Keep in mind their first introduction to the term was likely at a poker table, from another poker player talking about "variance" after taking a beat.

And previously misinformed people are much more defensive in an argument than uninformed people. So.. there you have the DNA of the WR thread.

bip! droppin the knowledge

So further you play from GTO, the lower variance is?

Such notion is ridiculous, but you probably haven't thought of the flip side to your statement.

I do not think you fully understand what GTO means, and you really do not need to understand it in LLSNL.

Biggest nit in the world is at your table and in your thousands of hours playing with him, he has never once raised preflop without AA.

Random player comes to the table and it's his first time ever playing with this biggest nit. Biggest nit raises in MP, random looks down to see KK and re-raises AI.

Is random 3betting with KK a -EV play?

To you, it obviously is, but to him, it's hugely +EV.

The point of the example is that of course EV is different from player to player, because EV calculation relies on range assessment and everyone ranges differently based on several factors.

Definition of thin value never changes, simply means low +EV.

What you have in mind is a situation similar to my example, in which case, underlying variables of EV calculation change, and thin value is not thin value to someone with more information.

However, it still doesn't change the relationship between thin value and variance.

As an evolutionary biologist, I can state with 98% certainty that this thread has succumbed to inbreeding depression. About 34% of the variance can be apportioned to skip's "beauty"...ahem... "pageant."

I guess Captain Obvious to some is General Knowledge to others.

Oh wait...what? LOL.

loooooooooooooooooooooool

Also have a question

Is 2/2 with 150 max buy in, 10% rake and 10$ cap still beatable? If so; what would be a decent hourly, is 15+ even possible?

Casino really ****ed us over in the Netherlands

People beat even worse rake structures, so yes to beatable.

How beatable will get a ton of answers ITT... none of which matter. Go play it and report back.

( sorry - that sounds worse than I meant. GL)

I think 3/6 limit with $6 rake/tip/drop is beatable.

But I will not report back.

hehe alright thanks

Seared into my mind is the fact that GG beat 2/4 limit over a large sample.. such a good example of what is possible.

FYI, if you play every hand with $100 starting stack and raise to $99 pre and fold on river, your variance will be 0.

#zerovarianceftw

He did factor in the BB jackpot.

Daisy Duke shorts tho

$1.94/hr over 1,353 hours at 2/4 Limit (obviously does not include my big BBJ win). *BUT* that was with a maximum rake of $3; having a rake of $4 would have made me ~breakeven over that period.

Plus, I probably just ran good.

Gjustoneman'sresults,butIdoubtslowstakesLimitgames arebeatableG

I did mean no limit btw

and sick ^

Yeah I don't fault them; it just never occurred to me exactly HOW it was being misunderstood--that variance is essentially thought of as just negative variance.

Variance is volatility. I am currently running like GOD and am up over 3k at 1/3 in my last 64 hours. This is positive variance. I highly recommend it.

The opposite of GTO I think would be folding every hand? Which has 0 variance.

But I agree with what you said in thin value and take back what I said

Don't worry about GTO.

Just read last 6-7 pages of thread. Can I get a refund?

Quite a downswing, eh?

Or maybe variance of thread.
What do I know though, my WR -27BB/hr over last 48 hrs.

So obviously I am not qualified to have an opinion

The QQ vs AK aipf is a big edge, folding the QQ was the example of a marginal spot and that's wrong, 33 vs AK is a marginal spot.

Guys who are just starting are impressionable, I didn't mind the advice in the specific HH threads, guys should be able to consider everything and know what they're capable of. But in this thread when the guy said foregoing any marginal spot definitely means you're going broke, that was really bad for that group.

Again, what?

That's fine if you want to label 56:44 or 1.27:1 as big edge.

QQ vs AK is big edge and folding QQ is an example of a marginal spot that's wrong?

Que?

53:47 or 1.11:1 is marginal and 56:44 or 1.27:1 is big edge.

Ok...

Ok, so you're looking out for the new guys.

What guy, which guy?

Who's you? How is forgoing marginal spots mean that person is going broke?

I mean dang...what are you talking about?

This thread is awesome. And subbed.