Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Live No-Limit Hold’em Cash Discussion of no-limit hold’em live cash games of all stakes.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-21-2017, 04:18 PM   #19101
LordRiverRat
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 3,513
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

I know the 280 hour sample is nothing. But I'm just hoping my bb/hr won't drop as much. So in a week or two when I'm ready I'll shot take on weekends and if I run good I might stay there weekdays too. I noticed my std dev per day is only about $420. Averaging 7.5 hours per day played, that's about a std dev of just over $150/hr which seems pretty small. I guess that's indicative of being overly nitty and perhaps missing spots where I can be more LAG? Surely the std dev doesn't taken thousands of hours to converge.
LordRiverRat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2017, 04:50 PM   #19102
Malucci
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Malucci's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 10,779
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

When I lost all my poker journal stats during an iOS update a couple years ago I went with RunGood and have been pleased with it ever since.
Malucci is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2017, 04:52 PM   #19103
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,371
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by LordRiverRat View Post
I know the 280 hour sample is nothing. But I'm just hoping my bb/hr won't drop as much. Surely the std dev doesn't taken thousands of hours to converge.
The more hours you put in over the the more years you play you'll realize how little any of these resulting stats matter (especially as conditions change). My stats at 1/3 over 3400+ hours state I'm a $22.11/hr winner, and yet I think in my current game conditions that result would be extremely difficult to achieve over the long term moving forward (and I certainly don't expect to win at anything remotely close to that rate unless conditions change drastically).

This "I've done x at y, therefore what should I expect at z" is unlikely to be answered to any satisfaction.

GgoodluckG
gobbledygeek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2017, 04:54 PM   #19104
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,371
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Malucci View Post
When I lost all my poker journal stats during an iOS update a couple years ago I went with RunGood and have been pleased with it ever since.
Thx. I'll have to look a bit more into whether I can salvage my PokerJournal and if its done then make a decision whether it's worth trying to import all my previous stats into another app.

GR.I.P.giraffes,longlivegiraffesG
gobbledygeek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2017, 04:56 PM   #19105
spikeraw22
The Situation
 
spikeraw22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: SB is the new BTN
Posts: 8,731
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

I'm finding that not playing at all is a quick way to break even over a long sample of time.
spikeraw22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2017, 04:59 PM   #19106
Avaritia
Confirmed 2500 hour haver
 
Avaritia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 12,215
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by spikeraw22 View Post
I'm finding that not playing at all is a quick way to break even over a long sample of time.
The mc bbj would be a mighty fine add to your wr imo.
Avaritia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2017, 05:10 PM   #19107
AlmostGood
journeyman
 
AlmostGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Mount Variance
Posts: 266
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by spikeraw22 View Post
I'm finding that not playing at all is a quick way to break even over a long sample of time.
Truueee

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
AlmostGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2017, 05:36 PM   #19108
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,371
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by spikeraw22 View Post
I'm finding that not playing at all is a quick way to break even over a long sample of time.
You're probably just running good.

GlolzG
gobbledygeek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2017, 07:45 AM   #19109
homerdash
banned
 
homerdash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: desert
Posts: 6,062
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

this is 1656 hours over the past 4 years after consolidating results, lol.

homerdash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2017, 08:32 AM   #19110
DonkeyCopter
old hand
 
DonkeyCopter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Downtown
Posts: 1,316
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

DonkeyCopter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2017, 11:41 AM   #19111
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,371
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Ha, I'm guessing you didn't play much until the giraffe spiked up?

And is that a $6K downwsing at the peak? Yikes (if low stakes)!

Gbutwinning,congrats!G
gobbledygeek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2017, 12:07 PM   #19112
Angrist
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,883
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Looks like it.

While it doesn't change your actual "winrate" in $/hr, it's interesting to plot your results by calendar time as well as by hours played. You can sometimes see where you burn out from playing too many hours in short periods (leading to fatigue and mistakes).
Angrist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2017, 12:22 PM   #19113
homerdash
banned
 
homerdash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: desert
Posts: 6,062
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

actually there was a decent amount of playing at the beginning of that garf, it was just in such a narrow range of +/-



that spike was basically cashing in on sitting through the above, and then back to BE mode

homerdash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2017, 02:27 PM   #19114
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,371
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by gobbledygeek View Post
I'll have to look a bit more into whether I can salvage my PokerJournal
I finally got around to trying the oldest trick in the book: reboot. That seemed to clear up the problem.

