Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I think you're overstating the variance. If you watch high level poker play you will consistently see the same players at the final table of big tournaments. Sure, a few lucky random players will go pretty deep in the tournament, but they just don't do it nearly as frequently as the top few guys.

A competent but not great player has a chance of beating a pro in one session, but it's definitely pretty slim.



When poker players measure variance, it's $$$ over time. And while some pros are indeed good are surviving the bubble in fishy tournaments, none make a perfectly consistent income. Even amongst crushers, the variance can be massive.

For every tournament you make a big score, you crash out of 5 and get min payout on a few more.

Many of the biggest names in poker have been the biggest losers in a given calendar period. For example, Gus Hansen and Daniel Negreanu are two of the biggest winners of all time yet also have some of the biggest documented losses...




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: