Originally Posted by ramdeebam
Well, how can variance effect a losing player?
If you get it in bad a vast majority of the time, then there is only one result over time, a consist losing graph no spikes, even for run good because you get it in so bad so often.
Wheres the varience even for this losing player blue?
To me, he never has any sort of spike, in ANY form and even SnG's the varience seems marginal dont you think for 12500 games, nothing "major" in terms of spikes. Just seems like the graph you posted before over 200 games for that guy.
PS: Think I'd give up after -$3,000,000+
Cash game player who obv avoid huge swings. Also larger sample size irons out and minor spikes. Look at nanonoko, his graph is pretty decent for a graph without major swings (bar a minor one if I remember correctly)
In HU hypers you will almost always get these swings over a small sample size. Here's what I expect of a losing HU hyper palyer. Going down overall but still with spikes (He has been on for last 8 hours I think, yet he doesn't appear very good lol).
I'm not disagreeing that getitng it in bad your graph will only go one way, I just didn't get how he seemed to have completely dodged variance. If you merged everyone i've ever played HU their cumulative graph would show a mirror image to mine, they would be losing but still having 15BI swings. I've run at about 10% ROI so someone who runs at -10% RPO should have a simialr graph to me but relfected in x-axis.