What is the accepted 55s "ceiling" ?

[Big Limpin']

Simple question...and not and e-penis competition (i hope).

All i ask is this:

***What is considered to be the max ROI from 55s?***

-ideally, we are talking quadding+
-the BARE minimum is a 1k sample


Now, i know i am good at poker, but i am not the "best", and not even close to the "best". I absolutely guarentee that i have leaks.

But i would like to know what is the max attainable at the 55s from people who are "better than that kinda slummin'"...or from those who have settled into a nice kind of quadding 100k/yr gooove.


etcetera. its openeded. just curious.

set a bar...i'll aim for like 5 points lower ROI

** and again...i dont want a parrot saying "i hear xxx% or i hear 44.44444%ITM, or anything.

[The Yugoslavian]

Easty posted this like 2 months ago:

http://sitngo-analyzer.com/poker/ROI-55.PNG

I think it was mainly 4 tabling. It's probably fairly close to the upper limit (or at the upper limit 4+ tabling).

Yugoslav

[Big Limpin']

I would agree that the is pimp/max
Wow eastbay, suberb!
I have slightly <20, and i thought i was doing good
maybe i *DO* need the SnG-PT's

[KingDan]

Wow I suck.
A lot.

Before Rakeback... 8 /images/graemlins/blush.gif

Too often I just do something [censored] stupid in early levels... I will call with overpair even though its painfully obvious I'm lost.

[Newt_Buggs]

If you can get over 20% ROI at the $55s then you should probably be playing the $109s instead of the $55s.

also, just wanted to throw in that you really shouldn't "shoot" for an ROI limpin, you should just play poker and let things happen.
[ QUOTE ]

Too often I just do something [censored] stupid in early levels... I will call with overpair even though its painfully obvious I'm lost.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think that most players, myself included, have these moments.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]

I think it was mainly 4 tabling. It's probably fairly close to the upper limit (or at the upper limit 4+ tabling).

Yugoslav

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it's that close, and I'm not just being modest.

I think 35% is doable.

eastbay

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Too often I just do something [censored] stupid in early levels... I will call with overpair even though its painfully obvious I'm lost.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think that most players, myself included, have these moments.

[/ QUOTE ]

The worst thing about these moments are the few seconds there where your mind does the great flip flops between:

1) Oh come on, but this guy is a tool! So is that overcaller! Yeah, that's it. They both have top pair! They're so dumb. I'm so smart.

and

2) Alright, this is the last one. If I'm behind this time, I'll have officially learned my lesson, and start giving the average player at this limit respect when I'm in this spot in the future.

[censored] brain, trying to play tricks on me.

citanul

[wuwei]

[ QUOTE ]
The worst thing about these moments are the few seconds there where your mind does the great flip flops between:

1) Oh come on, but this guy is a tool! So is that overcaller! Yeah, that's it. They both have top pair! They're so dumb. I'm so smart.

and

2) Alright, this is the last one. If I'm behind this time, I'll have officially learned my lesson, and start giving the average player at this limit respect when I'm in this spot in the future.

[censored] brain, trying to play tricks on me.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

It's comforting to know I'm not the only one who has these thoughts.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Too often I just do something [censored] stupid in early levels... I will call with overpair even though its painfully obvious I'm lost.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think that most players, myself included, have these moments.

[/ QUOTE ]

The worst thing about these moments are the few seconds there where your mind does the great flip flops between:

1) Oh come on, but this guy is a tool! So is that overcaller! Yeah, that's it. They both have top pair! They're so dumb. I'm so smart.

and

2) Alright, this is the last one. If I'm behind this time, I'll have officially learned my lesson, and start giving the average player at this limit respect when I'm in this spot in the future.

[censored] brain, trying to play tricks on me.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

You forgot to mention calling, "knowing you're beat", and then getting shown Q high, at which point you think you're smart again. For awhile.

eastbay

[citanul]

it should be known that amongst the good things to do for your psyche to make yourself more able to fold overpairs when you know you are beaten is to remember that if you don't, you can't flame raptor for not being able to do it later. that changed my outlook on the world a lot a long time ago, and made me a better player.

thanks raptor!

citanul

[Meatmaw]

I don't know, is 1000 even close to a good sample? What about 5000?

I have a -17% ROI in my first 270 SNGs. then, I have a 44% roi over my next 300. granted, that all evens out to about 18% or so over the 570, but if a 44% roi can last for 300 sngs, is 1000 even safely close to a good number for a statistical sample?

And no, I can't remember how "differently" I've been playing for the latter half of my 4-tabled 50s, but my memory isn't exactly great either. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[GrekeHaus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I think it was mainly 4 tabling. It's probably fairly close to the upper limit (or at the upper limit 4+ tabling).

Yugoslav

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it's that close, and I'm not just being modest.

I think 35% is doable.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

What makes you think this?

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I think it was mainly 4 tabling. It's probably fairly close to the upper limit (or at the upper limit 4+ tabling).

Yugoslav

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it's that close, and I'm not just being modest.

I think 35% is doable.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

What makes you think this?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a judgment call based on a wide variety of things. A good part of it is my incredulity that there's nothing more to learn after little more than a year playing this game.

eastbay

[runner4life7]

Just curious what your ceiling would be for the 33s

[Big Limpin']

[ QUOTE ]
I think 35% is doable.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

ok. right. /images/graemlins/mad.gif

do you know anyone with 35% over 1k games? 30%?

"doable" implies that somebody has done it. Nane that person.

*ok, i guess it doesnt quite imply that someone has done it, but that someone will do it. I am unconviced that anyone could rip 35% in 1000 games, and then repeat that.


****Eastbay, i think someone has hacked your account and is posting riff-raff under your name

[Big Limpin']

[ QUOTE ]
also, just wanted to throw in that you really shouldn't "shoot" for an ROI limpin, you should just play poker and let things happen.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh yeah, agree 100%...and i do "just play" and let it shake down.....i was just inquiring as to what the "huge penises" can achieve. All i wnat to do here is get a benchmark for what can be done, so as to estimate how much work i have in fromt of me to get into that ballpark.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think 35% is doable.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]


ok. right. /images/graemlins/mad.gif

do you know anyone with 35% over 1k games? 30%?


[/ QUOTE ]

Bozeman claimed 50% at $55 over "the long term" and he was very credible on every level.

I think the games may have stiffened since then some.

[ QUOTE ]

"doable" implies that somebody has done it. Nane that person.


[/ QUOTE ]

Ok. Bozeman.

But, remember, I played those 1200 games at $55 for a reason - I was not doing well at $109 when I posted those numbers. I have since improved, and think I could probably improve on that 24%, but it's not in my interests to do so anymore. I make more money playing $109.

This is another reason why no one posts 35% at $55. If they can, they'd be a fool to.

eastbay

[Apathy]

[ QUOTE ]
Bozeman claimed 50% at $55 over "the long term" and he was very credible on every level.


[/ QUOTE ]

Unless I am mistaken this was 1 tabling though, 1000 would take a long time...

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I think it was mainly 4 tabling. It's probably fairly close to the upper limit (or at the upper limit 4+ tabling).

Yugoslav

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it's that close, and I'm not just being modest.

I think 35% is doable.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree... I think 24% is very good but not the ceiling. I don't know about 35% though....

[freemoney]

this is really not a brag post but by 4 and 8 tabling the 100s i have over 30% over almost 1000, i think it points more to that 1000 isnt a large enough sample size but i really think very impressive ROIs are possible at the 109 level even, def over 25%+