Re: I need PROOF!
 

[ QUOTE ]
Honestly, I don't see why it matters. It shouldn't affect your play in any way. If people are claiming 40% but are actually getting 30%, more power to them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here is why... I have been playing a strategy in SnGs that is a bit different from normal 2+2 style (at the $22s). It has nothing to do with ICM or anything like that (actually it isn't really a 'strategy' at all). I have been teetering around 30% after 775 tournaments (although a 16 OOTM streak dropped me off a bit yesterday). I wanted to see if anyone could prove to me that they have achieved this and then I could check their back posts and see if they were doing anything similar to me.

Re: I need PROOF!
 

As long as you strategy doesn't involve overcalling two all-in bets with AQo in Level 2 and a lot of bubble folding, I see no reason why you couldn't have a 30% long-term ROI at the 22's. A good player can leverage the great implied odds you can get in the early rounds when the stacks are 50BB, open up playing a lot of hands early on, and probably do quite well at it.

Read my post...
 

No one has proof because it's not worthwhile staying down there to 'prove' it, when you could make alot more playing higher up.

"I have been teetering around 30% after 775 tournaments"

This is just silly. Move to the $55s.

Re: I need PROOF!
 

I love this post and the responses so far.

Re: I need PROOF!
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Honestly, I don't see why it matters. It shouldn't affect your play in any way. If people are claiming 40% but are actually getting 30%, more power to them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here is why... I have been playing a strategy in SnGs that is a bit different from normal 2+2 style (at the $22s). It has nothing to do with ICM or anything like that (actually it isn't really a 'strategy' at all). I have been teetering around 30% after 775 tournaments (although a 16 OOTM streak dropped me off a bit yesterday). I wanted to see if anyone could prove to me that they have achieved this and then I could check their back posts and see if they were doing anything similar to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

while i'm fine with you questioning what is acheivable and what is not, your reasoning of why you are questioning it is pretty absurd.

as for my stats, when i threw out my original database, i had about 500 games with a 43 or 44 roi. my newer database of 10s has 179 games at a ROI of 43.22 at the 10s, while my main database has 16 games at a 53.41 ROI. so while i can't give a screenshot for those first 500 or so, my overall stats stand at 700ish and a roi of just about 43%. do note that that puts up a profit of like $3.3k. there is just basically no reason on earth that a player should play a ton of 10s if they are killing them unless they have to take out their whole bankroll for some reason.

citanul

Re: I need PROOF!
 

fwiw, my results over the 513 22s that i have on record in my archive is only a 31% ROI. =(

citanul

Re: I need PROOF!
 

[ QUOTE ]

(If I knew how to attach files to posts I'd show you)

[/ QUOTE ]

1. Hit the print screen button (Prt Scr).

2. Open Paint, go to edit and select paste and save the file to the desktop.

3. Type in free image hosting in google and find a free server to post your pic.

4. Post it here as an image.

Re: I need PROOF!
 

How did you get the moderator job with such a lousy ROI at the $22s?!?

Re: Read my post...
 

[ QUOTE ]
No one has proof because it's not worthwhile staying down there to 'prove' it, when you could make alot more playing higher up.

"I have been teetering around 30% after 775 tournaments"

This is just silly. Move to the $55s.

[/ QUOTE ]


A LOT of what I do is knowing the 'average' player at the $22s. It may be a lot different in the 55s and the implied odds won't be in my favor as much early game. Plus I just want to finish this 1000 as a personal goal. Also it is nice how little variance comes with ~30% ROI.

Re: I need PROOF!
 

[ QUOTE ]
It has nothing to do with ICM or anything like that It has nothing to do with ICM or anything like that (actually it isn't really a 'strategy' at all).

[/ QUOTE ]

I suspect you just don't understand what ICM means (which is OK, btw). First, ICM is not a "strategy". Second, anyone who has a strong ROI over long enough samples, is "using" some form of ICM, or a similar model, wheather knowingly or not.

As for having a style that is "a bit different" than normal 2+2 style, well, surprise, but there is no 2+2 style. There is an approach to the game and for many basic situations which you might call "2+2 style" maybe, which is nowadays basically the ICM oriented bubble/ITM game, but you must understand that people can be (winning) 2+2ers and still play rather differently, especially in early levels.