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

[maddog2030]

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

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

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

PWNED.

[raptor517]

[ 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

[astarck]

[ 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.)

[Freudian]

[ 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.

[Mr_J]

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.

[Mr_J]

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.

[astarck]

You just replied to yourself saying the same thing.

[astarck]

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

[Nick B.]

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

[FieryJustice]

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