[Mr_J]

"There's no shame whatsoever if Mr J is a 12% ROI performer at the 22s"

Yes there is!!!!

"I understand that even 1000+ games is still relatively small in the big picture, but it still starts to give a general idea in most cases as to the level of your play."

I agree. There are a few reasons that I believe I'm better than 12% though:

1. expert player review your HHs = Irie

2. I seem to understand sng theory better than most lower limits players here (obviously IMO), and feel more on par with the better $33ers and the $55ers. Remember that while I haven't played as many sngs, I have read this forum (HHs, theory posts etc) for as long as many of those players.

3. An ROI right after a 42 buyin drop will not be that accurate, even if you have played 1000 sngs. After 1000 sngs, a 20% player will have made 200 buyins. If he then proceeds to go on a 40 buyin drop over 200 sngs, his new ROI is 13%. This doesn't mean he's a 13% player, he might be a 20% player who has just hit a bad run.

Ok, we know there's a 3% chance that a 20% player will run at 12% after 1300 sngs. What is the chance a 12% player will run 21% over his first 1000 sngs? Any sample we take is really just a slice of the pie. To really have an idea of where I'm at (if we only look at results), then I'll need to play a few thousand more $22s.

"It seems that there is a bias on this forum towards not accepting good results, even when they cover 1000+ games, but at the same time poor results are so often glossed over as just variance or bad luck."

I agree with the first part. Now if we prefer samples larger than 1k for a good ROI, why is 1300 enough for a bad one? Obiously it isn't. If the forum isn't happy with a 1k good run, then they shouldn't be happy with a 1k bad run. Poor results obviously aren't glossed over as bad luck, or else I wouldn't have responded to half these posts [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]