MONSTER variance (w/ graphs)

[daryn]

whew i am glad i'm not going crazy

[Mig]

[ QUOTE ]
Just want to say that if I showed anyone of these hands to anyone on my AIM list and said doughnutz played it the response would be "typical doughnutz".

[/ QUOTE ]

Well if someone told me they were all played by a known stars regular, my first guess would have been pokkermon and then doug... fwiw these are all poorly played. There is time where capping Axs is good play but not when someone 3 bet your UTG raises imo. There is no doubt in my mind that 1k bb's swings are the norm for a guy like doug or pokkermon. If they haven't experienced more of them now it might just be because they caught the good side of variance and that they didn't play nearly enough hands.

When I see his graph and that he has been such a huge winner(considering how bad he plays sometimes) I feel that variance could be even worse than some might think. In the past everyone said that win rates wasn't accurate for less than 50k hands but now maybe should we raise the limit to 300-400k hands ?

[daryn]

doug. hahaha


[ QUOTE ]
When I see his graph and that he has been such a huge winner(considering how bad he plays sometimes) I feel that variance could be even worse than some might think. In the past everyone said that win rates wasn't accurate for less than 50k hands but now maybe should we raise the limit to 300-400k hands ?

[/ QUOTE ]

i believe it

[ggbman]

[ QUOTE ]
doug. hahaha


[ QUOTE ]
When I see his graph and that he has been such a huge winner(considering how bad he plays sometimes) I feel that variance could be even worse than some might think. In the past everyone said that win rates wasn't accurate for less than 50k hands but now maybe should we raise the limit to 300-400k hands ?

[/ QUOTE ]

i believe it

[/ QUOTE ]

Same. I have been saying for a super long time that people just have no f'in clue how much variance there is in the game. There are sooo many situations where variance affects a hand where it might not even be considered. Consider that every single time

-You are calling down with a drawing type hand or call or a turn with an AJ type hand on a QTxx board and hit a J on the river, making a call mandatory and correct, but you always lose to a Qx or better hand

-You correctly play a draw aggressivley against solid players where you should have enough F/E, but run into hands that are good enough to charge you the maximum AND you hit a bit less often than you should

-Having a significant deviation in your results in the type of hands like the 3s5s hands over large samples will have a HUUUUUGE impact on your earn when your equity is so high

-Simple things like having a liberal 3 bettor catching flops with are horrible for your hand (i.e. everytime you open A9 OTB and the BB three bets a huge range but every flop is KQx)

-Every time you showdown with TT on the J62 board after getting c/r by the Laggy BB and he always has Jx

Obviously you guys have considered all this, and i know it all seems like it should be flagrantly obvious to winning high stakes players, but sometimes it just seems like people think of variance by such a narrow definition and don't consider all the circumstances where variances [censored] with your results over huge samples.

Also bear in mind that people who legitmatley do run much worse than average over a 75k hand sample just SHOULD LOGICALLY BE

-More prone to tilt, both obvious big brain farts and more subtle mistakes
-Have probably seen results over a reasonable large sample thatare so skewed that their percecption of what is the correct play CANNNOT remain unaffected because their short term memory is cluttered with the recent results. Believe me, no one can play 100k hands or w/e and think only about the 700k hands before that when evaluating the correct decision

For guys like schnieds and Dean, do i think that their game selection and length of their sessions helps them avoid swings of this magnitude? Of course it does! But i'm also confident that variance has helped more. Thats not a knock on those guys, i consider them both good guys and friends, but it's just more likely that

-Other people playing 4x as many hands are more likely to see these swings before they do
-They have benefitted from a certain type of positive variance in that they haven't had these swings (FWIW they could also run slighlty worse of huge samples to even their earn even though they are still winning, but have managed not to have the huge downswings that other posters have)

People just need to look at the progression of these types of threads. A while ago, a 500 BB downer was "Impossible" without a lot of bad play, and now almost every single solid winning player has experienced something of this nature. Obviously they play a bit worse, and at the same time it's very evident that we underestimated how much variance is in the this game. (And this has only increases and the games have become more aggresive and the tendancy tends to move away from games running 8-10 handed)

***Also FWIW, this is coming from me at a time where i am running relativley well recently, i have just experienced enough first hand and seen enough second hand from good players to know that variance is much more extreme than people think***

[tongni]

Just wanted to say that in your Party days when you were winning your 1 bb/100 for your 300k hands or whatever I thought you played super similar to how doughnutz plays now, but once you moved over to stars I thought you played much better and ran worse than anyone. Just goes to show how rough variance can be sometimes.

[Cedrico]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just want to say that if I showed anyone of these hands to anyone on my AIM list and said doughnutz played it the response would be "typical doughnutz".

[/ QUOTE ]

Well if someone told me they were all played by a known stars regular, my first guess would have been pokkermon and then doug... fwiw these are all poorly played. There is time where capping Axs is good play but not when someone 3 bet your UTG raises imo. There is no doubt in my mind that 1k bb's swings are the norm for a guy like doug or pokkermon.

[/ QUOTE ]

Considering your posts about Pokkermon, and your refusal to reveal how much he robbed you, what is your nick so I can add you to the "Victims of the Pokkermon" list [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[jonnybegood_134]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just want to say that if I showed anyone of these hands to anyone on my AIM list and said doughnutz played it the response would be "typical doughnutz".

[/ QUOTE ]

Well if someone told me they were all played by a known stars regular, my first guess would have been pokkermon and then doug... fwiw these are all poorly played. There is time where capping Axs is good play but not when someone 3 bet your UTG raises imo. There is no doubt in my mind that 1k bb's swings are the norm for a guy like doug or pokkermon.

[/ QUOTE ]

Considering your posts about Pokkermon, and your refusal to reveal how much he robbed you, what is your nick so I can add you to the "Victims of the Pokkermon" list [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]


Add mig and hock to this list:

[daryn]

wow ggbman, exactly.

[Schneids]

Not to say I don't run good or whatever cuz people can go ahead and think I do if they want, but even though these guys all play more hands than me in the last 12 month stretch, I've been playing online as my job for about 4 years now... Over these 4 years, I've amassed a lot of hands myself too. Plus my first few years I was much better about playing a lot of hands, so I feel like I have a fairly large sample size to speak from too, even if some of the game textures were a little different than what the games I presently play in are like.

I will maintain till the end of time that these 1000BB swings are perpetuated by people trying to play through them. It's pretty much irrefutable IMO. I'm not saying they're not running bad, cuz surely they are. But, they're definitely tacking on several hundreds of extra BBs by continuing to play with the frequency they play when a session is turning into a nice loser.

[daryn]

the problem is you really will never know if you are just blessed because you just haven't been on that sick bad run that seems like you can't ever win again.