Early results.... I Stink

[Gk123]

After my 1st 55 sit and goes at the $55 level here are my numbers....pls help me

ROI -%27
ITM "

1st:6
2nd:2
3rd:4
4th:13
5th:4
6th:9
7th:7
8th:4
9th:4
10th:1

[kevstreet]

If you have the bank roll, check back after 445 more SnGs.

Needless to say this sample is much too small to make any assumptions, but it seems you may need to work on your bubble play.

[Jman28]

[ QUOTE ]
If you have the bank roll, check back after 445 more SnGs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just because he can afford it doesn't mean he should play the game. If he's a losing player, which it is too early to tell, then he should drop down buy-ins.

-Jman28

[Cleveland Guy]

[ QUOTE ]
If you have the bank roll, check back after 445 more SnGs.

Needless to say this sample is much too small to make any assumptions, but it seems you may need to work on your bubble play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Post some bubble hands

your in the top 4 50% of the time, but your 4th shouldn't be equal to your 1-3rds combined.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
If you have the bank roll, check back after 445 more SnGs.

Needless to say this sample is much too small to make any assumptions, but it seems you may need to work on your bubble play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Am I the only one sick of sample size snobs /images/graemlins/tongue.gif. It is a small sample but then its a fairly big -ROI figure too, I would drop to the 10s or 20s and play a few hundred of whatever level you choose and see how it pans out, posting hands will help people give you more relevant advice than statistic will.

Also I have noticed a recent influx of weak-tight advice on here lately, come back JStrasser all is forgiven /images/graemlins/tongue.gif.

Regards Mack

[kevstreet]

[ QUOTE ]
Am I the only one sick of sample size snobs...

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not trying to be a snob in any way, just hard to do analyzation on 45 tournaments. I did however point out there may be a leak in his bubble play based on what he has provided. You yourself said to check back after a few hundred, that's basically what I said!

[mackthefork]

Either way he needs to seriously analyse his bubble play to see if he is unlucky, too tight, too loose or whatever, posting some hands which are not bad beats will be a promising start. 55s are a tough place to start off IMO.

Mack

[apd138]

You do stink.

[kevstreet]

[ QUOTE ]
Either way he needs to seriously analyse his bubble play to see if he is unlucky, too tight, too loose or whatever, posting some hands which are not bad beats will be a promising start. 55s are a tough place to start off IMO. Mack

[/ QUOTE ]

I completely agree.

[Scuba Chuck]

My advice is to move down a level, minimally.

[kyro]

Everyone's telling you to move down a level. I personally think that's a ridiculous statement considering the information you've given us, which is basically nothing. A few things...

1) Where did you start? Have you been playing the 11s, and been building up steadily and are just now trying out the 55s? Or did you put a crapload of money into Party and say, I think I'll try the SNGs. If it's the former, and you were a winning player after a certain amount of SNGs, moving down is silly. If it's the latter, then yes, I would step down to at least the 20s and play there until you become comfortable with the SNG structure. They are incredibly beatable, even for an untalented hack like myself.

2) My stats at the 55s
First 100: 0% ROI
Second 100: 30% ROI
Final 50: 30% ROI

I didn't improve on my SNG skills THAT drastically. Maybe a push here, a fold there, but nothing that big. This is the reason why, SNGs are streaky as all hell. I've had 7 straight ITM finishes, and followed that up with 19 out of 21 OOM. If you decide to stick with the 50s, you're gonna need to play a hell of a lot more than 55.

3) It looks as if you have a crapload of 4ths. You could be unlucky, or you could be playing suboptimally on the bubble. It's up to you to figure out which of the two it is.

Good luck to you. I hope this calms your fears a bit, or at least points you in a general direction.

[eastbay]

Your results at $11, $22, and $33 were what?

eastbay

[John Hurst]

I honestly cannot understand the thought process behind these posts. You provide zero details about your thought process or style of play only results. Then you somehow expect people to help you improve your game.

Equivalent sports post:

Here are my results in basketball -

100 games

10 games 10+ points
90 games less than 10 points

What am I doing wrong? Thanks!

Ugh. Post some meaningful content that can be reviewed and discussed.

[pooh74]

Am I the only one sick of sample size snobs

No you're not. sample size is irrelevant here with those 4th place finishes...and even if those are just noise, who's to say that his bubble game couldnt use some work?

post some hands

[Gk123]

Well I guess nobody realized that the post was a joke. I agree with the people that say the sample is too small, seems obvious enough. My bubble play could probably use some improving as well. Even in the 33s I was only %78 from bubble with an ROI of %34 after +2000 tournies.

Based on what i've seen so far it seems as though people seem to be quite a bit more patient in the 50s as opposed to the 30s, definatly more so than I had thought they would be. This is what I feel that I have to adjust to most of all. Not to mention the fact that there are many more stupid nits who have to berate people.


Gk123

[John Hurst]

Damn it. I should have realized this was a joke post. My sarcasm detector must be faulty. NH

[Cleveland Guy]

[ QUOTE ]
Damn it. I should have realized this was a joke post. My sarcasm detector must be faulty. NH

[/ QUOTE ]

It helps when the joke is funny.... or at least we can know it's a joke.

[Gk123]

Didn't know anyone from Cleveland actually posted on here. I'm guessing if you play live there you must make a mint seeing that nobody there has a clue

[Cleveland Guy]

Married w/ 2 Kids under 5.

I rarely get to play live at the "church" things.

The tournaments are a joke, and I can't play during the weekends to much.

I play in a weekly home game, which is very easy to cash in.

Rest of my play is online.

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
Didn't know anyone from Cleveland actually posted on here. I'm guessing if you play live there you must make a mint seeing that nobody there has a clue

[/ QUOTE ]

I played at the Drew Carey home game...I beat Albert Belle Heads up to take it down...

[John Hurst]

Did you call him Joey after you knocked him out?

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
Damn it. I should have realized this was a joke post. My sarcasm detector must be faulty. NH

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope it was just the worst joke in the entire world. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Mack

[Slim Pickens]

55 tournaments? Your sample size is way too large for this to be a statistically significant joke post.

Slim

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
55 tournaments? Your sample size is way to large for this to be a statistically significant joke post.

Slim

[/ QUOTE ]

lol...g1

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
Am I the only one sick of sample size snobs

No you're not. sample size is irrelevant here with those 4th place finishes...and even if those are just noise, who's to say that his bubble game couldnt use some work?

post some hands

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize that saying the sample size is too small and then saying your bubble game could probably use some work is a bit of a contradiction.

Of course his bubble game could probably use some work, as well as his pre-bubble game and likely his ITM game as well. You can also put me in the its very likely this player is not a winning player and should move down immediately to at least the 20+2s (unless he provides some information that this is just the work of an awful run of cards or has enough money that he can afford and would prefer to learn at the 50+5s).

Although the sample size is small, that doesn't make it completely irrelevant. With results this poor its quite unlikely he is anything more and a marginal winner at best and it seems just plain silly to continue to throw money away at the 50s (although I would love to have more losing players there of course). People on these forums seem to want to believe that every one who posts is a winning player and want to dismiss a run like this as "just a bad run" or "insignificant sample size" when in fact most SNG players are losers.

That said, GK cares enough about trying to improve that he posted this. So I'm all about trying to help if I can, but like others have already stated: posting a list of finishes gives very little info to actually let anyone help you. Post some hands and situations you are unsure about and let the experts help where they actually can.

Edit: meh, that will teach me to respond without reading the whole thread. Anyway, some of what I wrote still holds true.

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Am I the only one sick of sample size snobs

No you're not. sample size is irrelevant here with those 4th place finishes...and even if those are just noise, who's to say that his bubble game couldnt use some work?

post some hands

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize that saying the sample size is too small and then saying your bubble game could probably use some work is a bit of a contradiction.

Of course his bubble game could probably use some work, as well as his pre-bubble game and likely his ITM game as well. You can also put me in the its very likely this player is not a winning player and should move down immediately to at least the 20+2s (unless he provides some information that this is just the work of an awful run of cards or has enough money that he can afford and would prefer to learn at the 50+5s).

Although the sample size is small, that doesn't make it completely irrelevant. With results this poor its quite unlikely he is anything more and a marginal winner at best and it seems just plain silly to continue to throw money away at the 50s (although I would love to have more losing players there of course). People on these forums seem to want to believe that every one who posts is a winning player and want to dismiss a run like this as "just a bad run" or "insignificant sample size" when in fact most SNG players are losers.

That said, GK cares enough about trying to improve that he posted this. So I'm all about trying to help if I can, but like others have already stated: posting a list of finishes gives very little info to actually let anyone help you. Post some hands and situations you are unsure about and let the experts help where they actually can.

Edit: meh, that will teach me to respond without reading the whole thread. Anyway, some of what I wrote still holds true.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes...we are responding to an unfunny joke...(not funny and hence the "real" responses)

However...I wasnt so clear in what I meant so Ill just clarify.

First of all, I didnt say I thought the sample size was too small (it is), but I didnt say it.

When I said the sample is irrelevant, I only meant in regards to its overall meaning, but what I thought WAS relevant, even after 57 games, was his 4th place finishes. If that were a true distribution I would say that this kid MAYBE having probs on the bubble.

Its not your bad, I was unclear in my wording...but I wasnt being contradictory (how dare you!!!!) /images/graemlins/wink.gif

p