Moving up to $20 + $2s

[durron597]

(Apparently) Because I have been playing a lot of tourneys on Pokerroom, they have offered me a 15% Bonus for a second deposit of up to $150. If I take this offer, then my bankroll will be enough for me to start playing $20+$2s. So here I ask if my numbers so far are good enough (they are NOT statistically significant, I know) that I should make this move.

SnGs played: 21
ITM: 52.4%
ROI: 94.8%

1: 7
2: 2
3: 2
4: 2
5: 2
6: 3
7: 2
8: 0
9: 0
10: 1

Starting bankroll: $200. Current bankroll: $385; which will become $425 + whatever changes come when I get enough FPP. It would be higher except I'm net negative playing MTTs. I am positive that I am better at SnGs than I am at cash games, so I haven't played cash games at all. I haven't cashed out yet.

Moving up now seems a bit premature, but the 15% deposit bonus is making it tempting. My original plan was to move up when I hit $500 bankroll if my $10+1 ROI stayed above 75% or when I hit 100 SnGs and it was still over 40%. Should I move up or not?

[Jurollo]

You answered your own question, 21 is so far from an acceptable sample size it is ridiculous. Nice run, but no one can make any valid thoughts about your long turn profit from them.

[durron597]

I know. Can I even have any confidence on that ROI number at all? Even within 50% (40%-140% ROI) would still show that I am a winning player at this level. Also, is there any real difference in skill at the $20+2s that it is worth it to move up assuming I have the bankroll for it? Does anyone have a thread or happen to know off the top of their head how the skill level changes as the buyin does? Also, this is Pokerroom not Party or Stars, so the blind structure and player base are different, but I'd like to think that the relative skill changes are the same there as they are on Party or Stars.

Honestly, assuming that the skill level doesn't change too much at the next level, I don't see why I can't move up as long as I have the bankroll for it. Can anyone explain how to quantify the statistical significance of my current ROI?

[Jurollo]

Simply said there is none. Even the worst player could have a streak of luck and get that kind of record over that little time. You have to make the move if you feel like you want to but no one will be able give you statistical evidence that says move up or stay.

[stupidsucker]

I would say play at least 100 at the 10's and move up if your RoI is at least 35%ish IF you have a bankroll of at least $600.

If you dont want to take our advice, then at least play up to 50 at the 10's and meet us half way. Personaly I recomend anyone semi new to SnGs play at least 300 before they move up for the first time.

[durron597]

I think you guys are right; my good numbers are exciting me a little too much. Does anyone know where I can find a formula that would let me convert the number of SnGs played so far to a confidence level of the results? Everywhere I look on this board, it says "you need 100 to have any confidence, and even that isn't that good", but nowhere do I see the numbers for it.

I actually looked this up in a statistics book of mine, but everything I found in there wanted a model of the results to guess with (Binomial, Normal, etc., which Tournament results are NOT). Can anyone help?

[Stoneii]

Why not stay at the $10 level to build up the assurance you are really beating the level and not just running hot. You could always 'treat' yourself to the odd $22 game (say after every $40-$50 increase in your bankroll) but discipline yourself to step down again win lose or draw.

That way you dip your toes in the waters at $22 level but don't put pressure on the roll too much if you're not quite ready to stay there.

Impressive results so far.

G'Luck

stoneii

[durron597]

You know, that's a really good idea. I think I'm going to do just that. Thanks!

[snowbank]

You can check out the 100 sit and go challenge thread if you want. I'll bump it up for you. A lot of people threw around a lot of different suggestions about a lot of different things(all involving sit and goes). I suggest playing more sit and goes before you make a move, but it's your bankroll. You may be ready for a move up right now, but playing more will help you be safer and keep you from going broke. Just to give you an example of how short runs can fool you, through 28 sit and goes in my 100 sit and go challenge I was up about $374 I think it was. The next 72 I only made $123. The first 28 was a hot streak for me. The next 72 was a dry streak for me with plenty of bad beats. If I was not aware that poker is a long run game I may have made a potentially bad decision to move up after making almost $400 in about 8 hours. I would say keep playing at the level you are at, and keep reading posts that will help you. You may be ready to move up right now, but play a lot more to make sure. Better to make sure than to move up and say "oops" if you weren't ready, watching your bankroll fall fast and have to start all over.

