Check out our brand new Local Poker Communities! Get updates and interact with poker players in your area.
Visit the United States Poker Community | Visit the California Poker Community | Read more about the Launch of P5s Local

Volume & Variance

Reply to Thread
  1. DP388 DP388 is offline

    Posts: 337
    Joined: May 05

    Mar 20th, 2011 (3/20/2011 4:45pm)

    I've been playing for about 7 years now, have kids, own a business, etc. so I can only put in limited volume compared to most. In a good month I put in about 100 tournaments of which about half are 45 man and 90 man turbos, but sometimes it's more like 50 a month.

    So...my time frame for reaching "the long term" is WAY longer than an MTT pro and also means my swings (up and down) can last a lot longer in terms of total time. Not that I'm impatient, but I don't play for income and winning is a lot more fun than losing. I also like playing tournaments over cash games.

    I'm trying to figure out MY optimal mix of what games to play to maximize profit given my lower volume.

    If you had to rank the factors that affect variance, which would be at the top? And more importantly, to what degree (anyone with math to support this would be appreciated).

    1. Field size
    2. Structure (blind length, blind jumps, starting stack/chips per player)
    3. Taking thin edges (while this is "optimal" if you can put in the volume, this may not be optimal in a shorter time frame if you want results in a shorter-run. Passing up thin edges can lessen the variance but you will not win more in the "long run". But the "long run" may be 5 years from now.)
    4. Edge on the field

    In other words (for example), is there more variance in a 180 turbo on stars or a $30 rebuy with 500 players? I prefer tournaments and I would much rather play non-turbo push/fold games. Any particular tournaments you would recommend?

    In my mind, one strategy to lessen the variance and offset my lack of volume is to pass up some of those small edges, but on the other hand I can also try to add a bunch more tables at once (I play about 4-5 at once now - of course that could also increase variance having less reads, etc.).

    Any thoughts are appreciated.
  2. hitthenuts hitthenuts is offline

    New Zealand

    Posts: 349
    Joined: Apr 06

    Mar 20th, 2011 (3/20/2011 5:27pm) in reply to DP388

     
    Originally Posted by DP388 View Post

    1. Field size
    2. Structure (blind length, blind jumps, starting stack/chips per player)
    3. Taking thin edges (while this is "optimal" if you can put in the volume, this may not be optimal in a shorter time frame if you want results in a shorter-run. Passing up thin edges can lessen the variance but you will not win more in the "long run". But the "long run" may be 5 years from now.)
    4. Edge on the field

    1. Edge on the field + Field size (tie)
    2. Structure (blind length, blind jumps, starting stack/chips per player)
    3. Taking thin edges (while this is "optimal" if you can put in the volume, this may not be optimal in a shorter time frame if you want results in a shorter-run. Passing up thin edges can lessen the variance but you will not win more in the "long run". But the "long run" may be 5 years from now.)

    that's how I would rank them
  3. iPlayTourneys iPlayTourneys is offline

    Brazil

    Posts: 1,019
    Joined: Mar 10

    Mar 20th, 2011 (3/20/2011 5:31pm) in reply to hitthenuts

     
    Originally Posted by hitthenuts View Post

    1. Edge on the field + Field size (tie)
    2. Structure (blind length, blind jumps, starting stack/chips per player)
    3. Taking thin edges (while this is "optimal" if you can put in the volume, this may not be optimal in a shorter time frame if you want results in a shorter-run. Passing up thin edges can lessen the variance but you will not win more in the "long run". But you might live long enough to see the results of the long-run)

    that's how I would rank them

    agree... only changed the bold part..

    variance is a bitch.. just put in volume and try to focus on your own game and thats about it.
    161 
  4. tyson219 tyson219 is online now Moderator

    New York, NY
    United States

    Posts: 2,121
    Joined: Feb 06

    Mar 20th, 2011 (3/20/2011 5:37pm) in reply to iPlayTourneys

    Depends partly on the buyins you play. If you play HSMTTs you have less of an edge on the field and need to take any thin edge possible in order to go deep. If you play LSMTTs, you have a solid edge and can avoid the thin edge spots. I would say:

