Quote:
Originally Posted by DougL
The variance in LHE is lower than NL in the math sense. Think of it this way, you can win or lose hundreds of big blinds in a NL hand and you can bounce 24 big blinds in a LHE one. So strictly, you're wrong.
However, you are right in another sense. The edge an expert winning player can have in a NL game is much larger. The effect of that edge is that the downswings that player sees are smaller. Since people think that losing is variance and winning is skill, the apparent variance in NL is lower because sick heaters are never luck. If you want to get mathy, look up a Risk of Ruin calculator and play around with the numbers. This goes away for a breakeven player or a losing one -- now the larger variance of NL isn't counter-acted by a huge WR. That's why bad and marginal players go broke so fast in NL. LHE is a much kinder game due to the lower variance.
I get what you're saying. On a strictly theoretical level and only accounting for the different betting structure of the games, NLHE will have more variance. However, I completely agree that a winning player's edge in NL is much greater than in LHE. Because of this fact, if you have a tight bankroll and the patience to select good games, my personal recommendation would be to play the 1/2 NL (or in Colo the 2-100 spread limit) vs a limit game that has a similar buy-in. So in a practical sense I still maintain NL has lower variance. Said another way, I believe a competent NL player will have a far higher % of winning sessions, than a competent 5/10 or 8/16 LHE player.
Another huge caveat is that variance will be heavily influenced by your own particular playing style. If you don't take bad beats well, tend to chase losses when you're losing, "gamble" more when you're stuck to try and win it all back in one big hand, than NL might be a very bad choice. Of course, those aren't really the characteristics of most winning players, so it's kind of a moot pt.
And DougL, just to be clear, I'm using you and your just to represent any Joe Schmoe poker player. I'm making no inferences about your own particular playing ability.
I could also be totally incorrect as to which type of game has more "real world" variance, but that has been my experience over a fairly large sample size. Also several players and dealers whose opinion I respect have told me they believe NL can be played on a shorter bankroll assuming the edge you think you have in a particular game actually exists.