[OFFICIAL] Winrates, bankrolls, and finances - Page 558 - Live Low-stakes No Limit Poker Forum

Two Plus Two Forums Poker Strategy Live No-Limit Hold’em Cash

[OFFICIAL] Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

View Poll Results: What is your Win Rate in terms of BB per Housr

Less than 0 (losing)

5 6.41%

0-2.5

0 0%

2.5-5

6 7.69%

5-7.5

8 10.26%

7.5-10

15 19.23%

10+

26 33.33%

Not enough sample size/I don't know

18 23.08%

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 558 of 1069

First

58 358 458 508 538 548 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 568 578 608 658 758 1058

Last

Page 558 of 1069

First

58 358 458 508 538 548 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 568 578 608 658 758 1058

Last

03-07-2016 , 03:22 PM

#13926

Richard Parker

banned

Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 13,949

Quote:

Originally Posted by VolumeKing

In long term who has worse swings, 10bb winrates or 4bb? Long term being 1k hours or more

It's a really bad question.

In a less than optimal game condition in which winning big is much harder than losing big, then I am pretty sure 10bb/hr winner has fewer bad swings.

In an optimal condition, it could easily be either one.

Quote

03-07-2016 , 03:23 PM

#13927

Gilmour

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: May 2013 Posts: 3,930

Quote:

Originally Posted by N3uromant3

Same I am doing right now.. Over one year doing it.. currently my hourly winning at poker are bigger than my net hourly pay at work. I would consider turning into full time pp if and only if my hourly winning reaches the gross hourly pay over an huge sample.. does it make sense to you? Same strategy?

It makes sense yes. I mean, playing fulltime is another ballpark, and i believe thats a big decisison to make for any person- crusher or not. There is always the option of just try playing fulltime for a period of time, and see how you like it. Nothing is written in stone right, so there is always the option of going back to get a job again if fulltime poker isnt what you imagined.

I mean for me, just the sheer stressfree type of life you can have when working 50 percent to cover your important expences every month is worth so much. Not just the risk free money incoming, but also having collegues, and some sort of ancor in your day to day life.

Quote

03-07-2016 , 03:24 PM

#13928

VolumeKing

adept

Join Date: Jan 2016 Posts: 729

Nah it's an easy question you just don't know what you're talking about

Quote

03-07-2016 , 03:25 PM

#13929

Richard Parker

banned

Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 13,949

Quote:

Originally Posted by VolumeKing

Nah it's an easy question you just don't know what you're talking about

Yep, you're right...

Quote

03-07-2016 , 03:30 PM

#13930

VolumeKing

adept

Join Date: Jan 2016 Posts: 729

I think you should spend some time learning about this stuff before you act as if you have all the answers when you clearly don't.

Spend some time on here and look at the variance between winrates

http://pokerdope.com/poker-variance-calculator/

In regards to your answer and statistics of course a smaller win rate could have less swings, but we can say with a high level of confidence that higher winrate(slope) has less swings over the long term than a lower winrate.

Can we see your graphs and results, maybe see what happened with yours?

Quote

03-07-2016 , 03:34 PM

#13931

spikeraw22

The Situation

Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 8,741

That's impossible to say. It could be 400 up and 100 down or 4000 up 3700 down.

Quote

03-07-2016 , 03:34 PM

#13932

Richard Parker

banned

Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 13,949

So you already have the answers and you're here to test me or something?

Of course I don't have all the answers, but I do have a clear rational thought process and I can easily identify where my thought process may be incorrect.

Quote

03-07-2016 , 03:37 PM

#13933

VolumeKing

adept

Join Date: Jan 2016 Posts: 729

It's like when you ask someone to explain a mathematical idea and you see that they can't. Yes I know the answer, I wanted to see if you did and then I happens to use google to make sure I was correct. There is a great variance simulator on that site and it will show you exactly how extreme the swings are between High and low winrateS. Check it out. Learn. Admit you're wrong and grow

Last edited by VolumeKing; 03-07-2016 at 03:41 PM. Reason: In b4 I'm wrong

Quote

03-07-2016 , 03:41 PM

#13934

Richard Parker

banned

Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 13,949

Quote:

Originally Posted by VolumeKing

It's like when you ask someone to explain a mathematical idea and you see that they can't.

I know what I can and answer only those that I can.

Quote:

Originally Posted by VolumeKing

Yes I know the answer, I wanted to see if you did and then I happens to use google to make sure I was correct.

You have access to the answer, but that's not the same as knowing the answer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by VolumeKing

There is a great variance simulator on that site and it will show you exactly how extreme the swings are between High and low winrateS. Check it out. Learn. Admit you're wrong and grow

See, you're already demonstrating that you don't understand it.

Think about it this way:

If a guy never wins or loses any money after 1000 sessions, his variance is effectively 0, and so is his WR.