[playerfl]

how much harder are the $20 than the $10 ?

[snowbank]

I don't think the $20's are much harder than the $10's, but it all depends on how much you've played. If you can consistently beat the $10's, definitely try the $20's. From what I understand the play doesn't change too much until you reach the $30's or $50's.

[AleoMagus]

I'm actaully no math guru, but my stats knowledge is growing and this is the calculation I use. Perhaps others will comment.

First, calculate your standard deviation per tourney

SD = SQRT((Prob 1st)(net $ 1st)+(Prob 2nd)(net $ 2nd)+(Prob 3rd)(net $ 3rd))

your standard deviation after n tourneys will equal (SD)(SQRT(n))

to figure a degree of confidence to +/- X dollars per tourney

X/(SD/SQRT(n)) = Z

Take this Z value and convert on a table of the normal standard distribution
These tables will come up on any google search

This converted value (a) will give you your % confidence as in the following formula

% confidence = 100(2a-1)

I have an excel spreadsheet which will calculate confidence values on this address

http://www.aleomagus.freeservers.com/Spreadsheet

It is the 'universal' file

This spreadsheet calculates confidence on the 'stats' page in three different catagories

Your WINNING confidence (confidence to +/- your avg profit/tourney)
+/- $2 per tourney
+/- $1 per tourney

It will take about 250 tourneys for an player getting what I consider a 'typical' standard deviation with modest win rates (25% ROI) to be only 65% confident that their results are accurate to within 10% of the initial buy-in.

This is to say that after 250 tourneys, a 10+1 sng player like I describe could be 65% confident that their win rate (of about $3 profit/tourney) is accurate to within +/- $1

Not insipring, I know, but such is life

In truth, a sample of 500-1000 tourneys is where you really start to become confident with any degree of accuracy

On the bright side, a sample as small as 100 can actually give you a pretty high (over 90%) degreee of WINNING confidence. So you may not know right away how much you can expect to profit, but you can be pretty certain that you will not go broke and will continue to profit.

Then again, it is my understanding that these equations are more approximate when the sample is small. I would definitely not be doing these kinds of calculation with anything less than a 100 tourney sample and perhaps that is even too small.

Regards
Brad S

[mackthefork]

A good approximation is 500 SNGs gives +/-5% confidence in results.

Regards ML

[Jurollo]

Listen to Aleo, he knows what he is talking about.

[AleoMagus]

I am of the opinion that you should not move up, but my reasons are perhaps different from other people.

First, I really don't think at this level you need to care too much about bankroll and maybe don't even need to care much about whether you are actually winning.

At these levels, I assume you are not living from your bankroll and I also assume that your profits are not necessary to you. Sure, it would suck to lose it all and have to buy-in again but you could probably do it with at least enough to get you going at 10+1 again so who cares.

More good thoughts about this (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=singletable&Number=565 423&Forum=,,,,,,,,,All_Forums,,,,,,,,,&Words=&Sear chpage=8&Limit=25&Main=565423&Search=true&where=&N ame=5278&daterange=&newerval=&newertype=&olderval= &oldertype=&bodyprev=#Post565423)

The reason that I suggest waiting is because you have had an unsustainably good run so far and can expect to see less optimistic results in the future. This is not to say that the cosmic order is going to balance out or anything, just that in the future, you can probably not expect more than a 50% ROI (and probably a lot less) and this is going to bring with it more swings and more frustration and doubt.

As we can be pretty sure this will happen, it's better that it doesn't happen right after you move up. Get at least 100 10+1 under your belt so that you have seen a 5 or 6 sng losing streak or a 30 sng -ROI streak. This will make you far more psychologically prepared for these things when they happen at a higher level.

Otherwise, you might experience a downswing and think - Oh yeah, this is a higher level, I need to adjust. You may not need to adjust much at all, but it can be easy to talk ourselves into such things and this can be damaging to our progression.

If you are very mentally tough and you have a LOT of confidence in your play (and I say this rhetorically, because I doubt it's possible after such a small sample), then I say move up if you want to.

