Step Highers -DOH, meant to put this in STT. Crosspost, yeah, that's..

[fnord_too]

I just got arround to looking at the monte carlo results for these, but it looks like the step highers, starting at level 4, offers some pretty insane return for risk.

Assuming at level 4:
Win level 5 (top two spots) 24%
Third 14%
fourth 13%
fifth 13%
sixth 11%

Level 5
First 13%
Second 11%
Third 10%

These are probably unrealistic, but here's what they yield:
ROI 23% (mean)
Max Neg (mean) -17.5K
Max Neg (SD) 18.55K
Max Neg (worst case out of 10k 10k runs) -160K (!!!!) (Thats less than 80 buy ins)

Assuming .9 hours per step 4, 1 hour per step 5

$/table hour: $434.68

I need to tweak the finish assumptions, but I think these can be very low variance (relatively) due to the deep payouts in level 4 (which are all money, not buy ins to lower level step highers). This smooths out results tremendously.

For reference, with the same assumptions, the average max loss starting at level 5 is 62K, with the max being just under 800K. (SD being 64K). In terms of buy ins, that is a huge difference.

These things look interesting to me. One big concern though is the lack of games that get going. I have not thouroughly researched this yet, but my guess is that very few step higer level 5's go off every day, and probably there are not that many level 4 that go off, either.

Has anyone here played a lot of any of the steps? There are several wild assumptions I am making, and would love more grounded oppinions.

I think applying these concepts to the regulat step tourneys may yield even more positive results. 1) a lot of the competion came from lower $$ tourneys who may not be as strong as your typical higher $$$ player (not always true but prob more donks in a 215 step than a 215 buy in). Also the step vs step higher has lower advancement requirements. I prefer the direct buyins at the higher level than starting at the low levels and step higher level 3 buy in is a little steep for me. And yes the level 4 and 5 step higher tables are rarely active. Usually you have to sit and and wait on a weekend day or late afternoon to get a game.

[fnord_too]

I've run similar analyses for one and two table original steps starting at each level, with and without playing freerolls won for the lowest level where appropriate.

What about buying in lower? Any idea how tough step higher 5 is? I imagine it has to be significantly harder than the 215s--maybe there are super-rich gambling addicts in it though.

[fnord_too]

[ QUOTE ]
What about buying in lower? Any idea how tough step higher 5 is? I imagine it has to be significantly harder than the 215s--maybe there are super-rich gambling addicts in it though.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have never played any step higher games, and very few of the original step two tables. With good assumptions, though, I can simulate results. (I keep hoping someone who plays a lot of these will provide me with those good assumptions.) For buying in at level 2, with a bunch of finish assumptions, I have the maximum downswing for a 10K player sample to be -41.5K, that is close to 400 buy ins (average is about 40 buy ins with a 40 buy in SD). The reason I posted the step 4 higher results is because they are unique in their low variance due to the modified pay outs.

[Apathy]

Noone has played "a lot" of step 5 highers because there have not been "a lot". A few people on this forum have played a less then 5 and a couple have played more. The competition is very tough, how many party stts have you played? at what buyin?

[fnord_too]

I've played between one and two thousand party STT's I would say. Mainly 55's and 109's. I really only started playing them seriously a couple of months ago. I played them a fair amount before, when I was just starting to obsess about poker (and had a lot of success at the lower buy ins at various sites, but the competition was pretty lax).

Maybe I will take some "time off" and play a bunch of steps this weekend. The step highers seem a little daunting on my current bank roll. Starting higher is too rich for me atm and starting lower yields such a low expectation in terms of dollars per hour, and it is high variance to boot. I like the original step two tables when I played them. (True story: December I am I think my first level 5, chip leader with like 6 or 8 ppl left, and power goes out. I scrambled and talked my sister through installing party and loggin in and some hands until power came back on. That was pretty painful since I focus on so many things at that stage of a tournament. Ended up coming in 4th, but I made a few mistakes while talking my sister through hands from not having facts right in my head, not to mention the opportunities lost in between power going out and getting her logged in.)

[Apathy]

Ouch, that's why I play with my laptop at hand if necessary along with my cellphone so I can plug in for backup internet that just uses minutes during big mtt final tables and such.

I think you would be a losing player buying in at step 4 highers. I haven't played many of them but I know the field pretty well and it is a pretty tough field. I recommend watching a few of them to see what you think.

Also there is no way you should make this your primary game. The games do not run often enough and you should find otherwise to supplement and diversify your poker income.

[fnord_too]

Hehe, belive me I am not planning on making it my regular game.

Though my STT experience is somewhat limited, my best game is MTTs where I have enjoyed much success. In the original steps, at least the two table ones, the step 4's I have played in were pretty soft. (Though that was near the beginning of the steps, now that the novelty has worn off they may very well be tougher).

As to diversity, I am the most diverse poker player I know. I have put in time on about every game offered. I don't really have a long term primary game, I just focus on one or another for a while until I get bored or burned out with it and move on. Right now I am focusing on STT's and am trying to put in 70% of my play time on those. By November I will probably cycle back to something else.

Ouch, man.