After 8k 30+3 sngs recorded, I've discovered something...

[SumZero]

What happens if you break your 8000 SNG into 8 batches by taking each 8th SNG? What are the ROI and what not of those batches. That might help clue you in to how much the changes were due to random luck in how you happened to bunch them or how much the changes were due to actual changes in your playing skill or the environements in which you play.

[Insty]

[ QUOTE ]
What happens if you break your 8000 SNG into 8 batches by taking each 8th SNG? What are the ROI and what not of those batches. That might help clue you in to how much the changes were due to random luck in how you happened to bunch them or how much the changes were due to actual changes in your playing skill or the environements in which you play.

[/ QUOTE ]
Interesting, do this.

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
true ROI.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think there's some massive misunderstanding of what this term means, even by a player like you, who seems totally wanting to figure things out, and approaching the largest sample sizes reported.

[ QUOTE ]
As the title suggests I have a crap load of 30+3 sngs recorded, and maybe another 2000-ish not recorded, and another 1000 50+5 and 100+9 sngs not recorded. I was looking over my stats and some batches of 1k sngs showed some really weird things.

I have 2 sets of 1k SNGs at 29% roi and 27% roi, and I have one set of 1k SNGs at negative 2% roi. My total (recorded) roi is at 17% roi for the 30+3s. What I rationalized is that it definately couldn't be only luck that could affect a set of 1k SNGs so dramatically, I mean there's a 31% roi difference on the end of each spectrum of my 1k batches.

All my sngs were done 8-14 tabling, 8 tabling maybe 5 months ago, started 12 tabling a few months, then 14 tabling, and now i 10 table (not because I can't handle 12, but because ive become lazy and decided to just use 1 party account). Anyways, what I realized is that I have gone some weeks where I go through 700 SNGs. I tend to get lazy periods where I play around with MTTs and such and I also get some weeks where I get super motivated to play massive SNGs. Well the point is multitabling enables a person to amass a large sample size within a short period of time.

By getting a decent sample size, you could probably say to yourself, "hey look I've got 1k games, I now have a pretty good idea of what my roi is." What's missing here is the human element of performance in these numbers. I think we can all agree that we can maintain our best performance in whatever we're doing for only a certain amount of time, after that our performance deteriorates, until we rest again.

For poker it's not so simple, it's a constant grind week over week, month after month... etc. The time we 'rest' isn't really 'rejuvenating' our juices, as poker is a slow slow game. Our best performance at any game must last many hours in any poker session to show any effects at all. To truly 'rest' we must take a prolonged break, maybe 2 weeks a month?

I sort of got side tracked, but stay with me here- because we as poker players are probably not at our 'best' most of the times, it means that the element of 'real time' must be considered in calculating our stats. So, if I played 1000 SNGs in a short 2 week span, that 1k set is good for a indication of perhaps my best performance. If I played 1000 SNGs over 4 months it would be even better, because now this set of 1k SNGs is also indicative of a longer period of time, where I might have had streaks of tiltiness, mixed in with times where I have performed great.

The 2nd set of 1k SNGs is far superior to the 1st set because it has a sort of 'average' of my performance capabilities (a-game,b-game,c-game,...whatever game you can deteriorate to).

So what does this all mean? A lot of the stats that we are getting from multitablers are probably very inaccurate, because they do not inidicate 'true' roi. 'True' roi I think must be a combination of a large sample size and it also must span over a good period of time, perhaps at least several months. If you can play well this month, does it mean you can play as well next month? What about the month after that, can you say for certain that you won't tilt?
A lot the roi we see posted are probably isolated periods where the player is playing near his peak performance. We may not realize this because it is at least a semi large sample size, which was achieve in a short period of time by multi tabling.

Sorry this got sort of long, I just had to write down these thoughts somewhere, so I don't forget and fool myself with inflated periods of roi and get too overconfident.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you CrzyChinaman on Party?

[FlyWf]

I'd define "true ROI" as "expected return on the next investment." What is your definition?

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd define "true ROI" as "expected return on the next investment." What is your definition?

[/ QUOTE ]

it's exactly that. but you have to "expect" your tilting runs, your game improvement, and all that fancy crap.