Big Limpin'
12-14-2004, 11:35 PM
Lets talk about what we can learn about profit optimization w.r.t. the distribution of finishes. The shape of a bar graph should tell us much about how a certain player plays. Keeping in mind the 50/30/20/0/0/0/0/0/0/0 payout structure, and our goal being extraction of the most money possible (duh).
I'd like to post an excel chart, but im unsure of how to do that (can someone help me for next time?), so i'll just type in percentages here...and make it kinda pseudo-visual, as i find it easier to quantify visually.
1st--------------------19.7%
2nd--------------14.1%
3rd----------9.9%
4th-------7.3%
5th---------------15.2%
6th-----------11.3%
7th-------- 8.4%
8th------5.7%
9th---2.8%
10h------5.6%
Let me be very upfront here, this is just over 71 tourneys, since starting Aleo2005.xls and is a prolonged hot streak. 46% ROI will NOT be sustained /images/graemlins/frown.gif
But, although the ITM percentages are a little higher than im used to, the relative distribution is about my norm. Alot of 1st, and alot of 5ths (not NOT 4ths. this is the crux of the post)
For me, bubble time ( i.e. flipping the bluffing machine's switch to ON) begins usually with 5 or 6 left, earlier than the "true bubble" 4 left situation. And i feel that is reflected here.
To me, 4th 5th and 6th place are all the same, so i usually dont make it to 4 left before the poker gods have passed judgement on how i will fare /images/graemlins/smile.gif by that i mean i have got my double up/bust out hand by then. This allows me to be the bubble bully in almost all of my ITM games, which is where the high 1st come from.
It seems im getting a little rambly here, so i'll get right to my point now. I have 2 questions:
1) How does this distribution compare to that of other winning players? (note i play 1500 chip SnGS at pokerroom.com, if that is applicable)
2) To me, this data set is absolutely perfect, the stuff i have wet dreams over. Gorgeousness and gorgeosity made flesh. But, i know i still have room for improvement in all facets of my game. Can anyone make a CONSTRUCTIVE AND THEORETICAL agrument as to why this data set is not "optimal" and could be modified by general strategy changes to increase ROI? (for instance why the OTM peak should be moved from most 5th to mostly 4ths. OR more 6ths.)
THank you all for reading this, and i hope it inspires some thought in readers w.r.t. QUANTITATIVE changes in aggressiveness at specific stages of a SnG, as opposed to just "tight as hell early, aggressive late"
And yes, i know, this whole post comes off as kinda bragging, but i cant get my point across without that. Sorry.
I'd like to post an excel chart, but im unsure of how to do that (can someone help me for next time?), so i'll just type in percentages here...and make it kinda pseudo-visual, as i find it easier to quantify visually.
1st--------------------19.7%
2nd--------------14.1%
3rd----------9.9%
4th-------7.3%
5th---------------15.2%
6th-----------11.3%
7th-------- 8.4%
8th------5.7%
9th---2.8%
10h------5.6%
Let me be very upfront here, this is just over 71 tourneys, since starting Aleo2005.xls and is a prolonged hot streak. 46% ROI will NOT be sustained /images/graemlins/frown.gif
But, although the ITM percentages are a little higher than im used to, the relative distribution is about my norm. Alot of 1st, and alot of 5ths (not NOT 4ths. this is the crux of the post)
For me, bubble time ( i.e. flipping the bluffing machine's switch to ON) begins usually with 5 or 6 left, earlier than the "true bubble" 4 left situation. And i feel that is reflected here.
To me, 4th 5th and 6th place are all the same, so i usually dont make it to 4 left before the poker gods have passed judgement on how i will fare /images/graemlins/smile.gif by that i mean i have got my double up/bust out hand by then. This allows me to be the bubble bully in almost all of my ITM games, which is where the high 1st come from.
It seems im getting a little rambly here, so i'll get right to my point now. I have 2 questions:
1) How does this distribution compare to that of other winning players? (note i play 1500 chip SnGS at pokerroom.com, if that is applicable)
2) To me, this data set is absolutely perfect, the stuff i have wet dreams over. Gorgeousness and gorgeosity made flesh. But, i know i still have room for improvement in all facets of my game. Can anyone make a CONSTRUCTIVE AND THEORETICAL agrument as to why this data set is not "optimal" and could be modified by general strategy changes to increase ROI? (for instance why the OTM peak should be moved from most 5th to mostly 4ths. OR more 6ths.)
THank you all for reading this, and i hope it inspires some thought in readers w.r.t. QUANTITATIVE changes in aggressiveness at specific stages of a SnG, as opposed to just "tight as hell early, aggressive late"
And yes, i know, this whole post comes off as kinda bragging, but i cant get my point across without that. Sorry.