Some people are simply not prepared mentally to deal with variance. I believe personality plays a big part and how much work your putting in off the felt. Your competition is huge as well, great vid Alec !!!
In essence Alec can’t answer the question directly. Ppl simply don’t know if they play the best game with respect to their style. In general I don’t think you should run bad for anything more than a few sessions, if you are a good players. Imagine you expect to win 7/10 sessions, which is at least the win rate you need to be winning ( or anything more than 50%) then if you lose 3 sessions in a row, that’s should be rare occurrence but very possible. But if you lose 5-7 sessions then chAnces you are just not playing good. Many ppl think you can go on long losing streak due to variance, which is essentially bad luck or due to risky plays (which yield positive return long term). For me, as a 3-4 days a week regular, I can tolerate one or two bad weeks, which is 5-7 sessions. At which point I absolutely reflect on my game and try to be critical and constructive about it. We all know what bad luck look like, but I think ppl have biases leading them to blame all losing to bad luck. On top of that they really don’t have a true A game. Remember that 90% or more of players are loser relative to the better players. Being 89% can earn you an A-, but in poker it is a fail.
Sometimes losing play is just bad luck. I've had pair of Queens, I 3 bet. The opponent calls with 2, 4 off suit. Flop comes down 2, 6, 9 rainbow, he pushes all in and I call. Turn card is a 2 and that is all she wrote. Or the time my trip Jacks gets beat by a pair of kings, with a king on the river. The guy only had two outs. It is painful, we are just wondering, when the pain might end.
Its all about being process oriented rather than results oriented. Which is a lot easier said than done, when you hit the negative side of variance. When we get it all in on the flop against a shortstacker with top pair top kicker, and he call with 33 and spike a set on the river, we should feel good about it, because we made a good decision. But its human nature to feel bad, because our bankrool just took (yet another) hit.
Once I was on a huge downswing (8 BIs at 10N, had to drop to 5NL) and I had aces against two fishes on the blinds, one of them was 300bb deep like me. I open on the CO, BU 3bets, SB (the deepstacked aggrofish) cold calls and so does the BB. I 4-bet to 40bbs and everyone calls. Flop comes whatever and SB open-shoves, BB folds, I call and BU folds. He turns over pocket fours for third pair and rivers a set. Somehow I managed to remain silent while looking blankly at the screen.
+Firo Rosso There is something to be said also for getting off a table, when your stack increase above a certain size, to avoid this kind of situation and limit your variance. Particularly if you are playing an aggressive bankrool management style. If you have 100 buyins for the limit, whatever, but if you only have 20 or even 40, losing 3 in a single hand kind of sucks.
imo, it`s much much worse for the mind state to face a huge cooler rather then be outdrawn after an all-in. Or to be outdrawn when only a few money are left in the stacks, and most are in the middle, and u have to make a crying call anyway given the pot odds, even if u r pretty sure u got beat on the river. If u r already all-in and face a bad beat on the river - u see ur EV curve going huge in positive direction no matter what. So i personally keep calm in such spots, because i know that if we`ll repeat something simillar a couple of times, i`ll get my money back.
+Ivan Garashchuk I guess, we are all different. I personally feel, that the suckout from a bad player bother me more emotionally. Maybe because when I see the 33, my reaction is "yes!", and I kind of feel, the pot already belong to me. So therefore when the screen show his equity boom from 5% of the turn to 100% on the river, my reaction is "you gotta be kidding me!" Whereas if I flop middle set and get it in on the flop against top set, or if I get KK all in preflop against AA, then I am a lot more like "whatever, good for him". Because I know, that in the long run I will cooler him just as often, as he will cooler me. I typically try to avoid situations, where a river bet will be getting sick odds by altering my bet sizes on the flop and especially the turn. If the board is wet, and betting 2/3 pot on the turn will leave a 1/4 or 1/3 pot sized bet behind for the river, then I will just overbet jam the turn and be done with it.
I'd have to disagree about online being worse than live. I have a live game that I play, that "SHOULD" be really easy to beat. But the suckouts are non-stop. I've gotten in as the favorite 80 times, anywhere from 2 to 1, all the way up to my opponent having 1 out. I've won 5 hands of those 80. It's utterly ridiculous. It's a short stacked 1/2 game where max buy in is $100. Today I get AA UTG, open for $10, 1 caller, sb calls, and bb shoves for $21 more. I know I have the best hand, and the caller will go along if I just flat here, and I'm hoping he somehow connects. I flat and he comes along as expected. Flop comes 3-7-K, I check hoping he bets, and he does, $21, I then shove for the $60 I have left, and he calls with K9, the short stack BB has QQ so completely understand his preflop shove, but when I come over the top post, how many times is K9 EVER good post flop to a 3-bet shove? But players at this game make these kinds of calls every single time, every game I play, so I should have such huge equity, and of course he donks a K on the turn, and for good measure a 9 on the river for a FH. Standard for this game. I know it isn't a huge sample, but it's just unreal how bad I'm running at this game, doesn't matter how good I get in, I just can't dodge 1-8 outs when I get it in good. Beat after beat after beat. Doesn't seem like it will ever end. Extremely frustrating.
