What exacly is ROI? what is a good ROI %? How do you determine ROI? I want to know everything about ROI.

ROI is Return On(?) Investment, so if you have a 20% ROI in the $11 SNG's you're making $2 on every SNG you play.

Your ROI is basically your net profit (or return) divided by the total amount you've spent in buy-ins.

Say your net profit is $200 and you've spent $600 in buy-ins (of course meaning you've actually won $800 in placings, but $600 was used for fees). 200/600 =0.3333, so your ROI is 33.33%. Note that ROI is only applicable for tournaments, because in ring games you pay no buy-in fee to play.

As for what a good ROI % is, maybe someone else could give some insight into that, because I'm not entirely sure.

EDIT: Actually I went searching for a post where DM talked a bit about ROI and found it...

Originally Posted by Dorkus Malorkus

Just a word of warning, a 50% ROI is unsustainable - don't expect to be able to maintain this figure no matter how good a player you are. Around a 30% ROI at the micros and 20% at mid-stakes (give or take 5%) are generally considered to be 'plateaus' for long-term ROI. It seems like you're a good player, but you're also running good, so don't let it get to your head too much.

Obviously credit goes to DM for that information. And I'd add that this is speaking of SnGs. I have no idea if the expectations for long-term ROI in MTTs are any different or not.

Of course, I'm also in the process of trying to prove DM wrong, because I think a 40% ROI at $10 buy-ins can potentially be sustainable.

Currently im at 49% ROI after 24 $5 SNG after finishing in the top 3 15 times

i dont play them often as i prefer cash but if you play tight then loosen up i find it is possible.

For Ring games :- the only thing of any relevance is your hourly rate.
For SNGs :- ROI and Hourly rate both worth recording.
For MTTs :- ROI, or sometimes Monthly Rate (even Yearly rate!)

Ring games, hourly rate very much depends on the level you play, so no plateau

SNGs, commonly argued that 44.4% ITM is highest over infinite no. of games. That would lead to something like a 36% ROI being possible in theory, although in reality very debateable. At a high level if you are hitting 10% ROI over a couple of thousand SNGs I'd say you were doing the business.

MTTs, a good ROI difficult to pin down as one substantial win can skew thousands of MTT results quite dramatically. Generally I'd say something like 40% ROI for 1000 MTTs or above is good and achieveable. (NB if you are a 'limping to the money' type player then forget it )

Welly

Quick context note - in that post of mine combuboom quoted I was talking about single-table SNGs.

For MTTs I'd expect the attainable figure to be higher, though I don't know by how much.

Originally Posted by Dorkus Malorkus

(Total winnings) / (Total buyins) = ROI

For example, you play 20 $10+1 SnGs and win $250 total...

ROI = 250 / 220 = 1.136 = 13.6%

This is from an old thread on the same subject but with a different formula. Which is correct?

How do I figure SNG winning %

(Total winnings) / (Total buyins) = ROI

For example, you play 20 $10+1 SnGs and win $250 total...

ROI = 250 / 220 = 1.136 = 13.6%

This is wrong - it's profit / buyins.

ROI = (250 - 220)/220 = 13.6%

I take it this ROI would be deemed as not acceptable then


Games Played 105
Average Stake $13
ROI -32%
Total Loss -350$

Originally Posted by Bombjack

This is wrong - it's profit / buyins.

ROI = (250 - 220)/220 = 13.6%

It's not wrong; it's the same thing. Only difference is that the way Chris calculates it, your ROI will show up as "1.x" where x is the percentage, and your way it will show up as "0.x" where x is the percentage. Use whatever way you're more comfortable with.


(Let X be the net profit, and Y be the total buy-ins.

ROI = X/Y

ROI = (X+Y)Y - 1 = X/Y + Y/Y - 1 = X/Y + 1 - 1 = X/Y)

Originally Posted by Deep Stacks

I take it this ROI would be deemed as not acceptable then



Games Played 105
Average Stake $13
ROI -32%
Total Loss -350$

I'd suggest to start posting some hand histories in the Hand Analysis section. You'll be surprised how much it will help your game out.

Thanks for the advice Effexor. I am sure it will be taken on board.

The stats I provided are not mine. They are from one of the members of this forum. This person has a lot to say about the mechanics of Hold Em and to read their threads you would think they clean up all the time.

The reason I am doing this is simple. This guy (your first clue) was on a table of mine about a month ago and got, I admit, totally donked. However what was inexcusable was his reaction to the person/donk who beat him.

He was raging that in HU he would kick his Ass and anytime anyplace was alright by him. He then continued to rant as an observer instead of taking his Bad Beat like we all have to do.

I have not seen him on Stars (second clue) since and have searched plenty of forums hoping he uses his Stars name on a forum. He does on this one (Third Clue)

And as you can see by his stats he does not practice what he preaches does he?

lol...was thinking hrmm those stats look awefully familiar

Yeah those stats are mine, and yes i've been on a downswing for the last while. As for the raging part - when was this? I don't recall, and I try every time I play to congratulate donks on their profitable-for-me play, but sometimes of course get over the top and snap. Was this in a SnG or what?

