Variance

Slightly inspired by several comments on variance.....What is your opinion on which games have the highest variance, and which have the lowest variance (out of the following games)?

1) NL Holdem
2) PL Holdem
3) Limit Holdem
4) PL Omaha
5) FL Omaha
6) PL Omaha Hi-Lo
7) FL Omaha Hi-Lo
8) 7 card Stud
9) 7 card Stud Hi-Lo
10) 5 card Stud
11) 5 Card Draw
12) Razz
13) Deuce-Seven Lo-ball
14) HORSE
15) Pineapple
16) Crazy Pineapple

Bump

no way can i attempt to list them all at the moment, maybe later.

let's just say that PLO and 7Stud are probably the highest (maybe 2-7 too, certainly 2-7 Triple Draw would be if it were listed), and Limit O8 and Razz are probably the lowest (not sure about Razz but the nature of the game suggests to me that it would be low variance).

I would think 5 card stud would have the lowest varience since only once card is hidden.

o8 is pretty low variance

Razz low variance, really? I would have guessed razz would be sort of high variance. Is part of your reasoning that most online player are so terrible at it? If so, I guess that makes sense. Seems like there's a lot of variance since every good starting hand is still only a drawing hand. I mean, in stud you can start off with rolled up aces, and no matter what, you've got at LEAST 3 of a kind aces... you've got a powerful hand. In razz, you've still gotta draw to have anything even decent.

I disagree with PLO and Stud being amongst the highest. I would put those mid-field. It would be difficult to argue that PLO and Stud has a higher variance than NLHE and PLHE.

I think i'd go for 2-7 trip draw and NLHE at the top (highest variance)

Stud Hi-Lo would be a pretty good one to argue for being near the bottom. Stud5 as well. Also Crazy Pineapple and LO8 near the bottom.

Razz certainly bottom half agreed.

PLO, played correctly has an absolutely huge variance simply because the edges are so tiny in the vast majority of large pots. I don't see how it's possible to argue that NLHE's variace is larger, as PLO presents many more drawing possibilities than NLHE, and when big money goes in one hand is less likely to be largely favoured over the other.

LHE has more variance than NLHE, simply because in NLHE you can price out draws, whereas in most cases you can't in LHE. This is a little subjective though - obviously 1/2 Limit has less variance than 1/2 NL, but this is only because the average pots in 1/2 NL will of course be much higher. Comparing a $200NL game with a limit game where it would be more feasible for people to buy in for $200 (5/10 Limit I guess?) would be more reasonable.

I'd actually put NLHE towards the bottom of the variance tree.

I place 7Stud way up solely based on my experience playing it as part of HORSE. It's a sick game.

I agree with Stud8 and 5Stud being close to the bottom. Will have to think about Pineapple (I have played it a bit on UB, but not enough to be able to form a snap judgment).

(Nice thread by the way - glad you bumped it 'cos I obv missed it first time around)

There seems to be a bit of a consensus on the bottom, but not on the top (highest variance)

I acknowledge what you are saying with LHE vs NLHE, but what this assumes is that a player would try to play the 2 games in broadly the same way. Which they wouldnt. Or wouldnt after time, when they realised it was wrong to do so.

If a good NLHE player (with a $4k BR) sits down at a $200 buy-in every day, and a good LHE player (with a $4K BR) sits down at a $200 buy-in every day, then over time the limit players graph (std dev) will be a lot more steady IMO. I think you generally talked yourself around to this anyway by the end of that paragraph....i think

With Stud you have got to argue it from the informational point of view. In theory you can get to see 35 out of 49 cards. In most hands you get alot of solid information to work with, which when combined with information from betting patterns has got to mean this is not near the top. Indeed in HORSE I acknowledge it is a pain in the butt, and is in fact my second least favourite rotation.

With PLO, I would argue that the small margins on hands are actually good. A lot of hands are chopped between good players, where slightly worse players might miss out on the splits over time. For me this is abit of a mid-tabler.