Ive found a lot of information on “variance” but im still having trouble understanding exactly what creates it, like is there a way to calculate its in a way to help with big decisions on a pot?
I'm not sure that strictly statistically speaking playing tighter is what lowers variance. I think playing less aggressive is what lowers variance (leading to loss of profit, of course, but maybe it's worth it for some players).
Variance is the square of standard deviation. Var = std dev * std dev. Playing straightforward poker is going to have the lowest std dev hence the lowest variance. Alec is advocating this when playing suboptimally for a number of reasons, but to do it in a way that isnt easily exploitable. Clearly, he states playing fearless with your A game (in which you attack with more marginal holdings) is better (+EV) because you are playing well. By exploiting opponents (i.e. choosing to 3bet OTB with Kd5d) because your opponent is opening too wide is better to do when playing well but if you are playing your C game then it is better to play abc in this spot and just fold therefore lowering your variance. You are right in that this will be less aggressive but not because of putting less money into growing pots necessarily but by playing closer to an abc game which is more in line with the lowest std dev.
If you are limited by your bankroll rather than skill, its profitable to give up a bit of expected EV to reduce your variance. The reason is, your bankrool only allow you to take on a certain amount of risk. And if variance is high, you need to play lower stakes, where your expected win per hour is lower in $, even if its higher in BB.
trdi I used to think that too. actually playing bad and bad luck is the cause of variance fluctuations. While playing tight or loose will have a constant built in long term variance
This is very true I hate online play i wish i was rolled for live play 😢😢😢 online is micro edges at micro stakes 😂😂😂 plus in feeling like i need to use the cash out button mid hand because they always hit their outs. Until im rolled to climb higher i need to keep hitting that button because i get in ahead but the site takes a huge chunk for that insurance, but not taking insurance seems to decimate my roll
Each style have different variance built in, I came to believe. On top of that luck is a factor affecting its short term fluctuations. Then it happens when you adjust your style. These 3 things are what you must find a balance for. A friend asked me: I been running bad, what should I do? He has a LAG style, I can’t tell him to play tight because he is a winning player with his style, I just say: if you believe you have a balanced style then there is not thing to do, don’t panic and keep playing well.
I measure each session as an hour, and think of the next hour as a new game no matter how long I'm actually playing, I usually play preflop tightly, with a small range., and tell my self that there is usually one hand in that hour ,that if played correctly can make up for all the variance experienced and loss accrued during that time. so many people when not getting cards after time,try to force hands and create their own luck so to speak, and to me, that's when you disastrously offend lady luck,. Luck is sprinkled much more liberally on the disciplined, which almost makes it not really luck. If you get what I'm getting at.
Wait hold on, you are telling me playing live poker, which is maybe 20-25 hands per hour rather than online poker where you can easily play 75+ or more by multi tabling is LESS variance? How does this make sense, more hands would lead to less variance
Because live poker has so many more fish, especially at the low stakes. I can confirm this. Online poker players develop a lot more skill, typically are risking less per hand (as a percentage of thier total bankroll), and also as he said, they can hide behind the computer...no tells involved. Playing live poker requires something called huevos and nerves of steel. Pros can spot a beginner a mile away.
i know everybody says they are unlucky but i have been super unlucky in poker over the last year. i know most readers are saying here we go again, bla bla bla. Anyway im not here to convince anyone, im convinced that the luck factor in poker is huge even though logic tells me that % will come through in the end. it has too right? The thing that ive experienced in playing live poker and plo for almost two years is that certain people tend to be lucky on more occasions and certain people tend to always get unlucky on most situations. it might seem crazy but ive seen this over and over. when an unlucky player possibly a good player is all in against a lucky player with cards to be dealt even if they are way in front u just know somethings going to happen. My question is, in life or in this case in poker is there more out there than just stats., something more mysterious that some people are generally lucky or generally unlucky? being realsitic i accept that im unlucky. im not being pessimistic or negative facts are facts. i dont see a need to lie and be positive when reality isnt that way. ive tried being positive over and over to chage my luck it seems to work at times but eventually i cant run away from bad luck. i know about variance in poker im not exagerating the bad luck. 1 outered over and over or similar situations, all big pots. play the hand so good, get the value than lose. is their something more about luck that we cant logically understand and explain?
heyglasses you're overestimating how often you get sucked out on, cause you don't remember winning when you should, and understimating how long a downswing can last. there's no way you've played 50k hands and still statistically run bad.