Some sng players actually started at $215 and have done well. Usually these were good tournament or NL ring players anyways and it was just the level they chose to start at.

No reason why you need to stay at 10+1 if you are itching to move up. I certainly wouldn't recommend to Howard Lederer that he go through the paces at 10+1, 20+2, 30+3, and so on. I'd say - go play the biggest game you can find.

So I guess what I am saying is - If you are an experienced poker player who has seen swings in ring play or multi table play and whose bankroll is easily replacable, move up. Otherwise, put in some more 10+1 and get a more accurate estimation of what to expect in terms of swings and expectation.

Regards
Brad S

edit - I like stoneii's idea and actually use it myself. Give yourself the occasional 20+2 (or even higher) when you are running well. This can make the eventuall transition a lot easier.

[jimotto]

Honestly, I think the 20-30s at pokerroom are easier than the 5-10s. Although I certainly don't near your ITM or ROI at the 10+1 (and you won't likely for long). At any rate, they aren't tougher, go for it.

Keep at the multis, they are quite good, its not that tough to get to the money in the 10,000 garuanteed.

[Airpoaneman]

200+15 = eat you alive.
100+9 = Where the pro's who are in a dry spell play
50+5 = Experienced Recreational Players
30+3 = New/intermediate recreational players
20+2 = People with an ample amount of money and people who just won a 10+1 our two.
10+1 = Rookies players and people who think they are good.
5+1 = Heh...crazy mofo's who get a poker high for going all in.
( made that up off the top of my head, no validity what so ever )
But the main factor in these tournaments is...

"The Rich get Richer and the poor go bust."

These players, (myself included sometimes), just next level when they win a few bucks. They throw their money into the next lever up, they win, and go into the next level up, and so on and so on. Usually the only people who win at this game are the NL 200's and the guys who are smart enough not to move up when they win.

I have basically doomed myself until I get a big enough bankroll to play the higher stakes regularly.

My scenario :

Multi-tables
NL 30+3, 5th out of 708; $1,770.00
NL 50+ 5, 8th out of ??, $700.00
NL 100+9, 12th out of 250, $300.00
NL 20+2, 21st out of 500, $120.00
SNG's
NL 50+5, played about 15, Net profit of 1,200.00

Played
NL 200+15, one, 4th place, Zero $, -$215.00
NL 100+9, Six, Placed 3rd twice, -$254.00

Cashed out all but $600.00

Continued to play nl 55's
Swing of -$544.00, Got it back up to $550.00
Up to $750.00
Cashed out 200.00
Swing of -$250.00
Up $200.00
LOST IT ALL.
-500.00 since then
Put 50.00 in and now I have $235.41, I am going to play nl $22.00, until I get it up to $400.00

RICH GET RICHER, THE POOR GET POORER...

If you think that your skills aren’t being tested at the $11.00, play 2-4 at a time. Since two nl 11's = one nl 22. It would only make sense.

GOOD LUCK!!!

~ ! ~ Air ~ ! ~

[AleoMagus]

Just answered a PM with some info that might be useful here

SD is your standard deviation per tournament

SD total is your standard deviation that you can expect in your total sample thus far.

For example:

A 10+1 player might have a avg profit of $4/tourney
They might also have a SD of $19

This would mean ~65% (1SD) of the time they would make -$15 to $23. Obviously, given the prize structure of SNGs this is not a direct statement of what we will actually make in a given sng, but an average over the long run.

Total SD after 100 sngs might be $190. This would mean that ~65% (1SD) of the time after 100 tourneys (or whatever our current sample is) we can expect to be within $190 of our current total. In this example we are making a $4 profit per tourney so $400.

This means that in another 100 tourneys we could expect another $400 profit +/- $190. Another way to put this is that in another 100 tourneys we could expect $210 to $590 profit ~65% (1SD) of the time.

A better measure for confidence in SNGs may be 2SD which is 95%. The calculations I provided in that recent post and which are in the spreadsheet calculate confidence under specific conditions (like +/- $1/tourney)

Hope this all helps

Brad S

[Stoneii]

[ QUOTE ]
edit - I like stoneii's idea and actually use it myself. Give yourself the occasional 20+2 (or even higher) when you are running well. This can make the eventuall transition a lot easier.

[/ QUOTE ]

I use it myself Aleo - I've sat down at SnG's up to and including $109 but I don't belong there (yet) /images/graemlins/smile.gif. You will find me regularly much much further down the food chain /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

On a good tear and with a bubbly bankroll, I'll take 'em on (for 1 game anyway /images/graemlins/wink.gif) before slinking back to my slippers and pipe games

stoneii

[durron597]

Replying to this post first since it's the one that requires the least amount of thought by me.

Honestly; I seriously think that ITM and ROI against similar competition that one might find at party would be higher on Pokerroom because of the nicer stack size and blind structure. However I think that $/hr is almost certainly lower for the same reason; with more chips on the table, the blinds tend to have to go up higher before you get to the money. But I think skill definitely shows itself more at Pokerroom than at Party. Though I have very little USD to invest in Poker, so I've never bought in for money at Party, and thus cannot say.

As far as the Pokerroom multi's go, only like 40 places pay at the tourneys that I've played, so I've found I have to get my stack up to like 8xbuyin before I can concieve of the money, not like 3xbuyin as I've seen davidross do in his big finishes. On the other hand, I've only played in the 5+1, 10+1, Plus 500, Lucky Dollar and Freerolls (the latter being a complete waste of time, 1000 chips and 10 minute blinds is ridiculous with the number of people that don't show up and you have to wait for the disconnect to go through).

I made a decision that I would only play in the Plus 500 and Freerolls until I was statistically sure that I would make enough money playing SnGs to pay multi entry fees plus enough confidence in my own ability to make the money that I wouldn't feel like I was chucking 1/15 of my bankroll out the window every time I played. Is it really that much easier to make the money in them? With about 10 5+1/Plus 500 buyins plus 2 10+1s and a couple of freerolls/lucky dollar I've only had one money finish, where I took 8th in a 5+1, and that didn't even pay for my other multi buyins.

[durron597]

First of all, I want to say that I've already been using your spreadsheet, and I think it's great. Thanks for making it, I really appreciate it.

Before, I didn't understand exactly what was going on in the Z/Confidence table, which is why I had to ask this question. Anyway, I think I follow you now. Right now (this is not the same as it was when I originally posted, because I've played more SnGs since then) my Confidence values are:

+/-$1 Z Value 0.58
+/-$2 Z Value 0.66
WIN Z Value 0.97

+/-$1 Confidence 16.9%
+/-$2 Confidence 33.0%
WIN Confidence 94.5%

Does this mean that I can be (already) 94.5% confident that I am a winning player? I have 25 SnGs under my belt right now. Obviously I cannot be confident of just how winning of a player I am. Is this right? Everything I've read on these boards says that 25 SnGs is far too low to get anything that confident, but your spreadsheet seems to say otherwise.

Thanks again for your help Aleo!

[durron597]

[ QUOTE ]
At these levels, I assume you are not living from your bankroll and I also assume that your profits are not necessary to you. Sure, it would suck to lose it all and have to buy-in again but you could probably do it with at least enough to get you going at 10+1 again so who cares.


[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely not. I started because I had even better numbers than these at play money, and I had a friend who was beating NL25 and refused to listen to my advice about SnGs, so I decided I would bite the bullet, find some money for a bankroll that I didn't mind losing and see if I could beat real money. I agree with your above statement wholeheartedly.

[ QUOTE ]

The reason that I suggest waiting is because you have had an unsustainably good run so far and can expect to see less optimistic results in the future. This is not to say that the cosmic order is going to balance out or anything, just that in the future, you can probably not expect more than a 50% ROI (and probably a lot less) and this is going to bring with it more swings and more frustration and doubt.

As we can be pretty sure this will happen, it's better that it doesn't happen right after you move up. Get at least 100 10+1 under your belt so that you have seen a 5 or 6 sng losing streak or a 30 sng -ROI streak. This will make you far more psychologically prepared for these things when they happen at a higher level.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not so sure of this. With a much more forgiving blind structure at Pokerroom, I'm not sure that these numbers are unsustainable FOR THE LOW LIMITS at Pokerroom. I will be able to comment on this better when I have more SnGs under my belt. I would say more than half of my firsts saw my stack near 2/3 the buyin amount at one point - I would try to bet out the flop with AK and rags, and I'd get reraised, so I folded. That time my opponent probably had a PP. Then I'd get it (or AQ or AJ in LP, etc.) again (which I had time to do because T1000 can survive until level 5 in Pokerroom, whereas T500 would be immediately be blinded away at party), and could take down the pot (or go allin preflop with them and get called by Ax or KT or something.

[ QUOTE ]

Otherwise, you might experience a downswing and think - Oh yeah, this is a higher level, I need to adjust. You may not need to adjust much at all, but it can be easy to talk ourselves into such things and this can be damaging to our progression.


[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. That's why I asked about the difference in difficulty between $10+1 and $20+2, so I wouldn't talk myself into changing something that didn't need to be changed.

[ QUOTE ]

If you are very mentally tough and you have a LOT of confidence in your play (and I say this rhetorically, because I doubt it's possible after such a small sample), then I say move up if you want to.

Some sng players actually started at $215 and have done well. Usually these were good tournament or NL ring players anyways and it was just the level they chose to start at.


[/ QUOTE ]

This does not describe me at all; the level of my play is very heavily influenced by my state of mind. Everything you've said so far has been convincing me more and more that I'm not ready to move up.

[ QUOTE ]

No reason why you need to stay at 10+1 if you are itching to move up. I certainly wouldn't recommend to Howard Lederer that he go through the paces at 10+1, 20+2, 30+3, and so on. I'd say - go play the biggest game you can find.

So I guess what I am saying is - If you are an experienced poker player who has seen swings in ring play or multi table play and whose bankroll is easily replacable, move up. Otherwise, put in some more 10+1 and get a more accurate estimation of what to expect in terms of swings and expectation.

Regards
Brad S


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm definitely going to spend some more time at the $10+1's now. I'm going to try to get my bankroll up to at least $600 before I start playing the $20+2's regularly - save for stoneii's idea - after all the advice I've recieved in this thread.

[Cosimo]

[ QUOTE ]
Absolutely not. I started because I had even better numbers than these at play money, and I had a friend who was beating NL25 and refused to listen to my advice about SnGs, so I decided I would bite the bullet, find some money for a bankroll that I didn't mind losing and see if I could beat real money. I agree with your above statement wholeheartedly.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd be happy to see you prove this wrong--to have a sustainable high ROI. I've never seen anyone on these forums (many of whom have played hundreds of SNGs at the low levels) have an ROI much over 50% in the long run. The competition is soft, but the looser they are, the higher your variance. Ultimately, high variance will eat into ROI.

So, good luck. Let us know how you do.

[AleoMagus]

[ QUOTE ]
+/-$1 Confidence 16.9%
+/-$2 Confidence 33.0%
WIN Confidence 94.5%

Does this mean that I can be (already) 94.5% confident that I am a winning player? I have 25 SnGs under my belt right now. Obviously I cannot be confident of just how winning of a player I am. Is this right? Everything I've read on these boards says that 25 SnGs is far too low to get anything that confident, but your spreadsheet seems to say otherwise.


[/ QUOTE ]

In fact, that is what my spreadsheet is saying. sort of.

It is indicating that based upon your current sample, you can be 94.5% confident that you 'actually' make between $0 and double your current $/t (in other words, 94.5% certain that you are winning).

The problem with samples of this size though is that because your results are so good, this produces a big range. Obviously if you were making half what you have been (which is a more realistic sustainable expectation), this would not provide as big a range and the probability of 'actually' being in this range will be lessened.

This is part of the reason why these equations lose accuracy with small samples.

I wouldn't trust any of those values before I had at least a 100 tourney sample.

There are additional reasons why small (and even extremely large) samples lose accuracy with those equations. Otherwise yes, you are interpreting those equations and those values correctly (to my knowledge).

I am actually working right now on a handy little confidence calculator in which a player can just input a few values and can determine confidence to their own specifications. This is to say that they can know what range of expectation they can have with 95%, 85%, or whatever other confidence they desire.

I should be done this today or in the next few days at the latest.

Incidentally, I'd really like if Bozeman, Guy, or any of the other stats/math guys commented on all of this as I am really not an expert and have derived all of this from conversations I have had with them.

