A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

I'm played around 1900 sngs since jan this year.
Around 1350 of these are 22s.
Around 500 are $33s.
And maybe 40 $55s.

Overall, I have:
12.5% ROI at the $22s.
0% at the $33s
-38% at the $55s

I KNOW the reasons I have run poorly. It hasn't come from getting involved too much early, or being too conservative or too aggressive shorthanded. I'm not a perfect player, but I KNOW where my skill level is at, and KNOW I'm quite a bit better than these results suggest. So before any of you complain about your latest -30 buyin drop, please remember there are some who are much more unlucky and run thousands of sngs WELL below EV.

I'd happily take a 50 buyin drop every week if it meant I could hit EV every 1k sngs.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

Have you beaten the $3 level before. This doesn't appear to be a variance. If I were you, I would take a closer look to see if you can beat the higher levels. Don't think that because you are beating the game for 12ROI on the 22's that will carry up.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

"Have you beaten the $3 level before. This doesn't appear to be a variance. If I were you, I would take a closer look to see if you can beat the higher levels. Don't think that because you are beating the game for 12ROI on the 22's that will carry up."

These results have nothing to do with my skill. I've run very poorly over alot of sngs. I know what it looks like, but that's why I'm posting it (to show people how poorly you can run, and to show that maybe they're not so unlucky after all).

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

Forgot to add, I'm much better than 12% at the $22s.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

just for references sake, you should probably post your total 22s stats for prior to this year.

citanul

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

Well I experienced such bad run last month.
I could'nt believe it. every day I was playing, I made 0/4 in the first 4 games. sometimes 0/8.

Finally when I look at my stats it was exactly a 0% ROI at the 33$ on 350 games. It so weird when your friends can't believe you on the importance of the variance. Half they believe you, half they think you don't play so well, after all !


But I can say that this bad run helped me to work the game.
Without it I would be weaker than now. I am almost happy to be well aware of that, while it wasn't so important to get some money.

I have decided to be a pro, and have still about one year to get a good level. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

These results are a little biased though. My $22 ROI a week ago was 21% over nearly 1k sngs, and has only dropped to 12% thanks to a 41 buyin drop (over the last 7 days).

My $33 ROI is low because I quit them at (what was probally near the end) of my first bad run.

$55s ROI is poor simply because of unlucky 4-5 handed.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

[ QUOTE ]
KNOW the reasons I have run poorly. It hasn't come from getting involved too much early, or being too conservative or too aggressive shorthanded. I'm not a perfect player, but I KNOW where my skill level is at, and KNOW I'm quite a bit better than these results suggest.

[/ QUOTE ]

actually, you know nothing at all. you have under 3k games played even with yer other results. you could be a losing player running well. what i see, is that its possible yer game is based upon beating the lower limits, and you dont know which adjustments need to be made to compete at the middle limit sngs. i have this problem too, as im barely above break even in the 215s, and losing money in the steps.. my game is beating hte 55s and 109s massive multitabling, and i should just stick to it. holla

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

"you could be a losing player running well"

Irie would have told me if I was no good when I got coaching. I have a solid understanding of sng theory and most of the HHs posted here a pretty clear.

"hat i see, is that its possible yer game is based upon beating the lower limits"

Actually my game was based upon beating $33s. When I got coaching from Irie this is the level I was playing. I only started playing $22s after I had the breakeven 450 $33s.

I do know why I've run badly, first at the $33s (I ran well then hit a 40 buyin losin streak) and now at the $22s (40 buyin drop over the last week). I know I've played decently, and I know I have decent skill. I've just run poor.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

[ QUOTE ]
"you could be a losing player running well"

Irie would have told me if I was no good when I got coaching. I have a solid understanding of sng theory and most of the HHs posted here a pretty clear.

"hat i see, is that its possible yer game is based upon beating the lower limits"

Actually my game was based upon beating $33s. When I got coaching from Irie this is the level I was playing. I only started playing $22s after I had the breakeven 450 $33s.

I do know why I've run badly, first at the $33s (I ran well then hit a 40 buyin losin streak) and now at the $22s (40 buyin drop over the last week). I know I've played decently, and I know I have decent skill. I've just run poor.

[/ QUOTE ]

you cant blame running poorly forever.. must be somethign to it. double the amount played, then see where yer at. you could turn that 0% into 20%. holla

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

While knowing your game and sticking to it is fine, I do have a problem with it. It never allows any room for improvment. Taking shots at higher levels does allow you to eventually adjust (along with lots of reading/studying/practicing/etc).

If making quick cash or never advancing is your goal, then staying put is more than fine.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Forgot to add, I'm much better than 12% at the $22s.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's say you're really a 20% player at the 22's. Over 1350 SnGs, you have about a 3% chance of running this bad.

Just a random fact that you can interpret as you will.

eastbay

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

Ok, so far the responses to this thread are that maybe I'm not a winning player, or at least not much of one. I posted this because I know with 100% certainty, that I'm at least a decent winning player for $33s and below, and that it IS possible to run this poorly over a large sample.

There will be some people here who have been running hot for quite a while. I remember degen had 1k+ $33s with a 30%ish ROI. Curtains hit 36% at the $215s over 700 sngs, etc etc etc. We all know 500 sngs is nothing. 1k doesn't really mean that much. Is it so absurd that a decent player could run so poorly over 1800-1900 sngs? It really isn't, considering the effect a 40 buyin swing had on my previous 1k $22 results.

Look. After 1k $22s I had 21% ROI. The fact that just a 42ish buyin drop causes a drop a 8% or whatever drop in ROI just shows how little a 1k sng sample is.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, so far the responses to this thread are that maybe I'm not a winning player, or at least not much of one. I posted this because I know with 100% certainty, that I'm at least a decent winning player for $33s and below, and that it IS possible to run this poorly over a large sample.

There will be some people here who have been running hot for quite a while. I remember degen had 1k+ $33s with a 30%ish ROI. Curtains hit 36% at the $215s over 700 sngs, etc etc etc. We all know 500 sngs is nothing. 1k doesn't really mean that much. Is it so absurd that a decent player could run so poorly over 1800-1900 sngs? It really isn't, considering the effect a 40 buyin swing had on my previous 1k $22 results.

Look. After 1k $22s I had 21% ROI. The fact that just a 42ish buyin drop causes a drop a 8% or whatever drop in ROI just shows how little a 1k sng sample is.

[/ QUOTE ]

who are u trying to convince? holla

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

I've run into plenty of these sorts of situations.

What is the chance that a 55% capper I follow loses 20 units at the beginning of a season? What is the chance that a friend misses 2 weeks of betting were my picks go 18-1? What is the chance that I miss posting my picks at ssb (a website) for those 2 weeks? What is the chance that I miss posting twice as many wins as losses? What is the chance that all the sports I bet on lose at the same time yet all finish the season as comfortable winners? What is the chance that I start betting just as a handicapper runs poorly? I could go on and on.

I have no doubts about my skill. I don't think I'm gods gift or anything, just that I'm a good player for my stakes.

You say 3%? This doesn't mean it doesn't happen. That means 3 people for every 100 on this forum will run this poorly. Maybe I'm just unlucky enough to be one of those people.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

I'm just trying to point out that this could be variance, and noone replying to the thread seems to accept this as a reasonable possibility.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

i duno man.. i know this last post was directed at easty, but it really really really sounds to me like you are trying to convince YOURSELF. right now, instead of doing that.. i challenge you to pick 4 HHs that you have a win in. no1 thinks to look at the HHs they won.. but these are most important. look at the hands u doubled up on, look at the steals you were making.. were they correct? did u get lucky to win? its not about results. pick apart your game tongiht. it will make you a better player. holla

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

[ QUOTE ]

You say 3%? This doesn't mean it doesn't happen. That means 3 people for every 100 on this forum will run this poorly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you just explain to me what 3% means? Just checking.