So what is the answer for live cash game? How long is long-run? In how many hours you can say that this is your long term winning rate? 500? 1000? 2000? More hours?
Well said, I really liked that and subscribed. I will definitely check out your other stuff. For me, since I really learned the game a few years ago, I just haven't had enough money to keep my bankroll going through the swings...I would advise anyone getting serious at the 1-2 entry level to have a bankroll of around 3000 or so, otherwise you can quickly become scared money, as happened to me. So, probably 1500+ big blinds is a minimum bankroll for whatever level you are playing to sweat the swings without devolving into your C game. Other players quickly sense scared money and you become just another fish, despite your skills.... Even, or particularly, in the case of playing against a lot of donks, you simply cannot be playing scared money....the nature of donks and many recreational players is the tendency to make big, bold bluffs like they see on TV and in the cowboy movies....while this can be very profitiable, it can also be very very difficult if 10% of your entire bankroll is at risk with just pocket QQs or something like that....you need a cushion.
Its not even enough, unless you are prepared to move down, whenever you have a losing session. Downswings of up to 20 buyins are to be expected although rare. But 5-10 buyin downswings are very common in poker.
I would _love_ to have the spare time to play 5-7 sessions a month. How do folks manage it if they don't live like right next door to a casino? Mind you, I suck, so if I did have that kind of spare time then I'd probably be losing a lot. But it's kind of a chicken-and-egg thing.
luck and variance are two diffent things. a top player doesn't need luck to win...a top player plays situations and players as much as cards. variance happens when you get your money in good (say >66%) but happen to lose 18 out of 20 times in a short period. You very rarely get your money in with 100% chance...you flop a set, someone backdoor a flush. You get KK against AA. You flop a set vs. a bigger set. It is similar but not the same. I firmly believe that someone like Ivie or Brunson could win a lot of money with 2-7 every hand against a table of mostly amateurs.....over time. In the short-to-medium run, variance is going to happen however.
Variance is also the way, the cards are dealt, and how the board runs out, when money is still left behind. Its not only about all-in pot. How often you make a flush, straight or set vs. how often your opponent make theirs, how often you are dealt KK, when someone else is dealt AA vs. the other way around, all that sort of things. In a single hand variance determine the outcome nearly 100%, but the more hands, you play, the less important it become. But it never drop to zero. Even after 10.000 hands, 100.000 hands or 1.000.000 hands your results will still be affected by variance, it will just be less and less.
To look at it another way, everyone gets the same percentage of any given hand over the long haul. This is basic probability. However skillful players win and unskillful ones lose (again, over time). So, in effect luck is 0% of your poker life (or career) but 100% of the starting cards for each hand. Beginners think they get "unlucky" all the time, like when they slow play a big hand and someone gets the right price and draws out on them...but in reality, the person who drew out was playing mathematically correct. It is a balancing act that is hard to get right...but that is a big part of the skill...getting the best results with any given situation, causing your opponent to make errors, usually mathematical in nature.
Kim Hall most ppl give confusing answer about variance, myself not entirely sure as the definition changes from ppl to ppl, unless we speaking strictly mathematics. Mathematically variance is simple the measure of how much your data is off from the normal expectation. For example, you can expect to hit set 1/8 times, but within a particular week you might hit twice that rate, then you in essence have positive variance that can be calculated. Thus it is a matter of luck in this case. In another case you hit set the normal amount, but you ended up losing because the board was scary and you folded to bluffing, and lower your expected win rate with sets, and thereby have negative variance, that is not due to luck but difference in skill in handling wet boards. It’s slightly different for bankroll variance but the concept is the same. Say you play a style that expect $20/hr, any time you make a mistake you cause it to fluctuate or when you get unlucky. In the long run, luck will normalize itself out giving you the natural variance, but bad decisions will continue to affect it. Not to mention that opponents decisions also affect it, but if they play bad and win, it’s luck! (Okay starting to confuse myself now) So variance actually varies (get it?), not a constant number. The mark of a good player is to minimize variance in term of skill while ignore variance in term of luck. Most ppl even who call themselves pro treat this concept incorrect. Bad player attributes it to luck, good players call it normal fluctuations in short term (not sure its luck or what cause they don’t believe in luck for the most part, they say good run and bad run).
We are explaining the variance today.Variance, variance, variance.That’s it.We made a good explanation today.See you later.(I talk a lot but I say nothing today too...)
You need to save up/work and invest money in to your bankroll until you're eventually operating correct BRM. Took me a while to save up 5k to play 200nl live, but now I am
Yes and no. They typically start with running bad. But after a while there is a risk, they get compounded by playing bad, because the running bad affect us mentally.
