MONSTER variance (w/ graphs)

[mntbikr15]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What's your name on Stars?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm interested in this as well, it seems as every time a thread comes up about a high stakes limit player on stars, daryn comes out to say how bad they suck except for a few maybe.

[/ QUOTE ]

iirc its not exactly a secret, pretty sure I knew it at one time. Dont remember anymore though. A search would turn it up.

[DpR]

I'm normally the one suggesting that people overestimate variance. However, even I do not think there is really any doubt that playing 3-4 handed in medicore games is going to lead to huge variance (1k BB).

There is no doubt there is a huge difference in percieved variance between a win rate of 1.75 to 1ish.

I do not think you will find any players who play in tough 3-4 handed games that think a 1k BB downswing is not possible when playing well.

[AndyatSD]

Hi doughnutz,

TanShuiWen here. You own me and you know it (i.e., I think you are one of the better players on PStars). So now that we got that out of the way here are my two cents...

I don't think much of incomplete data sets (such as that datamine of the players I saw a few months back, which I compared my own results with it and found, at least for myself, it was grossly off) - but just by playing with you for many many hands I'd say you are for sure a solid winning player. You have at minimum a standard understanding of the game (more than what can be said about most people), and most importantly you know how the conventional type of players play (the typical TAG, typical LAG, etc) and accordingly apply a lot of pressure post flop on boards that would give said type of players a real headache given the circumstances, regardless of your two cards. For that reason, I think you are one of the toughest players to play against out of position (I'm sure you've noticed I've taken the check-call line against you much more than normal).

But it's also for that reason that I think your variance is huge. I think you bank a lot of your game on things like 'well 40% of your hands here would do good against this flop but 60% of your hands won't' so you try to shoove people off of hands when you both miss. I think it's not a stretch to imagine that while this will aggregrate and converge in the long run point, it's probably multiple times more likely that you run into a 'crazy swing' compared to the typical player.

You are also a better player than me because in the middle of this downswing you appeared to still be able to play at a near-A game level. I can't say the same about myself - I think I been playing pretty poor at stretches during this last two weeks [while we're on that note, anyone have any advice on major holes to plug for me? : )].

I think you already know what to do and you're posting primarily to just let it out of your system. As I said in my post - your results are not typical of conventional 2p2 style, so it's not likely the typical readers of this board will experience what you experience. Alerting them to the subject of variance won't do much good overall. On the other hand if you're just looking for validation that *you* are just experiencing variance - my vote is with you.

~andy

[Hock_]

Thanks for the post.

You say:

[ QUOTE ]
But it's also for that reason that I think your variance is huge.

[/ QUOTE ]

And the possibility that my style would result in increased variance definitely occurred to me. But the fact is that in the past I've actually had very manageable variance. I've never had a downswing of more than 350 BBs or so. Never a losing month. Since turning pro 10+mos ago I've never even had 3 losing days in a row (all until this stretch last month, that is). So I don't think that's it.

Of course, maybe I've just been the luckbox that everyone seems to think I am and that's the reason I haven't gotten clobbered before.

[MarkD]

Hock,

What is your standard deviation 2 handed, 3 handed, 4 handed, 5-6 handed?

[AndyatSD]

I only suggested your style as a cause to offer some alternative lines of thinking. It's good to see that you already considered it, but to provide another counter-point:

The old adage is 'if it's probable, it's possible'. Let's just assume (and this is a very generous given) that you didn't have variance in your favor and it was normal for you to never even had 3 losing days in a row, and the most you ever did was lose 2 days in a row for maybe a 350 BB down-stretch.

Even then - it is *still possible* to go on a run you did, or even worse. The worse the run, the more unlikely, but to drive the point home - still possible.

An event with .1% probability of occuring, occured. It was very unlikely, but it happened, and it can happen because it has just that, 1/1000 probability of occuring. Live and let live.

With that said, reality is usually harsher than the given we assumed here, so again - any kind of downswing or luckbox can be possible. I think I also am the perfect example of variance. I've also rarely had 3 consecutive sessions of losing (especially not at Party, I think Party kept God-mode on for me) for the past 2-3 years, and as most experts can probably attest to, it wasn't because of skill ; ) When I do go on sick downswings - I *know* for a fact that I'm compounding cold decked with bad play - so I got myself to blame.

Deep inside I think this is still bothering you! So for you - I'd still say just cheer up! Go out and do what else you enjoy doing for a while. You said you just turned pro 10 months ago, surely this justifies a deserved vacation. Go travel to a few places you never been to. NBA playoffs is going on - go watch a game while you're traveling. Golf some - read a book, enjoy the sun. Poker isn't everything, and in a week or two you'll be fully recharged and killing the game again and brush this off as a thing in the past. Just stop doing it at my expense and take it easy when you see a funny named donk (i.e., me) on your tables. I usually play poker after a hard day's work and sometimes you just run. me. over. : )

Peace,

~andy

[kahntrutahn]

I've had a 1080 BB swing before, and I assure you, I'm a winning player. [censored] happens. Barring that one disaster of disasters though, I don't think I've ever broken 600 (though I came quite close twice more as I recall).

Long story short, large swings can and will happen even to winners.

[Schneids]

I think a lot of the swings you guys experience are perpetuated by the fact you both play super long sessions and try to "play your way through them," when really, it's just simply tougher to win when you're running bad because opponents pick up on it and attack you and play you more 'correctly.' Cutting sessions short IMO cuts back on the potential likelihood for 1000BB downswings.

Knock on wood but I've yet to experience a downswing over 330BBs, and have only had 2 300BB downswings in my life.

[PartyGirlUK]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Could you post your SN bcs Im sure plenty of posters will have played with you and could comment on whether you were playing [censored] or not.

D

[/ QUOTE ]

this is fairly useless. if he has been losing a ton of course everyone is gonna say he sucks and has been playing bad. they dont know what hes had, how colddecked hes been and all the other stuff. ive seen ugly variance (from myslelf and roommate) and heard from others like joshw and bk. i believe it.

dean, you simply dont understand long term implications of lhe. you sit back, smug and superior, bc it hasnt happened to you. the reason is that you havent played nearly as many hands as the rest and have been far luckier. gawd i remember when u lost 250bb and felt the world was ending. gimme a fckn break.

[/ QUOTE ]

Vic I asked a question, I'm genuinely curious - if a bunch of peopel come out and say they havent noticed any bad play over the past couple of months that makes the variance angle much more likely. Fwiw I dont everyone would think someone sucks just based on them losing, I base my impressions of a player on how they play their hands (may well be some link to how well you run tho, but it isnt the be all and end all)

D

[kahntrutahn]

[ QUOTE ]
I think a lot of the swings you guys experience are perpetuated by the fact you both play super long sessions and try to "play your way through them," when really, it's just simply tougher to win when you're running bad because opponents pick up on it and attack you and play you more 'correctly.' Cutting sessions short IMO cuts back on the potential likelihood for 1000BB downswings.

Knock on wood but I've yet to experience a downswing over 330BBs, and have only had 2 300BB downswings in my life.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've seen you say this a few times and while I feel there is truth in what you say, I cannot bring myself to leave a game with bad players and I think it would be counterproductive to do so.

Now, given that I see you play in what I consider terrible games all the time where your EV cannot be large at all, even with your superior skills, it would most certainly be best to leave when losing and stay when winning to exploit the tilt of your opponents (as you often say you do).

Your game obviously works and I envy your lack of large swings, maybe I'll emulate your methodology a bit and see what happens.