it

okay, my argument is that this system is not optimal for a winning player (you don't play with full-stacks all the time, you don't really do tableselection (you base it only on stop-loss/win-stop and time), etc.) and thus it should lead to a lower winrate. the standard deviation should be (all other factors equal) the same and the risk of ruin because of this higher (same sd with a lower winrate).

am i missing something here?

[filsteal]

Yes, you're missing something, but it's hard to say if the overall conclusion is right or wrong.

If you're routinely sitting with a shallower stack, then your standard deviation WILL be lower, simply because you'll lose less when you get stacked and win less when you stack somebody else.

So the winrate and standard deviation will both go down. As for what happens to the risk of ruin, who knows.

[darkcore]

yeah, thank you. you picked exactly the point (standard deviation) where i wasn't sure...

[SunOfBeach]

Why leave a good table (ie with bad players) after 60 minutes?

[darkcore]

or why stay at a bad table for 60 minutes?

this system came up after a discussion of the "hit-and-run"-strategy. it is flawed and you'll win less when you use it. but something about my conclusions just felt wrong (filsteal pointed out what i was missing) and that's why i asked for the linecheck.