I've just sharkscoped a player and found his ROI at 54%. It's only 194 games 6max at the $5.50 stake but it's still a lot right? Mine is just 16% at the half that level at 300 games 
This guy was stealing and reraising with nothing. I can't believe how profitable he is...
Three digit sample size is not really a sample size :).
This big ROI is not feasible in stt's - maybe in MTT/mtt sng.
Originally posted by Gunn56
mines 30 percent roi after 3 thousand n some games positive of course
What stakes? That's a great ROI goddamit I suck! lol
There is a lot of room for improvement over the typical ways serious players approach SNGs, but I don't think anything close to a 54% ROI is sustainable in 6-handed $5.50 SNGs.
In fact, even if you are a very good player, it is very rare to have a streak so good that your ROI is 54% after 200 6-handed tournaments. In the PokerStars Battle of the Planets promotion, you can see how well people do in sets of 100 tournaments. A 54% ROI would give you a score of 1700 which would be at or close to the top of the leader board. In a few cases, players have dumped chips to one account to perform well in the BotP promotion, and were caught and disqualified. The recipients of the chip dumping had high ROIs according to Sharkscope. Most of the players at the top of the leader board are MTT SNG players. The one time I found a 6-handed SNG player at the top of the leader board for the BotP promotion, he was cheating by having 3 players dump chips to him, and he got disqualified.
Did you perform an advanced search, filtering to 6-handed tournaments? If not, then you might have included a MTT. MTTs have high variance, and the potential ROIs are higher. If you win one 180-player SNG, your ROI for that tournament is about 5000%, which would bump up your ROI for a block of 200 tournaments by about 25%.
Yes I thought about possibility of an MTT. I couldn't look further into it because I am not yet subscribed to sharkscope. However his graph was steadily on the rise; no long vertical lines that indicate a huge win in one game. Also this player was on Everest poker where there isn't much reason to chip dump for points. (There is a leaderboard but the prizes are simply not worth the trouble).
What do you mean by there is a lot of room for improvement? Obviously I have a bazillion leaks - is this what you meant?
What do you mean by there is a lot of room for improvement? Obviously I have a bazillion leaks - is this what you meant?
Suppose you had a bet with someone about the ROI you could achieve over your next 100 SNGs. You get $100 times the difference between your ROI and your opponent's ROI. Would you do things differently from how you play now? I would.
In the prop bet, I wouldn't multitable, or not nearly as much. I would pay close attention to timing tells and chat tells. I would watch how the players act on other tables they might be playing--usually if a player is involved in a hand he will tighten up on other tables before the push/fold stage. I would use a much more extensive HUD. (I would also make some spite calls against my opponent in case we played each other.)
I think there are many decisions where we are used to taking shortcuts that work ok, but which are not optimal. If you only play one table, you might be able to consider different raise sizes or bet sizes, and more carefully put your opponents on ranges.
I think most players have significant error rates. In backgammon, there are objective programs which quickly tell you that play A wins 0.060 points less than play B. Expert backgammon players might only make the right move 80-90% of the time, and estimate their error rates in millipoints per move. I think poker players also make many mistakes, but it is much harder to get the objective feedback. I think it is quite possible for winning SNG players to average giving up over 10% of a buy-in per tournament from bad push/fold decisions. This represents the possible improvement you can make to your ROI.
Originally posted by pzhon
What do you mean by there is a lot of room for improvement? Obviously I have a bazillion leaks - is this what you meant?
Suppose you had a bet with someone about the ROI you could achieve over your next 100 SNGs. You get $100 times the difference between your ROI and your opponent's ROI. Would you do things differently from how you play now? I would.
In the prop bet, I wouldn't multitable, or not nearly as much. I would pay close attention to timing tells and chat tells. I would watch how the players act on other tables they might be playing--usually if a player is involved in a hand he will tighten up on other tables before the push/fold stage. I would use a much more extensive HUD. (I would also make some spite calls against my opponent in case we played each other.)
I think there are many decisions where we are used to taking shortcuts that work ok, but which are not optimal. If you only play one table, you might be able to consider different raise sizes or bet sizes, and more carefully put your opponents on ranges.
I think most players have significant error rates. In backgammon, there are objective programs which quickly tell you that play A wins 0.060 points less than play B. Expert backgammon players might only make the right move 80-90% of the time, and estimate their error rates in millipoints per move. I think poker players also make many mistakes, but it is much harder to get the objective feedback. I think it is quite possible for winning SNG players to average giving up over 10% of a buy-in per tournament from bad push/fold decisions. This represents the possible improvement you can make to your ROI.
Brilliant. Thanks!