I would particularly be interested in questions about interpretation of very low confidence values like 50% or less. Does this mean nothing at all, or can we actually infer that there is a greater than 50% likelihood that we are outside the specified range.

Any thoughts would be appreciated

Regards
Brad S

[durron597]

One thing you didn't quote that is EXTREMELY important (in my mind) is the difference in blind and stack structures on Pokerroom as compared to Party. I feel that with that difference it could be possible to have the higher ROI/ITM sustainably. I don't think that I'm the next greatest thing since sliced bread; I just think that any of the many players on 2+2 who are better than me could have the same numbers if they tried it on Pokerroom (but please don't! I want the money!).

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you guys are right; my good numbers are exciting me a little too much. Does anyone know where I can find a formula that would let me convert the number of SnGs played so far to a confidence level of the results? Everywhere I look on this board, it says "you need 100 to have any confidence, and even that isn't that good", but nowhere do I see the numbers for it.

I actually looked this up in a statistics book of mine, but everything I found in there wanted a model of the results to guess with (Binomial, Normal, etc., which Tournament results are NOT). Can anyone help?

[/ QUOTE ]

The usual approach is to assume a normal distribution about a mean. Clearly this is not quite right for a few reasons, but at least it gives you some numbers to work with.

You'll probably be surprised by the uncertainty, and then remember that real results are probably even more uncertain than what the normal distribution assumption tells you.

eastbay

[patrick dicaprio]

dont think of it in those terms. do you notice and are you able to exploit your opponents weaknesses? do you notice your own mistakes and correct them? do you fold pocket AA preflop because it has won three times in a row? the answers to these questions will be of more value. the play at pokerstars is somewhat better at the 20 level but not enough that it should prevent you from moving up if you play well. i dont know about your site tho, and i suspect it is similar.

Pat

[durron597]

To answer your questions:

Yes
Yes
No

Though I will fold a stealing hand if I've just stolen a bunch of times in a row, for example (Assuming I have less than 10 BBs) if 4 handed I push to SB's miniraise in the BB with KK, push on my SB with AJs, then I will probably fold my A6s on the button.

Anyway, as far as moving up goes; I don't have the bankroll for it just yet anyway (though I should soon, especially if I take pokerrom's deposit bonus); hopefully in the time it takes me to get up there I will have some better (more accurate) numbers.

[durron597]

Do you know how to get a better model than that? Are there tables/formulas for figuring such a better model out?

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you know how to get a better model than that? Are there tables/formulas for figuring such a better model out?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really, and it's probably not worth it. There's too many unknowns (variability in the quality of your play, variability in the quality of your opponents' play, primarily) to try to nail it down further than that.

It's good enough.

eastbay

[durron597]

That makes sense. Well, the model is about as accurate as I would expect it to be anyway (at least for everyone else so far). Thanks!

[AleoMagus]

Oops

My apologies to anyone who has been trying to figure SD and confidence with this info...

I have made one tiny error but a significant one nonetheless

[ QUOTE ]
SD = SQRT((Prob 1st)(net $ 1st)+(Prob 2nd)(net $ 2nd)+(Prob 3rd)(net $ 3rd))


[/ QUOTE ]

should read:

SD = SQRT((Prob 1st)(net $ 1st^2)+(Prob 2nd)(net $ 2nd^2)+(Prob 3rd)(net $ 3rd^2))

The spreadsheet has always done this correctly. I simply forgot to square the net $ amounts for each prize finish

Regards
Brad S

[Cleveland Guy]

Durron - I think your multi problem is that you are playing the "cheapys".

The Freeroll is just for messing around with. I'm usually all in early on - either double up or don't bother.

The Lucky Dollar, Plus500 and $5 + 1 aren't much better. Many people tend to play a lot of crap early trying to get a big stack, then will use it to push it around. If your gonna play - play it very very tight early on, or just see any cheap flop you can.

Once you get to the 10, 20 or 30 Multi's the play gets much better. IMO the field is managable and even a medicore finish in the money pays off big time.

I tend to usually do bad in the $5 Multis - but much better in the 10 and 20's - maybe it just suits my game better.