P
ph_il
...
Silver Level
The purpose of this post is to share some personal observations I've made with my micro-stakes mtt results. It's not meant to show off or be a brag in anyway. I also wanted to post this because, if I'm going create posts and/or make replies with the intention of helping other members, I would like them to see where I am coming from with my own personal experiences in micro-stakes mtts. I know this is only one site and doesn't show all of my results, but I think it shows enough.
---
I reset my betonline sharkscope graph on march 30, 2020. I was returning to poker after break from playing and was ready to start again. I didn't like the other site options i had for numerous reason, these sites included acr, carbon, and ignition. I found that betonline offered everything I was looking for in a site: cheap mtts, small fields, and short late registration. The only problem, I had played on betonline years before and was deep in the red from playing games and buy-ins that were way out of my skill level. I was an unskilled player with big dreams, I guess.
I decided that everything that happened before didn't matter and I would take it as an expensive learning experience. So, I deposited $25/$200 bankroll I set aside for myself and started playing.
Here is my graph from the day I reset everything.
I, now, think my graph/stats look pretty decent. I never had big expectations, given my skill level and the fact that I don't take poker seriously. I just like to play. However, for the longest time, I hated the part of my graph that's in the black square. So much, in fact, that I reset my stats again to hide that part, and I would always refer to my graph/stats from after whenever posting on here. It's stupid/silly, I know, but my intention wasn't to make myself look better than I actually was, it was the fact that I was embarrassed by it. That's it. I hated how looked and how I spewed off majority of a $200 profit.
So, what was going on during that part of my graph? Was it variance? Bad beats? online poker rigged being against me? I'm sure all played a part, except for it being rigged. I don't think that at all. But something definitely happened during that time period and something definitely happened afterwards.
Here is my graph in the black square.
Here is my graph after the black square.
As you can see, while the graphs are significantly different, a few stats are very similar. Most notably the number of mtts played, the average buy-in, and the number of final tables. So, yes, I experienced a bit of variance and I'm sure I experienced quite a few bad beats. I don't know, I don't think anything is really a bad beat so, I couldn't say if it actually happened. And if micor-stakes mtts was rigged, which I don't think is, then I got really lucky and hand the luck switch turned on in my favor.
What really happened was actually my fault which, unintentionally, works great for my betonline screen name. I was in a terrible place with my mental health and I used poker (mtts) as a means to deal with it. I had no other outlets other than poker and I just didn't care what happened. I do find it silly that, as went super spewy with my profits, I had it in good mind to stick with micro-stakes and likely followed good bankroll management. I was on a destructive path with my profits but I wanted to be sure I can be destructive a lot of times, I guess. Just following my bankroll spew plan: 100+ buy-ins means more chances to throw your money away.
But, even given how ugly my graph was and how spewy I was with my profits, I still managed to keep a positive roi% and I can't deny that I was able to put up some really solid mtt results and made 41 final tables in 429 mtts. Making final tables just doesn't happen, though it's possible with a bit of luck. Was I just a spewy luck box?
Lets take a closer look using some quick maths. I played 6, 8, and 9 seat mtts which averages to 7.6 seat mtts, but I'll round to 8 seats.
Looking at the second part of my graph, I had similar stats but much better results. I'll use the same 8 seats.
Again, as ugly and embarrassing as my graph was, I cannot deny the fact that what I was able to accomplish took some skill. Which is weird to say because I think I'm mediocre at best and always viewed myself as recreational player that plays for fun. But maybe I'm slightly above mediocre? My sample size is small, so I'm not letting this get to my head.
And for fun since I did all other numbers, I'll take a look my entire graph/stats.
To be honest, I think a < $2 mtt buy-in professional player sounds pretty cool.
---
I reset my betonline sharkscope graph on march 30, 2020. I was returning to poker after break from playing and was ready to start again. I didn't like the other site options i had for numerous reason, these sites included acr, carbon, and ignition. I found that betonline offered everything I was looking for in a site: cheap mtts, small fields, and short late registration. The only problem, I had played on betonline years before and was deep in the red from playing games and buy-ins that were way out of my skill level. I was an unskilled player with big dreams, I guess.