GwhoopG
gobbledygeek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2017, 10:15 PM   #19115
h0trod
grinder
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 429
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

I'm a rec player but I try not to be a huge fish. I read books, listen to podcasts, watch some videos but I have a full time job and can't exactly dedicate my life to getting better at poker. I play what is probably a too nitty, low variance style and I am sure that I don't get all the value I should be getting out of my good hands. I think I should probably be losing more sessions, but winning more overall. Interested to hear any thoughts on that.

Started tracking in 6/2015 so this is about two years. I was between jobs for a few months at the end of last year / beginning of this year and got to play more and had slightly better results in that stretch. Graphs filtered to NLHE (and it's pretty much all 1/2), because I play a 2/4-3/6 FL game with a bunch of old guys a couple times a month and trying not to muck up the stats.



h0trod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2017, 12:14 AM   #19116
aoFrantic
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
aoFrantic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 23,503
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Congrats dude.

I've had a higher bb/100 winrate in 2/5 than 1/2 in basically any year. To go to a casino, see no 2/5 or PLO and then play a 1/2 game where you buy in for $400 and the rest of the table has $600 combined usually means I go home. Even the worst $2/5 games have enough money on the table to make money just winning blinds.
aoFrantic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2017, 10:36 AM   #19117
browni3141
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: South Florida
Posts: 5,121
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

I cross-posted this from another thread to prevent further derail.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic View Post
Shorter games are definitely higher variance. Why would you think it's the opposite?
Common sense and math. There is an absolute limit to how much variance a game can have, and this correlates positively with the stack sizes. Smaller and smaller stacks definitely don't lead to higher and higher variance. For a silly example, a .2BB stack game obviously has lower variance than a 200BB stack game. How can a shorter game be lower variance when there is literally a limit to the amount of "variance" you can experience in an individual hand? In a 200BB game compared to a 100BB game, you are still winning/losing 100BB hands about as often as you are winning/losing them in a 100BB game, you are just not all-in and have the potential to win/lose even more, which leads to higher variance. There are a lot of times where the stack size limits your win or loss in a game, which directly limits your variance.

There are times where someone might just take a 50BB loss in a 200BB max game where they might commit a stack instead in a 100BB max game, but I don't think this is enough to counteract other effects.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic View Post
Genuinely, look at the online db of anyone who has a sufficient sample size of shallow games (ftp ran 20-40bb tables for a while that were super soft and not a total rake trap), normal 100bb games and 100-250bb games.

This shouldn't even be a tough question, your variance is so, so much higher in smaller games.
I'd love to look at such a database, but I don't know where they exist. My own online database isn't very big and has hardly any short-stacked hands.

Also, we're talking about short vs. deep games, not big vs. small games. I definitely agree that variance is higher in smaller games in terms of BBs.

Mathematically and logically it makes no sense to me that shorter games would have higher variance.
browni3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2017, 10:44 AM   #19118
Avaritia
Confirmed 2500 hour haver
 
Avaritia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 12,215
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

No, i believe its correct. Im pretty sure its fairly well documented that good shortstackers had much higher variance than good deepstack lags. Mostly bc of your third paragraph, which im too lazy to try to quote now that ive already started typing quick reply.

The term variance is always a bit confusing to me as it relates to poker. But i believe this is true bc shorter games rely on showdown winnings more and deeper games rely on non showdown winnings more and non showdown smooths out your wr more.

Could be off on that last bit.
Avaritia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2017, 11:58 AM   #19119
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,371
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

In shortstack games, a lotta time you're doing << 60/40 preflop flips with some dead money, so pretty high variance.

GIthink?G
gobbledygeek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2017, 12:57 PM   #19120
Enzioo
stranger
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 3
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

This discussion made me curious so I decided to go and check my online MTT database(I never play shortstacked in online cash so don't have a sample) to find out what the relation between stack size and variance looks like. This is what it looks like in graph form:



Total sample is about 175k hands, only the 250bb and up stack sizes don't have a significant sample size. Now obviously online MTTs and live cash are quite different but I am very doubtful that shortstacking increases variance because the fact that you can win/lose a lot more bbs when your stack size is larger matters a lot. Y axis is std.dev per 100 hands. X-axis is stack size from high to low