    1. Edge on field
    2. Field size
    3. Structure
    4. Taking thin edges (unless playing HSMTTs)

    Given your preferences, I recommend playing rebuys, cubed, quad and deepstacked tourneys. The rebuys, cubed and quad tourneys have deeper stacks and give you more room to play. Unless you're really good, I'd avoid 50rs and above. I especially like the 10 and 20 cubed, 10r and 10 quad tournaments on stars. There are also some decent midstakes freezeouts that have decent structures.
     969 
  5. GambleAB GambleAB is offline 1. I'm awesome

    Las Vegas, NV
    United States

    Posts: 5,493
    Joined: Apr 05

    Mar 20th, 2011 (3/20/2011 5:46pm) in reply to hitthenuts

    Variance is most closely associated with field size. Structure also plays a factor, but not as large as field size.
    The paradox is that the larger the field size, the higher your ROI will be. So you have to make a decision on if you want to make less money more consistently, or more money less consistently.
    Also, you should never be passing up an edge because you want to min cash. That is a Bad Idea.

    From the information about yourself you've provided (including the implication that you pass up some +EV spots), it seems like MTTs aren't the best for you right now. I'd suggest you give SNGs a try. There's less variance, so you'll see a more steady return, they are certainly beatable, and grinding SNGs will earn you far more site-rewards (be it rakeback, black card, ftp points for sats/fpp points for sats/supernova, ect), which will certainly help you grow your bankroll. And theres nothing that says that you can't play the occasional MTT sesh every now and then for fun.
     
  6. lordxixor101 lordxixor101 is offline

    Westland, MI
    United States

    Posts: 6,364
    Joined: Mar 06

    Mar 20th, 2011 (3/20/2011 5:58pm) in reply to GambleAB

    I think one thing to think about is that optimal play is optimal play. Whether your playing 100 MTT's a day or 10 per week, you will do the best by making the correct play. You talked about skipping thin edges since you play less, but that won't lessen variance, that lessens winnings. Folding to cash isn't going to help you be a winning player, nor is skipping edges.

    I think field size is by far the most important. No matter your edge on the field, your edge on them will never be so great that you'll do the same variance wise in a 1,000 person field that you will in a 180 (assuming you still have an edge in the 180). For someone who plays lower volume (like I do), I love fields that are smaller.

    Everything else (structure, etc) is important, I think the most important is to find a structure and games that cater to your skills (and where your edge over the field exists). If your very good at push/fold, finding games that get you to push/fold faster will help out. If you excel deep stacked, then finding games/structures will help you there. This is really knowing yourself.

    To finish up, poker is a very personal journey (which is funny, since it's seen as a social game). I don't think you should worry if your long term is longer than others. Remember, over time, a very small percentage of players win. If your part of a person that wins online over a 5 year period (whether you win every year or if your wins are as much as others), you are in a very exclusive club. It's easy to forget that when you rail someone who wins more in one tourny than you have in 5 years, but your still part of that club.
  7. DP388 DP388 is offline

    Posts: 337
    Joined: May 05

    Mar 20th, 2011 (3/20/2011 8:19pm) in reply to GambleAB

     
    Originally Posted by GambleAB View Post

    Also, you should never be passing up an edge because you want to min cash. That is a Bad Idea.

    From the information about yourself you've provided (including the implication that you pass up some +EV spots), it seems like MTTs aren't the best for you right now.

    I'm actually not passing up +EV spots now. When I play I play for the win. I'm more just thinking out loud to get some feedback.

    If large field sizes = more variance,
    which = you need to take thin edges to win/final table,
    which = more variance
    which = you need to put in volume to offset the variance

    So what if you can't put in volume? Then in theory you should do something to reduce the variance.

    One thought was to pass on the really thin edges, but...

     
    Originally Posted by lordxixor101 View Post

    You talked about skipping thin edges since you play less, but that won't lessen variance, that lessens winnings

    I see this point and it makes sense. Would things be less swingy passing on thin edges? Maybe if all I was playing was SUPER deep stacked with not many players. But the attempt to reduce variance by passing on an edge would then be negated other factors like the field size or structure.

    So I guess it points to looking for other ways to reduce variance like playing smaller field sizes and better structures. Of course like GambleAB said, the smaller field sizes also means smaller ROI.

    I guess for me, I've gotta find games that fit where I have an edge and my choices are either:

    A. Find a way to get more volume in (i.e. more tables at a time)
    B. Deal with the potential for long swings
    C. Play smaller field sizes and be cool with smaller ROI/prizes
    Thread Starter
Reply to Thread

Similar Threads