"swings"/extreme variance?

[godeem23]

Anyone who's done any research into this game has been repeatedly warned of the vicious standard deviation you will experience as a player. We know the rule of thumb that your max bet should be no more than 1% of your BR, in order to survive extreme variance. The topic of RoR is always on our minds and discussed constantly. However, in poker, all of this is much less spoken and written about. My question is:

Why?

Why is variance discussed so much more in BJ than in poker? How can the variance be any more devastating in BJ than in poker? Why? The variance can't be any worse, right? It's just randomness. How can BJ randomness experience more fluctuations than poker variance?

Experienced players please also take this oppurtunity to share with us the most extreme variance stories you've experienced.

[Cardcounter]

The most extreme variance that I ever saw in blackjack was when somebody took an original $50 and ran it up to more than $5,000 while doing it with about 7% disadvantage. That means that the house temporiraly lost $5,000 while playing with an advantage of 7%. I told management not to kick this player out that he is one of the worst players that I had ever seen and you will probably win back most of your money by the end of the night. So they keeped him playing and he eventually lost most of it back and went from playing 2 hands of $500 to one hand of $25. If that kind of extreme variance can happen on the Casino side with an unlimited bankroll and 7% advantage just imagine what can happen on the card counters side with a limited bankroll and just a 1% advantage.

[QFIT]

Originally Posted by godeem23

Why is variance discussed so much more in BJ than in poker?

Quite simply because variance can be calculated in BJ. You cannot even accurately calculate EV in Poker as you are playing against other players and they can make decisions too.

[Kasi]

Originally Posted by Cardcounter

The most extreme variance that I ever saw in blackjack was when somebody took an original $50 and ran it up to more than $5,000 while doing it with about 7% disadvantage. That means that the house temporiraly lost $5,000 while playing with an advantage of 7%. I told management not to kick this player out that he is one of the worst players that I had ever seen and you will probably win back most of your money by the end of the night. So they keeped him playing and he eventually lost most of it back and went from playing 2 hands of $500 to one hand of $25. If that kind of extreme variance can happen on the Casino side with an unlimited bankroll and 7% advantage just imagine what can happen on the card counters side with a limited bankroll and just a 1% advantage.

Well, I don't know if we have enough info to determine how extreme the variance actually was.

Maybe he just sat down and won 6 hands in a row letting it ride. That wouldn't be an extreme event I don't think.

Maybe a guy loses 99 hands in a row at $1 and wins the last hand with a $100 bet and is now even.

Which guy suffered more extreme variance?

So management really wanted to kick this -7% EV player out? Based on...?

You should just get a few really good-counters you know and, when they're way ahead, just tell management to let them keep playing because they suck.

Tough to even imagine a -7% EV player lol.