Of course "do as I say, not as I do" applies here...much of the stuff that I post is stuff that I understand, and try to live up to, but of course I play much differently. It's much easier to say "If you're tilting, just take a break for a few days, and cool off" rather than actually do it. I've lost chunks of my BR multiple times to tilt, and likewise also can't always control my rage vs. donkeys like the way I 'preach' it should be done.

Good answer. Just thought you made a fool of yourself and totally spoilt the game that you had been involved in.

Thanks for being adult enough to come forward and taking it like a man

Sure you will experience an upturn but please try to keep your temper under control. It does not help in the lonfg run.

Bye

I don't doubt it was me 'raging' like that, as my very bad temper takes control once in a while, but I find it hard to believe that i would say stuff like what you mentioned ("ill kick your ass anytime" etc etc)...that's just stuff I hate to hear from people, and lose alot of respect for someone when they say shit like that. Who knows; maybe i was smashed drunk

Anyways I do apologize if I acted like an ass, but I honestly don't remember this incident specifically. PM me the hand history if you could spare the time...

this thread divert is useless without chat transcripts, gogogo!

I'm honestly trying to remember when he's talking about and can't figure it out

If I knew your PS name, DeepStacks, then I could come up with the HH via pokertracker, but I'm clueless to the incident otherwise.
Though I'm kind of embarassed of what might come up

Originally Posted by F Paulsson

It's not wrong; it's the same thing. Only difference is that the way Chris calculates it, your ROI will show up as "1.x" where x is the percentage, and your way it will show up as "0.x" where x is the percentage. Use whatever way you're more comfortable with.

Alon asked for clarification and it is wrong as stated. 250 / 220 = 1.136 = 113.6%, not 13.6%.

You can work it out as Winnings / Buy-ins -1 = ROI, which is the same thing as Profit / Buy-ins, but you need the -1 in there.

You're being even more of a nit than I usually am.

Originally Posted by Welly

SNGs, commonly argued that 44.4% ITM is highest over infinite no. of games. That would lead to something like a 36% ROI being possible in theory...

Are they sure it's not 44.3%?

They seem to be convinced it is definately 44.4%

Found the source of this "statistic" for anyone who's interested:

http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/...b=5&o=0&fpart=

Originally Posted by Bombjack

Alon asked for clarification and it is wrong as stated. 250 / 220 = 1.136 = 113.6%, not 13.6%.

You can work it out as Winnings / Buy-ins -1 = ROI, which is the same thing as Profit / Buy-ins, but you need the -1 in there.

I'm pretty sure the stuff in italics at the bottom of my post (the stuff that you didn't quote) says exactly that.

It doesn't matter which way of the two one uses, was my point. "Wrong" is not a word I'd use to describe how Chris put it.

Edit: For shits and giggles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Return_on_investment

It does matter which you use. The statement "(Total winnings) / (Total buyins) = ROI" is just WRONG! Objectively, no question about it - doesn't matter what word you would use. It's profit / buy-ins, not winnings.

If someone used the formula as given, and made $10 from $100 in buy-ins, they'd think they had a 10% ROI, when it's really -90%. And most people have negative ROIs.

Originally Posted by Dorkus Malorkus

You're being even more of a nit than I usually am.

Seriously.

Come off it, someone asks how you calculate ROI and he's given the wrong formula, and you're trying to shoot me down for giving the right one?

I really refuse to be drawn into such a stupid argument, and I'm not trying to 'shoot down' anyone. All I will say is there's an old saying about there being various ways to skin cats which I feel is appropriate here.

I'll take my leave of this thread (unless it actually get interesting somehow) with my favourite quote!

Originally Posted by FPaulsson

It's not wrong; it's the same thing. Only difference is that the way Chris calculates it, your ROI will show up as "1.x" where x is the percentage, and your way it will show up as "0.x" where x is the percentage. Use whatever way you're more comfortable with.

Show me a worked example bearing this in mind where my formula gives an incorrect answer and I will admit I'm wrong. gogogo!

Edit: Unnecesary spur-of-the-moment comments removed.

Originally Posted by Dorkus Malorkus

Show me a worked example bearing this in mind where my formula gives an incorrect answer and I will admit I'm wrong. gogogo!

To take your example, from your formula

(Total winnings) / (Total buyins) = ROI

I win $10 from $100 in buy-ins.

ROI = $10/$100 = 10%. Wrong. It's -90%

Working from base 1 it's -90%.

Really, this is getting silly, can we just agree to disagree?

I admit I was probably drunk/tired or something when I made the originally quoted post 'cos I'd usually say profit, but even in my drunk/tiredness I wasn't actually wrong, per se.

According to sharkscope.com my ROI is 24%. I'm still confused as to what a good score is so I'd like to know if that is strong or not.

Originally Posted by Joe03681

According to sharkscope.com my ROI is 24%. I'm still confused as to what a good score is so I'd like to know if that is strong or not.

It is good (how good it is depends on what level you are playing at, and how much data you have)

Your ROI% only really means anything if you have a large data set.

EG if the 24% applies to 1000 sngs at the $55/$109 level....then big thumbs up. If it applies to 50 sngs at mirco limits then a smaller thumbs up

Regardless, a +ve is still a +ve. On most sites around 85% of people have a negative ROI%.

Welly

i cant tell if im just tired or i am actually reading the same argument over and over....

Originally Posted by joosebuck

i cant tell if im just tired or i am actually reading the same argument over and over....

Both.

I think Dorkus and Bombjack are just trying to artificially inflate their post counts.

Originally Posted by Jack Daniels

Both.

I think Dorkus and Bombjack are just trying to artificially inflate their post counts.

Either that, or they're doing a great job of providing a distraction from my dismal stats that were mentioned earlier in the thread. Thanks guys

Returning to the question of what is a reasonable target:-

On my favourite site for SNGs, where I feel the opposition is very soft (no I`m not telling you where, find your own fish ) I have an ROI of 35.39. This is after well over a hundred games.

My average over the other sites I play is 12.66.

I have read elsewhere that 35 is the highest figure you can realistically expect to maintain, and this seems to match with my experience.

I know it's been awhile scince this thread has any posts. But here it goes. I'm a new to poker been playing just a few years. But im truly focusing on getting better. And to under stand stats better. So I started a bank roll of 50$ to play .50 cent 9 man turbo sit n goes. I've done a 51 game sample ( meant to do 50 but I played one last one to help the numbers lol) I have the ITM of 32%. I've won 1st 10× 2nd 5× 3rd once. I've spent 25.50$ and made 26.59$ to me that's seems pretty poor but if I do the ROI formula profit/investment ×100=ROI , that means I have and ROI of 104% . What is your guys take on these numbers . I was going to do another tally at a 100 games. I just wanted to see how I'm doing.

Ahoy there - `SquibyBoom` !
What`s up - brigante ?
What about the weather - near Ontario Lake`s ?
Some words about ROI..
There is one pretty resource :
http://MacroPoker
I can tell you - such a very-very smart guy`s made it. Someone of them I know very close. All they is very good & experienced in the math.
Anyway, they propose to distinguish the concept and meaning of ROI : they divided into 3 categories.

1. ROI-std – a player’s ROI according to the classical definition: profits divided by the sum of invested money.

2. ROI-bi – the player’s ROI in buy-ins: for each tournament, a percentage is calculated based on buy-ins won/lost, and then the ROI is averaged over all tournaments.

3. ROI-adj - an indicator that takes into account the importance of tournaments: more weight is given to the recently played tournaments, tournaments with a deep structure, those with higher buy-ins, etc.

So, as you can see - all of that kind of ROI`s have the different values.
Which one of them exactly need for you - choose by your`s !

P.S.
dam ! the images - not show here, so - I post in next one the link`s to the images.
By the way, moderator: how I can to delete one of my post ?

Ahoy there - brigante `SquibyBoom` !
Just - take a look to the one resource :
http://macropoker.com/
When you open the bookmark `FAQ` - you can find there that there is at least 3 kind`s (type`s) of ROI:

1. ROI-std – a player’s ROI according to the classical definition: profits divided by the sum of invested money.
https://yadi.sk/i/1XCw2eqa38oqxT
2. ROI-bi – the player’s ROI in buy-ins: for each tournament, a percentage is calculated based on buy-ins won/lost, and then the ROI is averaged over all tournaments.
https://yadi.sk/i/Q3w-b0GV38orPV
3. ROI-adj - an indicator that takes into account the importance of tournaments: more weight is given to the recently played tournaments, tournaments with a deep structure, those with higher buy-ins, etc.
https://yadi.sk/i/h82TtrHW38oreY
As you can see - there is very different value in that 3 kind`s of ROI.
Anyway, which one exactly you need - is only your own choice.
Good Luck - at the table`s & in your life !
Play hard & smart !

Originally Posted by SquibyBoom

I know it's been awhile scince this thread has any posts. But here it goes. I'm a new to poker been playing just a few years. But im truly focusing on getting better. And to under stand stats better. So I started a bank roll of 50$ to play .50 cent 9 man turbo sit n goes. I've done a 51 game sample ( meant to do 50 but I played one last one to help the numbers lol) I have the ITM of 32%. I've won 1st 10× 2nd 5× 3rd once. I've spent 25.50$ and made 26.59$ to me that's seems pretty poor but if I do the ROI formula profit/investment ×100=ROI , that means I have and ROI of 104% . What is your guys take on these numbers . I was going to do another tally at a 100 games. I just wanted to see how I'm doing.

You’re doing well buddy. My ROI is also around that mark. Keep grinding buddy