Trapping at 100% ROI?

[zagosh]

Ok. I know that this is an "impossible" long term ROI. I am not one of those "idiots" who believe that they are the world's gratest poker player after playing 10 S&G's, because they placed 8 times. Or maybe I am.
After 21 $30+3's (puny sample size, I know) at Empire, I have placed 15 times, with quite a few firsts, I have acheived approx. 100% ROI (woooooooooooooooo, big deal, I know). As excited as I am about this, I have all the same thoughts that any intellegent S&G specialist reading this has (won't last, sample size, la da da de da.) However, because I am human, with a feeble, self-centered human intelect, I can't help believe that I have stumbled on to something.
Is it (mathemaitically)possible that a limping/waiting/trapping game could achieve a higher ROI than is currently accepted by the aggressive/attacking style community, atleast at the lower limits. (I am well aware that this style does not last even 5 levels at $50+5 and above)
I have not played in a while(for it was on a friends account), but have recently been playing play-money S&G's with the same (somewhat) style of players limping preflop, and have experienced the exact same results, with very little variance. Is this possible?????????
Enlighten me!

Excited and confused.

[PktAcesSoWht]

Well, when you throw play money into anything you are losing out on gaining any knowledge if something works or doesn't.

[zagosh]

P.S.

I forgot to mention that even I realize that a 100% ROI is unsustainable in the long run. But, is anything, even slightly more than the widely accepted 30 or so % ROI mathematically possible????????????????

[beeyjay]

You should stick to the play money tables if you honestly had to post this.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
Is this possible?????????
Enlighten me!

Excited and confused.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. So chill.

eastbay

[AtticusFinch]

Is it possible that such an alternative style could be successful? Probably, but only in the early stages of the tourney, and even then it would take an enormous amount of skill to execute. Is it possible that such an alternative style could be orders of magnitude more successful than the common style used by most successful players? No.

In the end, success is more about judgment than anything else. There is room for various playing styles. A player with good instincts, reading skills, and judgment, can probably adjust to succeed with a variety of different styles, at least early on. But when the blinds get big, waiting = death. One thing no one can control is time. If this style has worked for you thus far, I can only come to one conclusion: you've had one hell of a run of cards.

[UncleDuke]

[ QUOTE ]
In the end, success is more about judgment than anything else. There is room for various playing styles. A player with good instincts, reading skills, and judgment, can probably adjust to succeed with a variety of different styles, at least early on. But when the blinds get big, waiting = death. One thing no one can control is time. If this style has worked for you thus far, I can only come to one conclusion: you've had one hell of a run of cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

Beautifully said. I agree on all counts.

I'll also reiterate what one of the other posters said, which is, you can pretty much ignore any data you get from play money games. You'll find very few people with a clue playing there, and even those few will probably throw chips around in ways they wouldn't if they had real money on the line.

[curtains]

My ROI was nearly 100% after my first 100 tournaments. I thought I was God's gift too, however you'll find out eventually that you were lucky.

[theredpill5]

You didn't explain your game enough. Are you talking about limping KK, AA, etc and never raising preflop ? Slowplaying everything on the flop like sets and straights ?

[lorinda]

Is it (mathemaitically)possible that a limping/waiting/trapping game could achieve a higher ROI than is currently accepted by the aggressive/attacking style community, atleast at the lower limits.

With enough chips, small blinds and probably a few other factors then it would probably be possible.
In the conditions you are facing, then it would require an incredible lineup of peculiar players who always called any bet, but never raised or bet themselves to make a limping style good, but that then spoils the trapping.
I imagine the required conditions would be rarer than an informative post in NL-SS.

Lori

[jimymat]

yes

[The once and future king]

One thing I think is often overlooked in this forum is the when you are broke you are done concept in relation to pushing.

Yes a certain push may be EV, but one is possibley giving up the chance to make a better push at a later date and is also potentialy surrendering the opportunity of maintianing ones chips and a chair through stealing blinds.

Of course once the blinds reach a certain point in relation to ones stack then of course one must get ones chips in the middle.

It is my suspicion that a consequence of people multi tabling massive amounts of SNGs a day has created a mind set simialer to ring games, in that it is ok to push small edges
because one can just buy in again.

I think this evinced by most hand discusions revolving around whether it is EV not whether the play maximises ROI.

[pooh74]

My ROI at the 27 star turbos was 316% the other night. I am not going to include my sample size as I fear the flames...but lets just say its a round number.


(atually I started my PT stats over bc I dint like my old ROI) /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[jah0550]

Quit your job immediately and become a professional poker player. That is what I would do after 20 SNGs. I am not sure about yours, but my landlord loves to get play money instead of a rent check. If I were you, I'd jump right into the step 5s because you are ready.

[zagosh]

Thanks guys.

P.S. How do I erase my post if I feel like a complete idiot? /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[valenzuela]

I think u cant delete ur post, we all do an ocasionally retarded post now and then.( Ive started 6 stupid threads myself)

[faquewdikhed]

sorry if you feel like an idiot, but the general consensus answer is 'no'.

[barry111]

at least your past the "This site is rigged phase", or maybe not.

[valenzuela]

from which question?

[zagosh]

I realized when I posted this that I would get all the standard responses like "you've made it", and "you can now quit your job" and although predicted, they are still funny as hell. I agree that the play money results are useless, and probably should not have even been mentioned, but I am not yet totally convinced that if your good enough and you pick your spots, you can be successful trapping at the lower limits. I know most of you probably have millions of hands Pokertracked that would prove otherwise, but until I've played (alot) more using this strategy, I will never be fully convinced. There are just way to many variables to pinpoint precicely with graphs and charts to be able to fully prove to me that one stratigy is better than the other. Also, it's way to easy to hold on to your chips til your in the money. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a play money tournament to win. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[REL18]

[ QUOTE ]

In the end, success is more about judgment than anything else. There is room for various playing styles. A player with good instincts, reading skills, and judgment, can probably adjust to succeed with a variety of different styles, at least early on. But when the blinds get big, waiting = death. One thing no one can control is time. If this style has worked for you thus far, I can only come to one conclusion: you've had one hell of a run of cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lord Gigabet once said this he said strategy does not matter if u know u win the pot with a certain bet then do it

[UncleDuke]

[ QUOTE ]
One thing I think is often overlooked in this forum is the when you are broke you are done concept in relation to pushing.

Yes a certain push may be EV, but one is possibley giving up the chance to make a better push at a later date and is also potentialy surrendering the opportunity of maintianing ones chips and a chair through stealing blinds.

[/ QUOTE ]

This has crossed my mind as well. Actually, in reading Harrington's tournament book lately, I've been surprised that he seems to share the attitude that if a call is +EV in terms of expected return in raw chips, then it's a good one -- he often talks about whether you're getting the right pot/implied odds seemingly without regard to your potentially crippled chip position if you lose the pot. I thought there would be more "metagame" considerations taken into account. Of course, there is absolutely zero doubt that Mr. Harrington knows far more about how to play a tournament than I do, so if this is the way he looks at it, perhaps the metagame stuff really isn't as important as I thought it was. Then again, maybe I've just misunderstood what he's saying.