I think the idea that shortstacking increases variance comes from winrates being higher when deep, and higher winrates result in a lower possibility of losing. The variance probably also feels higher because you are all in more often when short.
Enzioo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2017, 01:27 PM   #19121
browni3141
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: South Florida
Posts: 5,121
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enzioo View Post
This discussion made me curious so I decided to go and check my online MTT database(I never play shortstacked in online cash so don't have a sample) to find out what the relation between stack size and variance looks like. This is what it looks like in graph form:



Total sample is about 175k hands, only the 250bb and up stack sizes don't have a significant sample size. Now obviously online MTTs and live cash are quite different but I am very doubtful that shortstacking increases variance because the fact that you can win/lose a lot more bbs when your stack size is larger matters a lot. Y axis is std.dev per 100 hands. X-axis is stack size from high to low

I think the idea that shortstacking increases variance comes from winrates being higher when deep, and higher winrates result in a lower possibility of losing. The variance probably also feels higher because you are all in more often when short.
Thanks for sharing! I agree with the last paragraph.

Here is the image which didn't show up properly.



It's still really hard to see the axes labels, though. It's here http://imgur.com/2yZYddF
browni3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2017, 01:53 PM   #19122
aoFrantic
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
aoFrantic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 23,503
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avaritia View Post
No, i believe its correct. Im pretty sure its fairly well documented that good shortstackers had much higher variance than good deepstack lags. Mostly bc of your third paragraph, which im too lazy to try to quote now that ive already started typing quick reply.

The term variance is always a bit confusing to me as it relates to poker. But i believe this is true bc shorter games rely on showdown winnings more and deeper games rely on non showdown winnings more and non showdown smooths out your wr more.

Could be off on that last bit.
The middle part is correct obviously. If I buy in at a deep home game that has no max, I'm maybe all in once or twice all night, if that.
Now, if we're playing a shorter game, our profits are much more reliant on showdowns, and specifically all in showdowns.

My hours are mostly PLO and the difference in variance isn't just the coming together of hand equities, it's that most hands reach showdown. It's a game reliant on making the best hand. When you're shorter stacked in holdem, you're reliant on the same thing as well.

Online MTTs are completely night and day compared to cash wrt variance dependent on current stack size. The difference is bigger than between PLO and NLHE.
aoFrantic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2017, 02:58 PM   #19123
Dream Crusher
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Dream Crusher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Dallas
Posts: 15,670
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

The swinginess of a game is going to be contingent on how the players play the game. In online poker players are generally quite willing to get it all in preflop with short stacks. More showdowns = more swings. It sounds like the low stakes in Cali where everyone is short may be like that too. However, my experience playing short in normal live low stakes games is that you rarely get in flip situations pre.
Dream Crusher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2017, 03:22 PM   #19124
browni3141
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: South Florida
Posts: 5,121
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avaritia View Post
No, i believe its correct. Im pretty sure its fairly well documented that good shortstackers had much higher variance than good deepstack lags. Mostly bc of your third paragraph, which im too lazy to try to quote now that ive already started typing quick reply.

The term variance is always a bit confusing to me as it relates to poker. But i believe this is true bc shorter games rely on showdown winnings more and deeper games rely on non showdown winnings more and non showdown smooths out your wr more.

Could be off on that last bit.
Variance is defined as the expected value of the squared deviation from the mean.

For example, whenever you fold your variance for that decision is 0, as your EV at that decision point is 0 so there is no deviation from the mean (although your variance for the hand from the start is not 0). If you make a 0 EV 200BB river bluff shove into a 100BB pot, the variance is (200-0)^2*1/3+(100-0)^2*2/3 = 20000.

In deeper stacked games greater deviations from the mean occur which are not even possible in shorter games, which is why it does not make sense that shorter games would have higher variance.

Standard deviation is the square root of variance. We typically prefer to use SD for any of the applications related to poker.

I did just look at my own online database, and it is too small to draw any reasonable conclusions, unfortunately. There doesn't seem to be any correlation at all between stack depth and variance in my tiny 5000 hand sample.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic View Post
Online MTTs are completely night and day compared to cash wrt variance dependent on current stack size. The difference is bigger than between PLO and NLHE.
At least it's evidence relevant to the discussion. It would be cool if you could provide some.
browni3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2017, 03:38 PM   #19125
Angrist
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,883
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Right.

The problem is that when many players use the term "variance" they're talking about the magnitude of their swingyness, not the deviation from the mean. We have this discussion periodically ITT and I always feel like I learn a little more about the math when we do.

So in that context a short stack game has smaller swings because of the smaller pots.
Angrist is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive