The live poker variance will always increase as you play higher limit games and games with tougher levels of opponents. Variance is going to be diminished from the perspective of buy ins when you are playing in deeper games. For example, a $1000 max game at $2/$5 will have less buy in variance than a $500 max $2/$5 game.

Enjoy!

Kill Tilt vous permet d'apprendre les bases et les règles du Poker, d'améliorer votre mental et de progresser grâce aux conseils de joueurs pros. Gagnez de l'argent en Cash Game, Tournois.

Enjoy!

As the game started, I bought in for 500, as well as Nazi, and TJ had to one up everyone and get in for 1000. This was classic John, always throwing more money at a situation to look like the man in charge. Other than that, the mood was very high at first, and the game ran slow as the focus was on other topics than poker.

Enjoy!

Variance is one of those statistical concepts which most people struggle to grasp, especially when it comes to connecting it to poker. In this post my goal is to help you understand poker variance and cover three simple adjustments you can make to your game to lower your variance.

Enjoy!

Live Poker vs. Online Poker What's the Biggest Difference Between the Two?. While an online cash game might feature players opening for 2x, 2.5x, or 3x the big blind, in live games it isn't.

Enjoy!

You'll most certainly get insightful results.

Read below how to use this simulator.

Depending on the number of hands displayed, the extent and number of downswings may be underrepresented due to the resolution of the graph.

Downswings in numbers How to use myÂ Poker Variance Calculator?

This section will explain how the calculator works and what the numbers and charts mean.

Enter the data Hop over to theÂ Â and enter your winrate, standard deviation and the number of hands you want to simulate.

You can ignore the field observed winrate, we'll get to its purpose later.

Once you have entered the data, hit Calculate and the let the Calculator do its magic.

It'll also calculate the expected winnings over the amount of hands.

This number will appear as a rather boring straight and black line in the graph.

Thirdly the calculator displays the 70% and 95% confidence intervalsÂ as light and dark green curves.

What you need to know about them is that at any given time your winnings will be within these intervals with a probability of 70% and 95% respectively.

They basically show, how much variance you should expect to see.

Meaning: 19 out 20 times your actual winnings will be within this interval.

You can choose how many hands to simulate by moving the slider.

Apart from showing a single sample, this graph also shows some insightful information about downswings.

The red area shows for any given point, how much the sample is currently away from see more previous peak, meaning it are free online cash prize games still downswings.

This chart uses two vertical axes.

While the sample winnings have their scale on the right axis, the downswing tracker has its scale on the left axis.

In this example poker variance cash game simulated player ended up with winnings over 25,000 big blinds after 2.

Downswings in numbers The last section of the Variance Calculator sheds some more light on potential downswings.

Therefor 100 million hands are simulated and all downswings over this simulation are tracked.

The first table shows the extents of downswings.

It shows how often the simulated player was stuck in a downswing of at least X big click the following article />The second table shows how long downswings last on average.

For the purpose of these calculations a downswing is defined asÂ any period where the current total winnings are below the maximum previous total winnings.

Meaning, by this definition a downswing is not over until the player has fully recovered its losses.

In general these simulations underestimate the extent of downswings, but the numbers should still click here you learn more here decent idea of the vastness of downswings you should expect.

Should you have any questions, encounter any errors or have ideas for improvements, please let me know.

Â the number of tables change the results of the calculator?

Winnings are measured in big blinds.

That means you have won 250 big blinds over 10,000 hands.

This is equal to 2.

Everything is super misleading.

Did you forget that the Gamblking Theory book states: Special Note: It has been pointed out to me by Bruce Zastera, one of the most knowledgeable posters on our forums atthat it is also possible to go broke before reaching the number of hours at which we evaluate the probability of a loss, as well as after that time, and this problem is more acute at the 95 percent level than I originally realized.

This means that these tables are significantly underestimating by a factor of about 2 the amount of bankroll needed to only have a 5 percent chance of going broke.

Fortunately, this problem mitigates as the probability of going broke is reduced.

Thus the Bankroll Required to Assure a Win tables do contain solid estimates and produce a risk of ruin of approximately 1.

I wrote some of it.

It in no way changes the fact that the calculations in that section are no way to compute the bankroll requirement for a desired risk of ruin.

That number gets worse as the risk of ruin is reduced.

The bankroll needed for a 5% risk of ruin is about 2.

If we want a 1% risk of ruin, the bankroll required is about 2 times what your method would compute.

If we want a 0.

The mitigating factor is that both of those numbers are relatively small.

Lots of folks may not care if their risk of ruin is 1.

You chose that as a way to include essentially all of a population as is common in statistics.

Except you are considering the wrong population.

We want the population of all random walks that never go broke.

Using the former population for bankroll requirements and risk of ruin is mathematical nonsense.

BTW, the formula Pokerdope posted was well known long before Mathematics of Poker by Chen and Ankenman.

It has been discussed by many at 2+2 since I introduced it there in the early 2000s or possibly even the late 1990s.

Before that it was well known to the blackjack community, having appeared in papers by George C.

It was surely known in mathematics before that as the general expression is important in financial math, and it can also be go here from the Weiner process.

There is also an analytical short term ruin formula for risk of ruin in a finite number of hands.

Mason Mason Malmuth: The confidence intervals in his graph have nothing to do with risk of ruin.

His graph is showing you a range of results assuming you can play through any drawdowns.

IOW, if you lose your 5991 at some point, you can still keep playing, as if someone lent you additional funds.

The positive portion of the graph includes the times you lost your bankroll and then recovered to finish positive.

The risk of ruin formula as correctly given by Pokerdope counts these instances as a failure.

A risk of ruin formula is not and cannot be based on confidence intervals.

Attempting to use confidence intervals to compute risk of ruin is a well known blunder.

It is why the bankrolls in your book Gambling Theory and Other Topics for a 5% risk of ruin would actually give a 26% risk of ruin as was discussed on your site back in 2003 and countless times since on your Probability forum: Here is a derivation of the risk of ruin formula Pokerdope gave which has been simplified to require nothing more than high school algebra: BTW, we developed a similar variance calculator on your site for tournaments which requires a different approach to risk of ruin.

It runs in R which is a platform for statistical computing which free and very easy to install.

Here is a link to the script.

The images of the graphical output are broken on your site, but they looked like this along with some separate textual output including both analytical and simulated statistics.

Thank you for answering my question.

In your example of a 2.

Â« to be 5991 BB.

The risk of ruin and the necessary bankroll is calculated independently from the confidence interval.

Using the example above with a win rate of 2.

Hi, Do you have sophisticated guesses for the STD of 6-max five-card Omaha?

Maybe something like 200?

If so how do you poker variance cash game ROR if they move down the stakes?

Hi, I noticed that the 20 random graphs in cg variance simulator almost always have one graph that is outside of the 2 std deviation line.

How are the graphs calculated?

Greetings M Q: Do you have any idea how awesome you are for putting this up for people?

A: All the way awesome.

With that caveat aside, as far as I can tell the numbers you used for EV and SD poker variance cash game reasonable a 35%ish edge when getting it all in sounds about right for the ever-short-stacked hypers.

The 100% confidence interval would be the range all the way from losing every hand to winning every hand, which is as wide as it could get — you can be 100% confident that a trial will net something in that range.

An expected 5% of trials will net outside the bounds of the 95% interval; an expected 30% of trials will net outside the bounds of the 70% interval.

Could someone please explain how could it be possible that 95% confidence interval is wider than 70%?

Is this a bug?

We have winrate and observed winrate, any differences?

Am confused if the BB is big bet or big blind.

I would assume it is big bet.

It would be correct if online poker would work with correct and real life daily math, but since it doesnt, any calculation is a fail.

If your ture winrate is 2.

Hi Mitch, these is the complete overview of my calculations.

Especially since, even though I am a small winner in my games, I am perpetually running below EV and my actual winnings should be much higher than they currently are.

Â« 100000 Expected winnings Â»?

Â« 15338 BB Hi.

Do you assume normal distribution?

I always see people on the forums : say it is as likely to run below EV or above EV but this says games cash no deposit />Help explaining this please click for source be greatly appreciated.

Probability of running at or above observed poker variance cash game rate 10.

You see, those tables were simulated at the distance over 100 mil hands.

So the smaller is your sample the less chance for you will be to ruin.

Could anybody explain me.

If I see this: Minimum bankroll for less than 5% risk of ruin Â»?

Do I poker variance cash game right, when think, that I can lose my 14979 bankroll with a probability of 5%?

Then how can it be, that Downswing Extents : 15000+ BB 30.

What does it mean?

Id say, losing 150bi bankroll with 5% prob assumes u get 150+ downswing at the very beginning of your journey.

Also HM2 has 2 different stats for std dev.

One is bb per 100 hands and is as in examples.

Another is just std dev.

So the difference is like, eg, for midstack nlhe 65 vs 6.

You may put in the description than you use https://agohome.ru/cash-games/game-access-cash.html dev per 100 hands.

How can i figure out standard deviations for non-standard games?

I set the parameters for 250, what do you think they should be?

Any chance you can create a simulator for live players?

Like what language you used and what sort of things went into making this.

Thanks Thanks for the variance simulator.

I currently am sending my Mental Game Coaching clients over to this website to learn about the true effect of variance in their game.

Software - MORE

Live cash game poker strategy. Obviously, live games are a bit different, and you need to adjust your strategy to get better results. I already covered many Texas Hold’em tips and how to crush live poker home games in this article, but want to highlight the most important live cash game poker strategy adjustments as well.

Enjoy!

You'll most certainly get insightful results.

Read below how to use this simulator.

Depending on the number of hands displayed, the extent and number of downswings may be underrepresented due to the resolution of the graph.

Downswings in numbers How to use myÂ Poker Variance Calculator?

This section will explain how the calculator works and what the numbers and charts mean.

Enter the data Hop over to theÂ Â and enter your winrate, standard deviation and the number of hands you want to simulate.

You can ignore the field observed winrate, we'll get to its purpose later.

Once you have entered the data, hit Calculate and the let the Calculator do its magic.

It'll also calculate the expected winnings over the amount of hands.

This number will appear as a rather boring straight and black https://agohome.ru/cash-games/play-online-skill-games-cash.html in the graph.

Thirdly the calculator displays the 70% and 95% confidence intervalsÂ as light and dark green curves.

What you need to know about them is that at any given time your winnings will be within these intervals with a probability of 70% and 95% respectively.

They basically show, how much variance you should expect to see.

Meaning: 19 out 20 times your actual winnings will be within this interval.

You can choose how many hands to simulate by moving the slider.

Apart from showing a single sample, this graph also shows some insightful information about downswings.

The red area shows for any given point, how much the sample is currently away from its previous peak, meaning it tracks downswings.

This chart uses two vertical axes.

While the sample winnings have their scale on the right axis, the downswing tracker has its scale on the left axis.

In this link the simulated player ended up with winnings over 25,000 big blinds after 2.

Downswings in numbers The last section of the Variance Calculator sheds some more light on potential downswings.

Therefor 100 million hands are simulated and all downswings over this simulation are tracked.

The first table shows the extents of downswings.

It shows how often the simulated player was stuck in a downswing of at least X big blinds.

The second table shows how long downswings last on average.

For the purpose of these calculations a downswing is defined asÂ any period where the current total winnings are below the maximum previous total winnings.

Meaning, by this definition a downswing is not over until the player has fully recovered its losses.

In general these simulations underestimate the extent of downswings, but the numbers should still give you a decent idea of the vastness of downswings you should expect.

Should you have any questions, encounter any errors or have ideas for improvements, please let me know.

Â the number of tables change the results of the calculator?

Winnings are measured in big blinds.

That means you have won 250 big blinds over 10,000 hands.

This is equal to 2.

Everything is super misleading.

Did you forget that the Read article Theory book states: Special Note: It has been pointed out to me by Bruce Zastera, one of the most knowledgeable posters on our forums atthat it is also possible to go broke before reaching the number of hours at which we evaluate the probability of a loss, as well as after that time, and this problem is more acute at the 95 percent level than I originally realized.

This means that these tables are significantly underestimating by a factor of about 2 the amount of bankroll needed to only have a 5 percent chance of going broke.

Fortunately, this problem mitigates as the probability of going broke is reduced.

Thus the Bankroll Required to Assure a Win tables do contain solid estimates and produce a risk of ruin of approximately 1.

I wrote some of it.

It in no way changes the fact that the calculations in that section are no way to compute the bankroll requirement for a desired risk of ruin.

That number gets worse as the risk of ruin is reduced.

The bankroll needed for a 5% risk of ruin is about 2.

If we want a 1% risk of ruin, the bankroll required is about 2 times what your method would compute.

If we want a 0.

The mitigating factor is that both of those numbers are relatively small.

Lots of folks may not care if their risk of ruin is 1.

You chose that as a way to include essentially all of click to see more population as is common in statistics.

Except you are considering the wrong population.

We want the population of all random walks that never go broke.

Using the former population for bankroll requirements and risk of ruin is mathematical nonsense.

BTW, the formula Pokerdope posted was well known long before Mathematics of Poker by Chen and Ankenman.

It has been discussed by many at 2+2 since I introduced it there in the early 2000s or possibly even the late 1990s.

Before that it was well known to the blackjack community, having appeared in papers by George C.

It was surely known in mathematics before that as the general expression is important in financial math, and it can also be obtained from the Weiner process.

There is also an analytical short term ruin formula for risk of ruin in a finite number of hands.

Mason Mason Malmuth: The confidence intervals in his graph have nothing to do with risk of ruin.

His graph is showing you a range of results assuming you can play poker variance cash game any drawdowns.

IOW, if you lose your 5991 at some point, you can still keep playing, as if someone lent you additional funds.

The positive portion of the graph includes the times you lost your bankroll and then recovered to finish positive.

The risk of ruin formula as correctly given by Pokerdope counts these instances as a failure.

A risk of ruin formula is not and cannot be based on confidence intervals.

Attempting to use confidence intervals to compute risk of ruin is a well known blunder.

It is why the bankrolls in your book Gambling Theory and Other Topics for a 5% risk of ruin would actually give a 26% risk of ruin as was discussed on your site back in 2003 and countless times since on your Probability forum: Here is a derivation of the risk of ruin formula Pokerdope gave which has best cash players ever simplified to require nothing more than high school algebra: BTW, we developed a similar variance calculator on your site for tournaments which requires a different approach to risk of ruin.

It runs in R which is a platform for statistical computing which free and very easy to install.

Here is a link to the script.

The images of the graphical output are broken on your site, but they looked like this along with some separate textual output including both analytical and simulated statistics.

Thank you for answering my question.

In your example of a 2.

Â« to be 5991 BB.

The risk of ruin and the necessary bankroll is calculated independently from the confidence interval.

Using the example above with a win rate of 2.

Hi, Do you have sophisticated guesses for the STD of 6-max five-card Omaha?

Maybe something like 200?

If so how do you calculate ROR if they move down the stakes?

Hi, I noticed that the 20 random graphs in cg variance simulator almost always have one graph that is outside of the 2 std deviation line.

How are the graphs calculated?

Greetings M Q: Do you have any idea how awesome you are for putting this up for people?

A: All the way awesome.

With that caveat aside, as far as I can tell the numbers you used for EV and SD look reasonable a 35%ish edge when getting it all in sounds about right for the ever-short-stacked hypers.

The 100% confidence interval would be the range all the way from losing every hand to winning poker variance cash game hand, which is as wide as it could get — you can be 100% confident that a trial will net something in that range.

An expected 5% of trials will net outside the bounds of the 95% interval; an expected 30% of trials will net outside the bounds of the 70% interval.

Could someone please explain how could it be possible that 95% confidence interval is wider than 70%?

Is this a bug?

We have winrate and observed winrate, any differences?

Am confused if the BB is big poker variance cash game or big blind.

I would assume it is big bet.

It would be correct if online poker would work with correct and real life daily math, but since it doesnt, any calculation is a fail.

If your ture winrate is 2.

Hi Mitch, these is the complete overview of my calculations.

Especially since, even though I am a small winner in my games, I am perpetually running below EV and my actual winnings should be much higher than they currently are.

Â« 100000 Expected winnings Â»?

Â« https://agohome.ru/cash-games/macau-poker-cash-games-2019.html BB 5.

Â« 15338 BB Hi.

Do you assume normal distribution?

I always see people on the forums : say it is as likely to run below EV or above EV but this says otherwise.

Help explaining this would be greatly appreciated.

Probability of running at or above observed win rate 10.

You see, those tables were simulated at the distance over 100 mil hands.

So the smaller is your sample the less chance for you will be to ruin.

Could anybody explain me.

If I see this: Minimum bankroll for less poker variance cash game 5% risk of ruin Â»?

Do I understand right, when think, that I can lose my 14979 bankroll with a probability of 5%?

Then how can it be, that Downswing Extents : 15000+ BB 30.

What poker variance cash game it mean?

Id say, losing 150bi bankroll with 5% prob assumes u get 150+ downswing at the very beginning of your journey.

Also HM2 has 2 different stats for std dev.

One is bb per 100 hands and is as in examples.

Another is just std dev.

So the difference is like, eg, for midstack nlhe 65 poker variance cash game 6.

You may put in the description than you use std dev per 100 hands.

How can i figure out standard deviations for non-standard games?

I set the parameters for 250, all cashier cash counting games agree do you think they should be?

Any chance you can create a simulator for live players?

Like what language you used and what sort of things went into making this.

Thanks Thanks for the variance simulator.

I currently am sending my Mental Game Coaching clients over to this website to learn about the true effect of variance in their game.

Software - MORE

We could be up 10 buy-ins in a cash game, and there is a decent chance no one would really care that much. Taking down a big field MTT is generally considered a much more noteworthy achievement. It's also pretty exciting to reach the final table of a large field event, considerably more so than just playing a standard cash game all day.

Enjoy!

You'll most certainly get insightful results.

Read below how to use this https://agohome.ru/cash-games/game-access-cash.html />Depending on the number of hands displayed, the extent and number of downswings may be underrepresented due to the resolution of the graph.

go here in numbers How to use myÂ Poker Variance Calculator?

This section will explain how the calculator works and what the numbers and charts mean.

Enter the data Hop over to theÂ Â and enter your winrate, standard deviation and the number of hands you want to simulate.

You can ignore the field observed winrate, we'll get to its purpose later.

Once you have entered the data, hit Calculate and the let the Calculator do its magic.

It'll also calculate the expected winnings over the amount of hands.

This number will appear as a rather boring straight and black line in the graph.

Thirdly the calculator displays the 70% and 95% confidence intervalsÂ as light and dark green curves.

What you need to know about them is that at any given time your winnings will be within these intervals with a probability of 70% and 95% respectively.

They basically show, how much poker variance cash game you should expect to see.

Meaning: 19 out 20 times your actual winnings will poker variance cash game within this interval.

You can choose how many hands to simulate by moving the slider.

Apart from showing a single sample, this graph also shows some insightful information about downswings.

The red area shows for any given point, how much the sample is currently away from its previous peak, meaning it tracks downswings.

This chart uses two vertical axes.

While the sample winnings have their scale on the right axis, the downswing tracker has its scale on the left axis.

In this example the simulated player ended up with winnings over 25,000 big blinds after 2.

Downswings in numbers The last section of the Variance Calculator sheds some more light on potential downswings.

Therefor 100 million hands are simulated and all downswings over this simulation are tracked.

The first table shows the extents of downswings.

It shows how often the simulated player was stuck in a downswing of at least X poker variance cash game blinds.

The second table shows how long downswings last on average.

For the purpose of these calculations a downswing is defined asÂ any period where the current total winnings are below the maximum previous total winnings.

Meaning, by this definition a downswing is not over until the player has fully recovered its losses.

In general these simulations underestimate the extent of downswings, but the numbers should still give you a decent idea of the vastness of downswings you should expect.

Should you have any questions, encounter any errors or have ideas for improvements, please let me know.

Â the number cash game online rankings poker tables change the results of the calculator?

Winnings are measured in big blinds.

That means you have won 250 big blinds over 10,000 hands.

This is equal to 2.

Everything is super misleading.

Did you forget that the Gamblking Theory book states: Special Note: It has been pointed out to me by Bruce Zastera, one of the most knowledgeable posters on our forums atthat it is also possible to go broke before reaching the number of hours at which we evaluate the probability of a loss, as well as after that time, and this problem is more acute at the 95 percent level than I originally realized.

This means that these tables are significantly underestimating by a factor of about 2 the amount of bankroll needed to only have a 5 percent chance of going broke.

Fortunately, this problem mitigates as the probability of going broke is reduced.

Thus the Bankroll Required to Assure a Win tables do contain solid estimates and produce a risk of ruin of approximately 1.

I wrote some of it.

It in no way changes the fact that the calculations in that section are no way to compute the bankroll requirement for a desired risk of ruin.

That number gets worse as the risk of ruin is reduced.

The bankroll needed for a 5% risk of ruin is about 2.

If we want a 1% risk of ruin, the bankroll required is about 2 times what your method would compute.

If we want a 0.

The mitigating factor is that both of those numbers are relatively small.

Lots of folks may not care if their risk of click the following article is 1.

You chose that as a way to include essentially all of a population as is common in statistics.

Except you are considering the wrong population.

We want the population of all random walks that never go broke.

Using the former population for bankroll requirements and risk of ruin is mathematical nonsense.

BTW, the formula Pokerdope posted was well known long before Mathematics of Poker by Chen and Ankenman.

It has been discussed by many at 2+2 since I introduced it there in the early 2000s or possibly even the late 1990s.

Before that it was well known to the blackjack community, having appeared in papers by George C.

It was surely known in mathematics before that as the general expression is important in financial math, and it can also be obtained from the Weiner process.

There is also an analytical short term ruin formula for risk of ruin in a visit web page number of hands.

Mason Mason Malmuth: The confidence intervals in his graph have nothing to do with risk of ruin.

His graph is showing you a range of results assuming you can play through any drawdowns.

IOW, if you lose your 5991 at some point, source can still keep playing, as if someone lent you additional funds.

The positive portion of the graph includes the times you lost your bankroll and then recovered to finish positive.

The risk of ruin formula as correctly given by Pokerdope counts these instances as a failure.

A risk of ruin formula is not and cannot be based on confidence intervals.

Attempting to use confidence intervals to compute risk of ruin is a well known blunder.

It is why the bankrolls in your book Gambling Theory and Other Topics for a 5% risk of ruin would actually give a 26% risk of ruin as was discussed on your site back in 2003 and countless times since on your Probability forum: Here is a derivation of the risk of ruin formula Pokerdope gave which has been simplified to require nothing more than high school algebra: BTW, we developed a similar variance calculator on your site for tournaments which requires a different approach to risk of ruin.

It runs in R which is a platform for statistical computing which free and very easy to install.

Here is a link to the script.

The images of the graphical output are broken on your site, but they looked like this along with some separate poker variance cash game output including both analytical and simulated statistics.

Thank you for answering my question.

In your example of a 2.

Â« to be 5991 BB.

The risk of ruin and the necessary bankroll is calculated independently from the confidence interval.

Using the example above with a win rate of 2.

Hi, Do you have sophisticated guesses for the STD of 6-max five-card Omaha?

Maybe something like 200?

If so how do you calculate ROR if they move down the stakes?

Hi, I noticed that the 20 random graphs in cg variance simulator almost game cash app have one graph that is outside of the 2 std deviation line.

How are the graphs calculated?

Greetings M Q: Do you have any idea how awesome you are for putting this up for people?

A: All the way awesome.

With that caveat aside, as far as I can tell the numbers you used for EV and SD look reasonable a 35%ish edge when getting it all in sounds about right for the ever-short-stacked hypers.

The 100% confidence interval would be the range all the way from losing every hand to winning every hand, which is as wide as it could get — you can be 100% confident that a trial will net something in that range.

An expected 5% of trials will net outside the bounds of the 95% interval; an expected 30% of trials will net outside the bounds of the 70% interval.

Could someone please explain how could it be possible that 95% confidence interval is wider than 70%?

Is this a bug?

We have winrate and observed winrate, any differences?

Am confused if the BB is big bet or big blind.

I would assume it is big bet.

It would be correct if read article poker would https://agohome.ru/cash-games/free-online-cash-prize-games.html with correct and real life daily math, but since it doesnt, any calculation is a fail.

If your ture winrate is 2.

Hi Mitch, these is the complete overview of my calculations.

Especially since, even though I am a small winner in my games, I am perpetually running below EV and my actual winnings should be much higher than they currently are.

Â« 100000 Expected winnings Â»?

Â« 5060 BB 5.

Â« 15338 BB Hi.

Do you assume normal distribution?

I always see people on the forums : say it read article as likely to run below EV or above EV but this says otherwise.

Help explaining this would be greatly appreciated.

Probability of running at or above observed win rate 10.

You see, those tables were simulated at the distance over 100 mil hands.

So the smaller is your sample the less chance for you will be to ruin.

Could anybody explain me.

If I see this: Minimum bankroll for less than 5% risk of ruin Â»?

Do I understand right, when think, that I can lose my 14979 bankroll with a probability of 5%?

Then how can it be, that Downswing Extents : 15000+ BB 30.

What does it mean?

Id say, losing 150bi bankroll with 5% prob assumes u get 150+ downswing at the very beginning of your journey.

Also HM2 has 2 different stats for std dev.

One is bb per 100 hands and is as in examples.

Another is just std dev.

So the difference is like, eg, for midstack nlhe 65 vs 6.

You may put in the description than you use std dev per 100 hands.

How can i figure out standard deviations for non-standard games?

I set the parameters for 250, what do you think they should be?

Any chance you can create a simulator for live players?

Like what language you used and what sort of things went into making this.

Thanks Thanks for the variance simulator.

I currently am sending my Mental Game Coaching clients over to this website to learn about the true effect of variance in their game.

Much of what follows is excerpted from my Chapter 4 of my book Tournament Poker for the Rest of Us. My goal here is to explain cash game variance so that you will better understand the impact.

Enjoy!

Software - MORE

Game type is the next factor that should be considered when you are looking at variance. The game with the most ongoing variance is heads up. Whether you are playing heads up cash games or sit and go's, you should expect all kinds of wild swings.

Enjoy!

Software - MORE

Variance in Online Poker. Remember how we said variance isn't a particularly big problem for the good, live cash-game player? It's a very different story for online poker players. In particular there's one major elephant in the room that needs to be approached with caution: win-rate.

Enjoy!

Variance and Structure. Some poker games, as well as some betting structures, are prone to have higher variance than others. For instance, a $3/$6 fixed-limit hold’em game will have much less variance than a $1/$2 no-limit hold’em game due almost exclusively to the betting structure.

Enjoy!

Software - MORE

Video Poker Game Variance : What is variance? While we could go into the mathematical details we will explain variance on video poker machines using real world examples. Variance is one of the characteristics that makes a big difference in the short term results between one game and another. Lets compare two popular machines.

Enjoy!

Poker Variance – Beginners Guide to Variance in Texas Holdem Our beginners guide to variance explains what it is, why it matters, how you can calculate your acceptable poker variance score, and what to do if you are on the wrong side of it.

Enjoy!

Therefore, let us dedicate this discussion to poker variance and I will try to give answers to most commonly asked questions.

Firstly, let us clearly state what the variance is.

To put it source simple as I can — it is the difference between how much money you expect to win on average over the long run and the results you have in the short term.

cash money and game />A lot of players underestimate this part and think, if they are running bad for a week, it must end the next week.

It is far from the truth and especially in.

Because online you have a much smaller win rate and you will encounter smaller or bigger variance all the time.

It is just the way this game works and you should not judge your ability just by your short-term results.

For example in 2015, I finished the year over 150 buy-ins under.

It is ridiculous to even think about that and it is hard to understand how much of the variance we can encounter until it hit us.

It does not mean I finished the year losing 150far from that, I was able to win a healthy chunk of money, but I should have won 150 BI more over that period in the long run.

This is really a huge swing and it is not going to happen a lot of the time.

However, it is not something unbelievable, read more things happen from time to time and you need to ready to deal with it when it comes.

As ridiculous, as it sounds, poker variance is a good thing for us.

It is the only reason why weak players keep coming back and giving their money away.

If they would lose, every time when playing against better opponents, most of them would never return to the tables and the whole game would be doomed.

However, now they keep coming back for more action and that drives us forward.

Therefore, you should not be angry when encountering poker variance, you should not be made after losing with AA and in similar spots.

You should see things as they really are and taking all you can from these situations.

There is a positive side of this as well.

You can use this time to improve yourto study poker strategy, analyze your lines, and maybe even learn new things.

It is important to identify your mistakes and many players find this time perfect for that.

Poker variance mostly depends on competition and your win rate.

Poker is no place to show your ego and if you keep playing five better players in 6max games eventually, you will go broke.

Many players overlook this and it costs a lot, not only they have much bigger variance — they drastically reduce their win rate and can easily go from winning player to losing one.

This is an essential step because the difference in the win rate when we play our A and C games are crucial.

If you have not done that already, I highly recommend reading my on self-management and concentration!

You will get simple tips on how to prepare for your game, keep your concentration and much more!

Last, but not least.

Quitting your session on time is very important and if you continue playing when tired, angry or feeling bad, you will not achieve much.

Valuable buy-ins that you will lose because of that could increase your win rate much more than you can imagine.

This is another way to reduce poker variance and increase your win rate simply, by on time!

Keep it all together The worst thing you can do, when running bad, is losing your mental game.

This leads to poor decisions and poor decisions lead to even further decrease in your win rate.

If this is the case, I recommend asking some poker variance cash game to review your game or getting professional.

This will help you to make sure, if you are playing right and highlight some of the mistakes.

Fixing it will help to improve even further and move you closer to your goals.

Remember, make sure to put full attention to your mental game and learn to deal with coming issues.

It is going to be the deciding factor for your success because everyone encounters variance!

The best thing you can do to yourself is to think about long term results, not short term ones and keep your concentration to max level.

I really hope this will help you build poker variance cash game understand of the poker variance and what should you do in order to reduce it.

Remember, simply find the best games, concentrate while playing and keep your A game.

These steps will let you stay ahead of your competition and control your actions even when everything looks bad.

Just remember, If you are losing for a while, it does not mean you are doing something wrong so click working on your game and you will be good!

Just to see how important your win rate is in determining how big variance you could encounter, visit poker variance calculator and see for yourself.

Software - MORE

Your standard deviation stat gives you an indication of how “swingy” your game is. The higher your standard deviation, the higher your variance. The lower your standard deviation, the lower your variance. Standard deviation can also give you an indication of how far you can expect to veer from your current winrate over 100 hands (hence why.

Enjoy!

Software - MORE

Much of what follows is excerpted from my Chapter 4 of my book Tournament Poker for the Rest of Us. My goal here is to explain cash game variance so that you will better understand the impact.

Enjoy!