eastbay

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

[ QUOTE ]
i duno man.. i know this last post was directed at easty, but it really really really sounds to me like you are trying to convince YOURSELF. right now, instead of doing that.. i challenge you to pick 4 HHs that you have a win in. no1 thinks to look at the HHs they won.. but these are most important. look at the hands u doubled up on, look at the steals you were making.. were they correct? did u get lucky to win? its not about results. pick apart your game tongiht. it will make you a better player. holla

[/ QUOTE ]

I always look at the hand histories that I won when I am running bad.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You say 3%? This doesn't mean it doesn't happen. That means 3 people for every 100 on this forum will run this poorly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you just explain to me what 3% means? Just checking.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

3% also means that out of every 100 people 3 of them will try to teach you what 3% means. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Did you just explain to me what 3% means? Just checking.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

I will only say this once in my lifetime...

PWNED.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You say 3%? This doesn't mean it doesn't happen. That means 3 people for every 100 on this forum will run this poorly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you just explain to me what 3% means? Just checking.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

oh god it hurts so good.. ROTFLMFAO HOLLA SHIP IT BATCH BWAHHAHA> nh easty. holla

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

[ QUOTE ]
ROTFLMFAO HOLLA SHIP IT BATCH BWAHHAHA> nh easty. holla

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually sat out of some of my tables I was in because I'm not quite skillful enough to ROTFLMFAO while playing. One day I'd like to aquire this skill. I hear 3% of the population can do this (for those of you that don't know, that is 3 out of 100.)

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

[ QUOTE ]

Look. After 1k $22s I had 21% ROI. The fact that just a 42ish buyin drop causes a drop a 8% or whatever drop in ROI just shows how little a 1k sng sample is.

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems as if you are putting a higher significance on this 1k sample than your current 1.9k sample (if that is what you base the "I know I am a better player than this" reasoning on). Perhaps you ran well initially but the game has changed which has cut into your profits (the new level 5, opponents adjusting to the pushing etc).

While of course this 1.9k sample doesn't have to be identical to your true ROI, I can't imagine your true ROI many times higher than this ROI is (~6%) given this distibution of levels. I think it is unlikely it is even twice that.

That said, my last 1000 SnGs has an ROI that is 10%-units higher than my first 1000 SnGs. Of course I played much worse poker back then so I suspect that eats up a big chunk of the difference rather than variance.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

I don't base my skill on results. I don't think I'm a ~20% $22er because I hit 21% there. I felt my skill level at the $33s before coaching was ~15%, and irieguy even estimated this, and this was BEFORE I got coaching and had just 50 sngs under my belt. I also seem to be at the same skill level as other people making about the same.

Ok, I was very inexperienced so my guess could be wrong. Iries guess of 15% could be wrong, but I doubt it's far off.

I've already have this debate before. I'm definately 15%+ longterm at the $22s.

6% is for all my sngs. I've got around 12-13% for my $22s. It's not unrealistic that a a 15%+ $22er could run at 12-13% over 1300.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

Last post in this thread. You can say what you will, but I'm not a sub 15% player at the $22s. I'm not a breakeven player at the $33s, and I'm not a losing player at the $55s. I've run poorly over a large sample. Just because this is unlikely for a decent player doesn't mean it won't happen to someone. The idea of my original post was to show that prolonged bad runs can happen (well it's mainly be steady profit mixed with a few ugly runs). I'll leave it at that.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

You just replied to yourself saying the same thing.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

You just replied to yourself saying the same thing. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]= [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

I am not a 7% $215er either...the cards just dont like me.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

This thread got me thinking...

I have an idea for casting of a remake of an old comedy classic... Eastbay could play Mary Swanson and Mr J could play Lloyd Christmas:


Lloyd Christmas: What are the chances of a guy like you and a girl like me... ending up together?

Mary Swanson: Not good.

Lloyd Christmas: Not good like one in a hundred?

Mary Swanson: I'd say more like one in a million.

Lloyd Christmas: So you're telling me there's a chance?

