Is the sample size of one tournament (say 1000 players) more or less meaningful than the samplesize of one cashgame hand (HU NL) played? Or is the sample size of 10000 tournaments played (1000 players average field size) more or less meaningful than the samplesize of 10000 cashgame hands (HU NL) played?
What would you guess, how big does the average field size of the tournament have to be, so that one tournament equals one cashgame hand (NL HU) played in terms of variance (meaning how much the result deviates from your long term winrate, $per tournament for mtt and $/hand for cashgame)?
I'm not going to answer your question because I see no fruit on that limb. However, this is my personal philosophy on variance:
Quote:
After 15 years of poker I've come to the conclusion that it's all about keeping your head above water between hot streaks.
Of course, one can never know if and when a hot streak will hit. Just keep swimming and on a long enough timeline you'll eventually hit that massive heater.
