|
|
 Originally Posted by siknd
we all talk about variance in some vague sense. but how do you define it literally? i think variance is a little more rare than most ppl would like to think.
i define variance as losing with the money in as a 5:1 favorite or better.
examples:
variance
1. losing with 55 to A7 on a 357flop.
2. losing to set with AA
3. losing with set under set
4. never setting pocket pairs in a session.
5. losing several times in a row in race situations eg AK vs PP.
6. the dreaded running four flush.
NOT variance
1. losing with flopped straight
2. losing with best hand to a flush/ straight draw (even if opp given horrid odds)
3. AK vs AQ
4. KK vs AK
ive lost six buyins in an hour before, but ive never blamed it on variance.
I don't think you really understand what variance is.
I'll give you an example. Lukie gets it allin with a flush draw. Bdawg has a set. Bdawg wins the pot.
Lukie has negative variance here. He had 25% equity in the pot and won 0% of it.
How come losing to a runner runner flush is variance but losing to a normal flush draw isn't?
How come losing to a set with AA is variance but losing to AK with KK isn't?
Sorry, I don't want to be mean or disrespectful or anything, but your definition of variance is extremely flawed and wrong.
|
Reply With Quote