Quote

03-07-2016 , 03:42 PM

#13935

spikeraw22

The Situation

Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 8,741

This has turned bizarre quickly. Can we talk about sled hockey?

Quote

03-07-2016 , 03:46 PM

#13936

Richard Parker

banned

Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 13,949

FWIW, my credential is my GMAT score

.

Me no advance math, but me know good enough math.

Quote

03-07-2016 , 03:56 PM

#13937

VolumeKing

adept

Join Date: Jan 2016 Posts: 729

beautiful thing about math is that credentials don't matter, only matters that the equation balances

I would also pose this question. For which winrate (10bb or 4bb)would you need a larger bankroll, and why?

Quote

03-07-2016 , 04:01 PM

#13938

Richard Parker

banned

Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 13,949

LOL, I know where this is going.

I think we already had the "good players don't need big roll" argument some pages back. Feel free to search.

Once again, your thought process is convoluted.

You're confused by the idea of RoR (risk of ruin) and idea of maxing WR coupling with variance.

Naturally a 10bb/hr winner comparing vs a 4bb/hr winner will need smaller roll to avoid busto, but that's not the context we have been discussing.

I think bip! was right in this instance. You are confusing "downswing" with variance.

Quote

03-07-2016 , 04:07 PM

#13939

feel wrath

The Situation

Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 29,814

Quote:

Originally Posted by VolumeKing

In long term who has worse swings, 10bb winrates or 4bb? Long term being 1k hours or more

4bb of course. Is this a level?

Quote

03-07-2016 , 04:14 PM

#13940

Richard Parker

banned

Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 13,949

Quote:

Originally Posted by feel wrath

4bb of course. Is this a level?

FWIW, this isn't true.

4bb/hr winner could have no swings...

Quote

03-07-2016 , 04:15 PM

#13941

VolumeKing

adept

Join Date: Jan 2016 Posts: 729

Quote:

Originally Posted by VolumeKing

In long term who has worse swings, 10bb winrates or 4bb? Long term being 1k hours or more

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Parker

I wanted to see what people thought

Quote

03-07-2016 , 04:21 PM

#13942

suited fours

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 4,143

Quote:

Originally Posted by VolumeKing

In long term who has worse swings, 10bb winrates or 4bb? Long term being 1k hours or more

Trick question, nobody itt only wins 4bb / hr

Quote

03-07-2016 , 04:24 PM

#13943

feel wrath

The Situation

Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 29,814

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Parker

FWIW, this isn't true.

4bb/hr winner could have no swings...

All we have to deal with is the question though (nothing about playing styles) and all other things remaining equal a guy that wins at 10bb an hour will have fewer downswings than somebody winning at 4 bb hr because the card and other variance train has to hit them on average 6bb hr harder for them to lose money

Quote

03-07-2016 , 04:34 PM

#13944

Richard Parker

banned

Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 13,949

Quote:

Originally Posted by feel wrath

Again that's not true...

If the 4bb guy somehow cashes out exactly 4bb ahead every time, he would have zero downswing.

Maybe we need a COTM on variance.

Quote

03-07-2016 , 04:36 PM

#13945

Gilmour

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: May 2013 Posts: 3,930

Thats a good idea RP, variance is an interesting topic for sure. If you would do i COTM article writeup on variance, i would be happy to read it and participate in the discussion.

Quote

03-07-2016 , 04:39 PM

#13946

gobbledygeek

Poet Laureate of LLSNL

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 36,138

Quote:

Originally Posted by spikeraw22

Didn't know they had wheel chair hockey.

Lol.

One team I'm on plays on a rink designed for sled hockey (no lips on the benches entering the ice surface, seats far back from the semi-transparent boards, etc.). They're often playing before our game, cripes it looks like a lotta work.

GnowbacktoyourregularlyscheduledprogrammingG

Quote

03-07-2016 , 04:41 PM

#13947

Bluegrassplayer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 38,648

How pedantic can you get RP?

Maybe the line is moving up and down the same amount, but the bigger winner is going to be winning during a downswing more often.

Quote

03-07-2016 , 04:42 PM

#13948

Richard Parker

banned

Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 13,949

My bad for putting some thoughts into these questions...

Lol.

And you are still missing the point. There are many LLSNL players who cannot win at high WR not because they lose more often.

Quote

03-07-2016 , 04:44 PM

#13949

Bluegrassplayer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 38,648

You're not though. You're just being pedantic and arguing a nonpoint to be confrontational.

Quote

03-07-2016 , 04:48 PM

#13950

Richard Parker

banned

Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 13,949

Was I wrong that they're wrong?

Lower WR does not mean having experienced worse swings. Is it really hard to understand that?

If that's understood, then you realize that the question is non-sensical.

Quote

Page 558 of 1069

First

58 358 458 508 538 548 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 568 578 608 658 758 1058

Last

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 558 of 1069

First

58 358 458 508 538 548 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 568 578 608 658 758 1058

Last