expected value of tournament play

[Flint{$N}]

If you are a "good" tournament player, how often would you expect to place in the money or win the whole tournament (assume a player pool of 200).

No real way to answer this, other than to say, a "good" tournament player will place in a "good" amount of tournaments, relative to an "average" player. Still won't win outright very often, though.

There are threads outlining these sort of expectations (I think there is mention in the stickie?), which tend to emphasize ROI over ITM.

Here ya go...

6. What is a good ROI/ITM%/FT%?
Difficult question to answer, generally many have said that any positive ROI is a good one, 100 is solid. As for ITM, anything over 10% is good, and MTT guru Sirio has said his records haven’t shown any player above 20% with a decent sample size (this is for online tournaments with fast structures, deeper stacks and slower levels should allow a skilled player to break that cap).

[Flint{$N}]

whats ITM?

[wmspringer]

In the money

[Flint{$N}]

so saying that 100% ROI and about 10% ITM is good, why don't people stick to ring games?

sorry for these questions
I'm thinking about adding tourneys to my daily/weekly grind. Just trying to justify it.

[ QUOTE ]
so saying that 100% ROI and about 10% ITM is good, why don't people stick to ring games?

sorry for these questions
I'm thinking about adding tourneys to my daily/weekly grind. Just trying to justify it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the main attraction for tournies is, well, they're fun. And, of course, there is the chance for a BIG cashout!

/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[beachbum]

I've been thinking the EXACT same thing, Flint. For one, it keeps things fresh and fun. Two, there's that bit of a thrill there of winning a big one. Your (and my) hourly rate probably won't nearly be as high as when we grind out our cash games, especially until you reach an advanced skill level, but it's a nice way to break up the monotony.

FWIW, I think the added +EV in playing tourneys and developing this game is the possibility of making a name for yourself. The overlay of possibly acquiring sponsors, affiliations with online poker rooms, revenue from endorsing poker products like apparel, etc. might make it worth your time. Actually, I'm going to try and start playing 6 tourneys per week along with my limit cash games once the new year starts. Oh, and figure the EV overlay of being famous. As an acquaintance/friend of Phil Gordon, believe me the remote chance of living the type of life he leads is worth the hourly rate sacrifice, IMO.

[Flint{$N}]

i hear you beachbum

thats another thing as well- i play limit SH games. NL tourneys are diffinately fun but I doubt i'd ever become famous.

didn't phil gordon retire from the tech boom a millionaire? if i was in that situation, i'd be playing tournaments all day long!

[beachbum]

I play 5/10 limit SH myself and will be moving to 10/20 shortly. I think my NL tourney game has gotten better playing SH because it's taught me how to play "poker" and focus more on player reads.

Phil was definitely well off when he got into poker so that obviously helped. But he's made the most of his successes and pretty much has become a celebrity.

[asteroid]

sorry for the newbie question:
ITM=in the money?
FT = final table?
ROI=??

thx

ROI=Return on Investment
CL=Chip Leader
DILIGAF=Does it look like I give a F***


As for playing tourneys, that is pretty much all I play, seems like I do better there than in ring games. Just seems like people hit hands on me alot more. That is something I am working on though, personal issue.

[ QUOTE ]
If you are a "good" tournament player, how often would you expect to place in the money or win the whole tournament (assume a player pool of 200).

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't classify myself as good or bad, but rather better than some and not nearly as good as many others. Good at poker is like good at many other things in life. Unless you are world class skill or in the top of your field, you are always likely to run into someone better, smarter, more talented, etc.

I just ran through my numbers again last night so I can recite them from memory:
# Tourneys: 293
Avg Entry+Rake: slightly over $33
Average Return (after entries & vig): slightly over $37
ROI: about 112%
% ITM: 18.8
% FT: 8.9
% Win: 1.7

Any serious player should be keeping similar detailed stats in an excel spreadsheet or using some other tool.

Oh yeah .... lest I forget, there is also this little thing called variance. In 293 tourneys, I've endured losing streaks of 22, 17, 15, 14 and several lesser numbers. I thought 15 and 17 was high until I flew by those numbers last week while completing a 22. As ExitOnly educated me in a PM, MTT losing streaks in the twenties are common so get used to it.

It is also worth pointing out that these results are very much in the short run, and well within ranges of statistical fluctuation. We've speculated in the past that these low limit MTTs can be viewed as a single hand of limit play. 293 hands of limit play would only be 5-10 hours of play, also very much in the short run.

Hope this helps answer some of your questions.

[Solitare]

My stats are pretty similar:

# of Tourneys: 144
Ave Entry + Rake: $32.85
Ave Net: $69.1
ITM: 20.1%
ROI: 210%
FT: 5.6%
Win: 1.4%

I play in $33/$55 MTTs and the $22 180SnG on Stars. I like to play in MTTs with fields in the 300-500 range, but will play in the occasional 800-1000 field, and rarely the monster 2000+ tournies.

My ROI is higher than Spee's probably because I just had better final table luck. My 8 final tables resulted in 2 wins, 3 seconds and a third. Probably not sustainable. Also, one of the firsts was in a 900 person tourney, so the payout was $5500 instead of the $3000 I would have gotten from the 400 person tourneys I usually play.

I have had a losing streaks of 23, 13, and 12. The 13 and 12 streaks were nothing and easy to shrug off. The losing streak of 23 was really grim. In that streak I went throuh a period where I exited something like 12 of 15 tournies as a 70-90% favorite on the key hand.

I also agree that these are very short term results, but not so much as Spee suggests. These tourneys amount to 16.5K of actual hands. The limit forums say that you can start, but only start, to get an idea of your play after 10-20K hands. So I've got a good start of seeing where I'm at, but I need to get another 300 tournies under my belt before I'm really sure of where I'm at.

[greg nice]

what do you guys use to keep track of those stats? does PT give those from importing the tournament summaries?

Comment deleted.

[ QUOTE ]
what do you guys use to keep track of those stats?

[/ QUOTE ]

I just built a basic excel spreadsheet. All I have to do is plug in each tournament result, then the excel formulas turn the crank and spit out the data. It's not super sophisticated but it does the trick.

It took about 15 minutes to make the initial draft, another hour to refine it later on, and only takes a few minutes to update it every week or so. I have a few refinements in mind that will take another hour and add some more functionality. Keeping complete and accurate records is just routine, something that goes with the territory of trying to be an improving player.

[ QUOTE ]
what do you guys use to keep track of those stats? does PT give those from importing the tournament summaries?

[/ QUOTE ]

Exit_Only PM me an Excel spreadsheet that is prettynice and well done. I don't want to put him on the spot but you could ask him.

[Solitare]

I use PokerTracker. It's usable, but you have to calculate the final table and win %s yourself.

With Party, when you import your hand histories, you will automatically import where you finish and the amount of $$ you win or lose. You do have to enter the tournament details yourself by hand (buy-in, rake, # of players in tournament).

With PokerStars, when you import the hand histories, it does not automatically import where you finish. You have to request a tournament history email from PokerStars and import that also.

Needless to say, using PokerTracker also allows you to compile data on all the hands you play. You just can't take the results as literally as your ring game stats because of how tournament conditions change over time -- blinds, your stack size, bubble play, etc. Still usefull, though.