BelFish
Legend
Loyaler
Usually, the success of playing in tournaments is determined by ROI (return on investment).
And winning prizes in 3 tournaments out of 10 can give both a very negative result and a huge win...
To roughly determine your true ROI, you need to play a long distance, at least 1000 tournaments...
P.S. Good ROI - positive ROI ))
And winning prizes in 3 tournaments out of 10 can give both a very negative result and a huge win...
To roughly determine your true ROI, you need to play a long distance, at least 1000 tournaments...
P.S. Good ROI - positive ROI ))
J
josueob247
Rising Star
Bronze Level
That makes sense but I was thinking terms of be a player that regularly gets a position in the money, assuming for example that always plays the same tournament with same buy-in, same number of players and the same payouts.
rock0001
Legend
Bronze Level
finishing itm 3 out of 10 times in the long run its a very difficult thing to achieve however even if you only cash on average in 1 every 10 tournaments you can still be a winning player if you reach the final table, or make a deep run so for that reason the most important thing to be a winning player im mtt is not only how many times you cashed but how much money you win in every tournament that you cashed.
M
mikeajax15
Enthusiast
Silver Level
Yes itm % doesnt matter that much.
There are losinf players with a itm of 20%.
And there are winning players that with a lower itm%.
The focus on itm leads to a to tight aproach on the bubble.
So focus on roi. In micro stakes i Guess everything above 30% is decent. (Non turbos)
A stat that i use over a large sample is finishing position on ft's. When i look up a player on sharkscope i watch this stat. (Sample 2000+ mtt).
This is the situation where the most money comes from.
Gl
There are losinf players with a itm of 20%.
And there are winning players that with a lower itm%.
The focus on itm leads to a to tight aproach on the bubble.
So focus on roi. In micro stakes i Guess everything above 30% is decent. (Non turbos)
A stat that i use over a large sample is finishing position on ft's. When i look up a player on sharkscope i watch this stat. (Sample 2000+ mtt).
This is the situation where the most money comes from.
Gl
IADaveMark
Rock Star
Silver Level
While a lot of the comments above are correct in how to analyze things, the simple answer to your question is that the pros tend to cash in about 25% of their events.
But yes, the problem is that min-cashing will only net you about a 50% bonus over your buy-in. So if you entered 4 $100 tournaments, cashed in 1 (25%) and made $150 off of that min-cash, you are in for $400 and out for $150. That's not a long-term winning strategy.
There are obviously, 2 ways to improve that:
I'm playing 6-8 bracelet events at wsop this summer. And possibly a few of the daily deepstacks on my days off. (Or wandering over to Wynn, Venetian, or Aria.) My goal is to cash in 25%-33% or more but have at least one of those be a deeper run. (e.g. > top 5%)
Just use those as a benchmark. YMMV
But yes, the problem is that min-cashing will only net you about a 50% bonus over your buy-in. So if you entered 4 $100 tournaments, cashed in 1 (25%) and made $150 off of that min-cash, you are in for $400 and out for $150. That's not a long-term winning strategy.
There are obviously, 2 ways to improve that:
- Cash in more tournaments
- Have deeper runs in the ones that you do cash in
I'm playing 6-8 bracelet events at wsop this summer. And possibly a few of the daily deepstacks on my days off. (Or wandering over to Wynn, Venetian, or Aria.) My goal is to cash in 25%-33% or more but have at least one of those be a deeper run. (e.g. > top 5%)
Just use those as a benchmark. YMMV
J
josueob247
Rising Star
Bronze Level
Thank you. This is the kind of answer I was looking for.
balo
Legend
Loyaler
I normally cash in 3 out of 10 tournaments. But you will not increase your ROI if you always end up mini-cashing. So looking at 100 tournaments I should be able to reach the final table at least once in a field of max 1000 players. If not my ROI will suffer.
manzanillo53
Legend
Platinum Level
Only guessing, but I equate it to baseball batting average, anything above 24% and it depends when. Low batting average but they are key hits is better then just base hits. So a low win rate in big money is better then a high win rate in peanut tournaments.
hilary antonik filho
Legend
Platinum Level
It's hard to give any advice, I'll answer as I do, sometimes I participate in 10 and I don't even enter the bubble and other times, I reach the final table 2 or 3 times, and I even enter the bubble at other times. today 5/12/22, I've played 5 tournaments, I couldn't get into the bubble. It will depend a lot on your eagerness and patience.
IADaveMark
Rock Star
Silver Level
I would disagree with this.
If the payout structures are the same (i.e. same percentage of the field and same curve), then finishing in for example the 5% slot (whatever that is for the field size) is going to have the same ROI. e.g. A $10 buy-in might make you $50, a $100 buy-in might make you $500, a $1000 buy-in might make you $5,000. In all three of those, your payout was 5x.
IADaveMark
Rock Star
Silver Level
That could possibly be. Still, the problem with that is if a buy-in is 1/4 the size of another, you need to win 4x as many times to bring in the same chunk of change.
BelFish
Legend
Loyaler
In general, right. We can consider 2 players: one plays with $10 buy-ins and 30% ROI, the other with $50 buy-ins and 7% ROI. It is better to be the second of these players, because he will win $350 for 100 games, while the first one will only win $300 for the same number of games...
F
firerain
Rock Star
Bronze Level
I would agree the ROI would be different between micro stakes, low, mid mand high BI states. I would state you should have a sample size for particular BI and type of MTT (for example at least 100) for ROI expectation. You are playing the proper spot but you are winning expect value so you are not running consistently in MTTs. The opposite may be true were running but there are number of hands won where you are behind, so you running over excepted value for a group of MTTs.
ROI is an important stat but more important is how you playing certain hands.
ROI is an important stat but more important is how you playing certain hands.
Duxflux
Rock Star
Bronze Level
Thats absolutely right men. The problem is i guess to reach 1000 tournamens...
Maybe this is one of reasons why successfull poker player do it full time.
jordanbillie
Legend
Bronze Level
A good balance to shoot for is 30/30.
30% ITM
30% ROI
This is the benchmark for being an MTT shark.
I have experience.
Edit: I just want to say that it was the analysis of these types of statistics that led me to my last minute late reg strategy. I figured out that I could surpass the generally accepted "good stats" that "pros" achieve playing long hours, by simply registering last minute and playing for a fraction of the time (by only choosing MTTs that were close to ITM at the time reg closed).
My stats in these two areas are:
42.1% ITM
70.8% ROI
Roughly 2,500 games played.
Last edited: