blankoblanco
plays poker on hard mode
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...
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.
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...
Dorkus Malorkus said: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.
Last edited:
Welly
Guest
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
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
Alon Ipser
Cardschat Elite
Dorkus Malorkus said:
This is from an old thread on the same subject but with a different formula. Which is correct?
https://www.cardschat.com/showthread.php?t=65138&highlight=winning
F Paulsson
euro love
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.Bombjack said:
(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)
D
Deep Stacks
Guest
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?
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?
ChuckTs
Legend
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.
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.
Last edited:
D
Deep Stacks
Guest
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
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
ChuckTs
Legend
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...
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...
ChuckTs
Legend
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
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
Bombjack
Legend
F Paulsson said:
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.
Bombjack
Legend
Found the source of this "statistic" for anyone who's interested:
http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=&Number=2302700&page=0&view=&sb=5&o=0&fpart=
http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=&Number=2302700&page=0&view=&sb=5&o=0&fpart=
F Paulsson
euro love
I'm pretty sure the stuff in italics at the bottom of my post (the stuff that you didn't quote) says exactly that.Bombjack said:
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
Last edited:
Bombjack
Legend
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.
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.
