Standard deviation at FL

I suggest moving this to the FL section.

/Johan =

Originally posted by YohanN7
I suggest moving this to the FL section.

/Johan =

Done

Hey,

I'm not sure which stat you're using, because that doesn't sound like any kind of result I have. There is a stat called StdDev BB (in BBs - as in big bets), that's the one you should use. (I think in HEM2 you have to multiply it by 10 to get the actual result.) Maybe yours is in big blinds, which is not that appropriate for limit games.

StdDev will depend on a lot of factors, like your gamestyle, the average number and quality of opponents you play against, etc.

I think the general numbers look something like this:
FR - 15-18 BB/100
SH - 18-22 BB/100
HU - 20-25 BB/100

Interpreting it is not easy, and mostly useless, it's only good to plug it into variance simulators and RoR calculations and stuff, but in itself won't tell you a lot of things.

Thanks madorjan!

I have looked in hem and yes..it is stddev in big blinds. I have some days when I tilt a lot and I end the session losing a lot of bb/100 probably increasing a lot the deviation.

I have selected stddev in BB and I have 2.66. So, if I have to multiply by 10, I would have 26.6 which is not so much over the general numbers you have posted for SH.

Well, I think it's a bit over the general number (~125%), but that easily can be just the small sample, and maybe either you playing really laggy, or you choose tables with agressive maniacal players. Also, your winrate looks quite high for a .5/1 regular, so that kind of hotrun might also effect the StdDev. (If you're a more experienced player, then just ignore what I said, but 3BB/100 is either a result of a hotrun, or produced by a really good player.) I consider myself a fairly LAGgy player and have 21 StdDev with 1.x BB/100 in over a 150k+ sample.

First of all, one little correction: I would like to be at .5/1 but now I am at .05/.10 and at this stake I don't think that 5-6bb/100 is to much .
I am kinda laggy but at micro stakes I don't think that tag players do very well considering that o pokertableratings almost none of the tag regulars didn't seem to have much profit.

PS of course I choose tables with maniacal players...at least they can pay my internet connection

Sorry, misread it in the first post. At that stake it's absolutely possible to make 3BB/100, however if you can do that consistently, I'd definitely suggest you to move up, because games are not that much harder at .1/.2 or even .25/.5, but you can definitely win much more.

About playing LAG or TAG, it should depend much more on your postflop skills, handreading, etc. than on PTR winners. Given the general definition, LAG always makes more money, however LAG gives you more opportunity to make mistakes, and with not enough postflop experience that can lead to troubles. (However if you can keep the 3BB/100 there is absolutely no reason not to play like you do.)

I only have about 100k hands and ~50k tracked in hem, so I don't know if I am prepared to move up.Looking at my graph( very steady) I think that I should move up but the problem is that I play on PS and I choose tables with 75-90c medium pot and at the next limit I didn't see so many tables with 1.6usd medium pot....so I choose to play 5/10c with 80c medium pot rather than 10/20c with 1usd medium pot.

Hey there,

I think you're being absolutely nitty with your limit selection. After my first 100k hands I already stepped up like 4-5 limits, it's all the question of bankroll and knowledge, and much less about being a "proven winner" in the games. If you know you're ahead of the opposition (given your posts I'm certain), and have the required bankroll to move up, don't hesitate, especially at the micros. You'll never achieve "real" stakes if you keep waiting for 100k hands to move up from a stake to the next. (Also, at 10c/20c you have to win just half of what you win here to be at the same $/100.)

I think a decent player or a wannabe good player should look at microstakes only as a learning place, as a springboard where you can get to the higher stakes, while experiencing what poker is like, and learning a few/lot of strategical concepts, that will be of help at the real stakes. But I think up to .5/1 at least, but more like 2/4 poker shouldn't be about the money, but to gain experience and knowledge to beat the higher stakes (unless you live in a country where the money you can earn at the micros counts as a fortune - sadly these countries exist).

I am kinda afraid to move up because at 2c/4c I had ~15bb/100(18k hands) and at 5c/10c I have only ~6bb/100.At 10c/20c I don't like the average pot comparing to 5/10c and for .25/.5 I am pretty sure I am not good enough yet.

You said that you moved 4-5 limits in 100k hands...did you manage to keep your winrate in USD/h moving up this fast?

And yes..I look at micros as a learning place although I could make a decent living playing at .50/1 (average net salary in my country is 347E)

The STDEV statistic in HM2 is unusual. I can explain that where STDEV = 20BB in HM1 it becomes 2.0BB in Hm2. I actually contacted them directly and was not satisfied by their responses.

Here's a basic explanation of how i think about Standard Deviation.

I would tend to continue thinking of it as being 20BB because its more useful and practical.

In this respect, lets say you play 100 hands of poker and measure your winrate per 100 hands (ie your result after that sample).

Well, with a SD = 20BB, we can expect your results to deviate around your true winrate between +/-20BB 68% of the time.

In other words, if our winrate is 1BB/100 then roughly 2/3rds of the time, our results over 100 hands will lie between -19BB and 20BB.

95% of the time, we can expect your results over 100 hands to fall between +/- 40BB around your true winrate.

In other words, standard deviation (STDEV) is a measure of the extent of the dispersion in a distribution. The distribution in this case, is the complete set of results expressed in BB/100 for possible 100 hands samples of poker played by you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation

just a quick reminder: you have to be careful when comparing stddev values. it's not linear (bc variance is the square of stddev), a stddev of 26.6BB/100 is A LOT higher than the average-ish 19-20BB/100 for SH.
you'd have to be playing in extremely laggy games to get such a high value... it's definitely weird and probably due to tilty sessions.

btw i agree that looking at stddev per hand is useless, since we commonly use BB/100 to express winrates. it's kinda stupid to have different metrics

grats on black member status!

red is right. 26BB SD is large. i didn't check but my first guess was that you might be playing HUHU.

of course, theres nothing inherently bad about having higher variance.

sometimes it suggests that other problems are occuring (like red pointed out).

most of the time we just need to have a more solid backing. This means having a bigger bankroll (not like isildur) but we also need to be mentally prepared for larger swings. knowing how variance plays a roll does help.

also, its not even that SD/hand is useless... its actually invalid. Standard deviation is only calculated by taking all possible random smaples of size N for a given population. I'm tired and would have to look up the justification, but for my money the way its expressed appears to be just kind of made up.

multiply SDEV in Hm2 by 10 and you should be just fine.

Thanks redskwerl and datsmahname!

Probably red is right.I have had a lot of tilty sessions and I also choose veeeery loose tables with maniacal players that can affect the br when they are running hot.