Maven, great little program and I appreciate you taking the time to make it. I had a quick question, though. The SD/100 stat you told to pull for PT3 from their website lists the standard deviation in BB/100 hands. For your simulator, would you then have to convert this number to $/100 like you simulator suggests. For example:
SD/100 of 25 from PT3
Divide it by 2 for PTBB, then multiply it by stakes (lets assume 100NL), so 1 as the big blind. Thus a $/100 SD of 12.5? Or leave it at 25 for BB/100?
Thanks for your help...
I only have HM :/
but from HM, if i have SD=25BB/100 -> 50 bigBlind/100 -> 50$/100 (100NL)
Could you make an MTT applet? Not that I play them, but they probably have the most variance of any form of poker. Obviously any losing player can be a winner lifetime with a huge score but it'd be interesting to see what sort of long term upswings are possible for losers and downswings possible for winners.
btw if you make a mtt applet, remember that outcomes are not gaussian, and don't try to apply the central limit theorem.
ok, so what this proves is that there is going to be some people who do in fact, win more money than others over a million hand stretch........even though they have the same win rates.
ok, so in pot limit omaha, is the swings wilder because people's winrates are not as big as they think?
i hear of players with very decent win rates but maybe they are fooling themselves and the nature of the game takes more hands compared to nl holdem to establish a true win rate?
not to carry on about this...but variance is atleast a part of the reason that the game will always be profitable. some % of bad players will run good, think they are better than they are...only to eventually lose out to the better players. this is an unending cycle.