Variance w/ graph!

[PokerWoody]

I thought i'd post a graph of my hands since July. Not becuase my results are particually impressive, becuase in fact they are not. The post a while ago on 'Who actually wins at poker' and Waltypies recent foray into Busto Lando just got me thinking about variance and i think this graphs sums it up quite nicely and really shows the importance of good bankroll managment.



This graph is entirely NL100 (i've filtered out the other limits) and over this period of time i'm winning about 5 BB/100. This is historicaly at the lower end of my winrate but is not untypical.

As you can see, despite the graph following a general upward trend, there are periods in there of biggish downswings and long (or at least they felt like it) periods of breaking even.

5,500-7,800 - 7 buy in down swing
15,00-17,00 - 6 buy in down swing
28,000-37,000 - Break even.

These aren't even particually big down swings and 37k is a relatively small sample of hands. My point is that losing is all part of a winning in poker and so long as you have a good bankroll you shouldn't let it worry you. If you don't have a good bankroll you will go bust - it's a simple as that, it's just the nature of the game.

I keep a bankroll of 40 buyins for NL100, which is mainly what i'm playing at the moment, for a number of reasons but I certainly don't think it's excessive. If anyone is playing on less than 20 buyins for your level, unless that level is very small, i'd recommend dropping down and building your bankroll.

[Dice Man]

Are we talking min buyins?

[Prowler]

it looks like $100 buy ins from where it reaches 1400 then drops to 700 which is around the 5500 mark and has been highlighted as 7 buyins lost

[FirePhil]

Are we talking min buyins?

No, max buyins.

I use 20 buyins but I'm happy to drop down if I need to, like when I spend a chunk of it on a holiday or something. I've only had to drop down a level once as a result of a big downswing. That was playing mostly full ring though and I usually a pretty low variance game, I expect Woody has much more frequent and bigger swings both up and down than I do so keeping a bigger bankroll is probably necessary.

[Raiser]

The most intresting post i have seen in a while...

Your graph has got me thinking...

I had some preconceptions about the cash game players on here (you and phil inparticular) and i imagined profits of multiple buyins per day and a very large daily 'rate'... i dont know why i assumed that, i think maybe because i know you are a winning player i assumed winning = $000's profit.

But, your post has brought me back down to earth with a bang and realisation that my cash game performance isnt all that bad (yeah its not great but its a new disipline iam trying to get better at) Somedays i would genuinely sit at the pc and look at my daily P&L (as i call it) and think 'fuck - what is the point - ive just made $20' ... i would then jump up a level and try to make more!

I know iam contridicting myself slightly now but i do posses good money management skills and i think i have been trying to be a short-term winner as oppossed to a long term winner.

Anyway the point iam trying to make is i think majority are in it for short term gains and thats why you see people going broke and see people on major tilt becuase they are playing levels with their entire bankrolls and one bad beat means disaster (this isnt directed at you walty, i know what u r thinking, its a general statement)

I know alot of what i have said is fundemental stuff... but still i never considered $15perday on a bankroll of $4k(?) as being successful - just goes to show how neive iam about poker & how greedy iam!! (iam have the balls to admit that - does anyone else?)

[PokerWoody]

I know alot of what i have said is fundemental stuff... but still i never considered $15perday on a bankroll of $4k(?) as being successful - just goes to show how neive iam about poker & how greedy iam!! (iam have the balls to admit that - does anyone else

Don't equate it to money per day, you have to look at it as money per hands. If we say that each table plays 100 hands per hour and I play 4 tables and play for a standard working day (8.5hrs say) then my $perday would be...

(4*100)*8.5 = 3,400 hands per day.

5 PTBB/100 is $2 * 5 = $10 per hundred hands (PTBB = 2 big blinds)

(3400 * $10) / 100 = $340 perday.

This is hypothetical of course as I don't really know how many hands per hour I play and typically my win rate is between 3-9 PTBB/100 over similar sized samples but I could also have a losing stretch over this many hands too. Also, I think it might suffer having to play so much and I don’t' think i'd enjoy it nearly as much. If I played full time (the same hours as I work at the moment) it would take me about 2 1/2 weeks to do 37k hands. Anyway, I don't claim to be a 'big' winner - i'm not as my stats clearly show.

You also have to consider why you are playing poker. For most people I believe not losing is enough as we mainly do it for recreation. Personally I couldn't be bothered to do it if I didn't win but I don't need to win much to keep me interested.

But yes, almost everyone you know, including me, is earning less from poker than they say they are. I actually believe jjh's poll thread was a testament to players kidding themselves into thinking they are winning players...I actually believe that the majority of players on this forum are break even players at best but i'm not going to back that up or argue with anyone about it.

[dancoles]

What software was that graph produced in Woody ?

[PokerWoody]

www.pokertracker.com

Check out the forum for the graph software. I used PokerGrapher but there are other available also.

[dancoles]

Wicked. Thanks for that Woody.

I've only had pokertracker for the last 4 days, but here's a graph of my progress over 1,600 odd hands. I'm pretty happy. Looks like I'm doing ok.

[jjh]

Excuse my dumbness here ,

but what is this graph showing- is the vertical line reflecting profit in terms of BB won- so you are +$3,900 here Woody over the length of time the graph represents?