[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

Not entirely sure if this has been discussed or not before, but don't you think it's possible SNG results don't follow a normal distribution? Truly you don't believe it's as simple as you've stated above.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Not entirely sure if this has been discussed or not before, but don't you think it's possible SNG results don't follow a normal distribution? Truly you don't believe it's as simple as you've stated above.

[/ QUOTE ]

My calculation assumes nothing about distributions, normal or otherwise.

What it does assume is stationarity of the underlying process on a relevant timescale. Sue me.

eastbay

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm definately 15%+ longterm at the $22s.


[/ QUOTE ]

You can't say that.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

Look at the big brain on brad....


been waiting to use that line [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

Well, Mr J's game is at least twice as good as other $22ers whom i've seen post 20% ROIs over whatever number of SNGs.

But it doesn't really matter... he was just trying to illustrate that a good player can run really poorly. But that's a futile illustration on this forum for several reasons, not the least of which is the fact that everybody will assume that poor results are due to poor play when somebody posts them. It's human nature; nobody wamts to believe that a good player can do poorly for very long.

Eastbay had the most poignant post in this thread: there's a 3% chance that Mr J is simply unlucky over that sample size if he is "really" a 20% ROI player.

The problem is that 3% is perceived as a small number. Mr J makes his exclusive living off of wagering on games that have large components of chance. He will lose to a 3% event hundreds of times a year because he is making tens of thousands of wagers.

People tend to underestimate the size of the pool from which they may pluck events that can be considered unlucky.

If I see a patient who is pregnant, has diabetes, and also has sickle cell anemia I don't spend the rest of the day contemplating with awe how unbelievably unlucky she is... or how unlucky I was to have come across something like this. If you look at the incidence of these conditions and then calculate how likely it is that a single person will have all 3 at the same time... the odds are more than a million to 1 against.

It's a very challenging task to evaluate a fabricated collection of data and then assign meaning to fabricated metrics that can be statistically extracted from that collection of data. It becomes even more difficult when you attach arbitrary characterizations to the metrics:

Result A for metric A means you are "good"
Result B for metric A means you are "bad"

Mr J is a winning player, and over a large number of SNGs he won money. That is an expected outcome. The details and magnitudes should not be mindblowing within that basic framework.

This is why Eastbay's comment is so great. He says "there is a 3% chance that results X can be due luck..." and the dialogue immediately reverts to whether that means that somebody sucks or not.

Irieguy

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Did you just explain to me what 3% means? Just checking.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure you know what 3% means [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I'd like to know the chance that an 17-23% player will go 12%ish over 1300 sngs.

Don't mean to come across as someone who thinks they are gods gift etc, just confident that I am a better player than my results reflect.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Did you just explain to me what 3% means? Just checking.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure you know what 3% means [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I'd like to know the chance that an 17-23% player will go 12%ish over 1300 sngs.

Don't mean to come across as someone who thinks they are gods gift etc, just confident that I am a better player than my results reflect.

[/ QUOTE ]

X%'er getting 12.5% or worse over 1350:
16.4% -> 19.3%
19.1% -> 7.2%
23.6% -> 0.7%

eastbay

PS My 3% post was a tad mischievous. I sort of knew that a fight would break out about what the 3% "meant." It doesn't really mean anything other than what it says.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

My point was, whether I stated it correctly or not, is that even what it says can't necessarily be taken at face value. We don't always play the same way from SNG to SNG, or from 500 SNG block to 500 SNG block.

Re: A post to put all of your results in to perspective...
 

[ QUOTE ]
My point was, whether I stated it correctly or not, is that even what it says can't necessarily be taken at face value. We don't always play the same way from SNG to SNG, or from 500 SNG block to 500 SNG block.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't have to, as long as the variation is fast enough to wash out.

The OP is talking about his confidence in "his skill level" which seems to indicate he has a pretty well formulated game. He's not talking about playing bad, or tilting, or what happened when he tried to adjust or play a new style. So it's not crazy to think his game is reasonably stationary.

The only other thing which can move here is the player pool, and I just don't buy that the player pool moves significantly over the times of interest here.

So I stand by my estimate, and challenge you to produce a better one.

eastbay