I decided that everything that happened before didn't matter and I would take it as an expensive learning experience. So, I deposited $25/$200 bankroll I set aside for myself and started playing.
Here is my graph from the day I reset everything.
I, now, think my graph/stats look pretty decent. I never had big expectations, given my skill level and the fact that I don't take poker seriously. I just like to play. However, for the longest time, I hated the part of my graph that's in the black square. So much, in fact, that I reset my stats again to hide that part, and I would always refer to my graph/stats from after whenever posting on here. It's stupid/silly, I know, but my intention wasn't to make myself look better than I actually was, it was the fact that I was embarrassed by it. That's it. I hated how looked and how I spewed off majority of a $200 profit.
So, what was going on during that part of my graph? Was it variance? Bad beats? online poker rigged being against me? I'm sure all played a part, except for it being rigged. I don't think that at all. But something definitely happened during that time period and something definitely happened afterwards.
Here is my graph in the black square.
Here is my graph after the black square.
As you can see, while the graphs are significantly different, a few stats are very similar. Most notably the number of mtts played, the average buy-in, and the number of final tables. So, yes, I experienced a bit of variance and I'm sure I experienced quite a few bad beats. I don't know, I don't think anything is really a bad beat so, I couldn't say if it actually happened. And if micor-stakes mtts was rigged, which I don't think is, then I got really lucky and hand the luck switch turned on in my favor.
What really happened was actually my fault which, unintentionally, works great for my betonline screen name. I was in a terrible place with my mental health and I used poker (mtts) as a means to deal with it. I had no other outlets other than poker and I just didn't care what happened. I do find it silly that, as went super spewy with my profits, I had it in good mind to stick with micro-stakes and likely followed good bankroll management. I was on a destructive path with my profits but I wanted to be sure I can be destructive a lot of times, I guess. Just following my bankroll spew plan: 100+ buy-ins means more chances to throw your money away.
But, even given how ugly my graph was and how spewy I was with my profits, I still managed to keep a positive roi% and I can't deny that I was able to put up some really solid mtt results and made 41 final tables in 429 mtts. Making final tables just doesn't happen, though it's possible with a bit of luck. Was I just a spewy luck box?
Lets take a closer look using some quick maths. I played 6, 8, and 9 seat mtts which averages to 7.6 seat mtts, but I'll round to 8 seats.
- 8/210 players = 3.8% final table rate
- 429 mtts = 16 final tables.
- I have a 9.5% final table rate.
- 1/8 = 12.5% mtt win rate, or 2 wins/16 final tables
- I made 3 final tables (not including an sng win), so slightly above the expected average, but below my expected average given my 41 final table finishes.
Looking at the second part of my graph, I had similar stats but much better results. I'll use the same 8 seats.
- 8/285 = 2.8% final table rate
- 471 mtts = 13 final tables
- I have a 9.5% final table rate
- 1/8 = 12.5% mtt win rate, or 1.625 wins/13 final tables
- In 44 final tables, that's an expected 5.5 mtt wins
- I have 10 wins in 44 final tables, nearly double the expected rate
Again, as ugly and embarrassing as my graph was, I cannot deny the fact that what I was able to accomplish took some skill. Which is weird to say because I think I'm mediocre at best and always viewed myself as recreational player that plays for fun. But maybe I'm slightly above mediocre? My sample size is small, so I'm not letting this get to my head.
And for fun since I did all other numbers, I'll take a look my entire graph/stats.
- 8/249 = 3.2% final table rate
- 896 mtts = ~29 final tables
- I have a 9.9% final table rate
- 1/8 = 12.5% mtt win rate or 3.625 wins/13 final tables
- in 86 final tables, that's an expected 10.75 wins
- I have 13 wins (-sng win), slightly over the expected rate
To be honest, I think a < $2 mtt buy-in professional player sounds pretty cool.
Last edited:
