Does anybody have any tournament graphs or an understanding of how to interpret them/the variance?

I seem to only ever see sharkscope graphs, not chipsEV or BB-EV ones.

Played a fair few in the last few months but it feels like I'm running phucking atrociously. But maybe its completely normal, I dunno.


[IMG][/IMG]


[IMG][/IMG]


[IMG][/IMG]


These graphs represent about 100 tournaments, although quite a few are satellites which involve only a handful of hands much of the time.

Dont even know how to interpret the $won graph but seems like a long below EV considering I'm playing $2 & $3 tournaments for the most part.

Likewise, being 6.5million chips seems a long way below EV when you start with 50k & I've made very few cashes, let alone deep runs so I'm not often running a huge stack up. I could understand if a few big pots went against me but this looks (AND FEELS) like straight up losing almost every allin.

Also seem to running into the top of everyone's range a lot & cannot get a hand when stacks get remotely shallow. I isolate with AK & someone wakes up with AA behind on numerous occasions.

I've had to ****ing drop down to 10NL & even 5NL to combat this, & I'm 15 buyins below there.

25NL (since I got my new laptop) & then 10 & 5NL combined;

[IMG][/IMG]


[IMG][/IMG]


The cash game variance is whatever because I can grind that out pretty easily (& enjoy it much more) but if this is normal for tournaments then I cant be assed with em tbh. Dont have the time to be grinding out thousands & thousands of $3 donkaments to *hopefully* run well.

Finding it hard to play with the right attitude lately. Anybody else got any graphs they'd be willing to share?

Yeah, this kind of variance is sort of normal for tournaments. They barely count as games of skill imo, and 6000 hands in 100 timbeys is obviously a tiny sample that means almost nothing at all. You've run badly when all in, but the sample size is insignificant.

The first graph (chips) is basically useless if you play a variety of different MTT/SNG games, because you could win a million chip pot in an MTT with a huge field and still end up bubbling it, whereas you can cash in a SNG with about 350 chips. (The ChipEV graph would be useful for SpinGos, if that's all you played, however, as the field size would always be the same, along with the maximum amount of chips you can win).

The graph in bb is somewhat more useful, as it gives you a better idea of whether you're beating your opponents in general. Running way below EVbb/100 (mainly by losing flips) will mean it's hard to beat the game, but it sometimes only takes a few tourneys where you run like God to change things around.

The 'prizes' graph has almost no utility whatsoever.

If you find the variance in tourney results is too tilting, stick to cash.

I don't have time to dig out my graphs right now, but I basically had a losing graph for 200 tourneys and then had two of my biggest ever wins in 90 minutes on Saturday, completely flipping my graph around. #Variance.

Yeah makes sense. These graphs tally with what I'm feeling at the tables but dont really mean much in the grand scheme of things, as you said.

Obviously *in general* it takes more skill to get the money in good the more blinds you have, but you can run well or badly in a 200bb pot that is a fairly insignificant double-up right at the start of a tournament, whereas there are certain 25bb pots for loads of chips that you just *have* to win late on.

Couldn't believe it was only 6k hands when I checked the database - although as I say, quite a number of satellites in there, that i usually register at the end of late reg. Bubbling 109 tickets tilts the hell out of me when I'm playing 5NL/10NL & it took numerous pre satellites to get there.

Played 87k hands (LOL) of cash games last year & ran 50buyins below EV, coupled more of this crap in tournaments.

Must admit, I cant imagine what it would be like to run like this playing for big money (whatever that means to you) against good opponents. It would be a complete massacre.

It really has given me a new perspective on variance/probability. It really can just keep happening, & keep happening, & keep happening