Anybody with a 50%+ in the money:SNGs?

[k000k]

[ QUOTE ]
at the limit that you play in, is anybody average 50% or more in the money playing one or two table SNGs?

[/ QUOTE ]
Over about 50 tournys, I'm just over 50%, but that's only cuz 1/2 the SnG's I play are 5 player ones. In a 10 player SnG, I'm about 35%, in the 5 player ones I'm over 75%. My ROI is within 1% of 24% on both.

[Lori]

WHY DO PEOPLE KEEP SAYING I ASKED THE QUESTION OF IS 50% ITM IN THE LONG RUN SUSTAINABLE

Because most of the people in this forum have no idea about what is and isn't sustainable (I actually think perkin is a good player, but anyway...)

I was over 50% (nearer 52) for 2 years at Paradise but as that wasn't my highest hourly rate I stopped playing there.
Anyone requiring proof of this should snoop around and find out how much I won session B world series qualifier by (clue it was a five day event, and i came 1st and missed out half a day.)

Given that the game was harder then than it is now, Im sure that 55% would be managable by a great SNGer.

People saying 50% is unsustainable at Party might be right, I don't have the sample to check, but at Paradise, it is reasonably easy to achieve.

Im on 47% at ultimate, where i play three tables at once and pay no attention to the early game, so I'd be pretty sure it's doable there too.

Lori

[chim17]

This threads interesting for me as I am somewhat new to SNG's and have been having very good success.

After 82 SNG's I have 51.22% in the money. (17 first, 13 2nd, 13 3rd).

Is this unrealistic expectation? I've found these to be really profitable.

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
WHY DO PEOPLE KEEP SAYING I ASKED THE QUESTION OF IS 50% ITM IN THE LONG RUN SUSTAINABLE

Because most of the people in this forum have no idea about what is and isn't sustainable (I actually think perkin is a good player, but anyway...)

I was over 50% (nearer 52) for 2 years at Paradise but as that wasn't my highest hourly rate I stopped playing there.
Anyone requiring proof of this should snoop around and find out how much I won session B world series qualifier by (clue it was a five day event, and i came 1st and missed out half a day.)

Given that the game was harder then than it is now, Im sure that 55% would be managable by a great SNGer.

People saying 50% is unsustainable at Party might be right, I don't have the sample to check, but at Paradise, it is reasonably easy to achieve.

Im on 47% at ultimate, where i play three tables at once and pay no attention to the early game, so I'd be pretty sure it's doable there too.

Lori

[/ QUOTE ]

but you just proved that it was possible over the long run. if you averaged 52% ITM for that long, that's probably represents a longer period of time than the 500 and 1000 SNG samples that people say to base your findings on. when i speak of meeting that limit and exceeding it, i speak of BEING a GREAT or ELITE player. i don't just mean average or good, i mean reaaaalllllll goooooooddddd!! i'm not there yet, although i'm currently at 50%, but once i get there i will be able to KEEP it at 50% and push it beyond. specifically, i never ASKED IF 50%+ was sustainable, somebody that responded to this thread brought that up in their response and basically referenced it as mine because i said I BELIEVE IT "CAN" BE DONE. saying that you believe it can be done and ASKING can it be done are two different things. my problem with ITM is all the bad beats that i've taken on the bubble of the money finishes with the best hand. with the amount that have been handed to me, i could be at around 70%+ with about a 150-200 SNG sample since the beginning of the year. although these beats are very discouraging and painful, they also hold a lot of promise and positivity. it shows my progression in NL as going foward into my first full year of poker and once the leaks in my game are plugged, i'll stay at that % over time.

[PrayingMantis]

Somebody already mentioned it, but I'll repeat it, because it's extremely important, IMO.

You said:

[ QUOTE ]
my problem with ITM is all the bad beats that i've taken on the bubble of the money finishes with the best hand. with the amount that have been handed to me, i could be at around 70%+ with about a 150-200 SNG sample since the beginning of the year.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bad beats are not, and never will be, your problem. They are an integral, inherent, part of the game. Considering them as a problem, and thinking about how much ITM or ROI you'll have *without* them, can be a significant flaw in your poker thinking. Please don't see this as if I'm telling you that you're not a good player or anything, not at all, I have no idea. I only strongly believe that thinking that your ITM can be improved if you just were a little bit more lucky (i.e, less bad-beats), will not bring you too far. Accept the fact you'll have these beats as long as you play poker, and strong players will have more bad-beats than weak players, since they more often have the better hand when the money is getting in.

Only some thoughts.

[Lori]

Mantis is correct.

I stated some time ago that I believed 60% was as high as you could get if you went for game selection, prime concentration levels and actually set out to get a high ITM (Which isn't neccessarily optimal play), I still believe that is true.
Under normal circumstances, I believe the absolute best players will hit around 55-57% at UB and Paradise, I would guess, based on my small sample that 51-52 is really pushing it at Party.

Lori

[Desdia72]

[ QUOTE ]
Somebody already mentioned it, but I'll repeat it, because it's extremely important, IMO.

You said:

[ QUOTE ]
my problem with ITM is all the bad beats that i've taken on the bubble of the money finishes with the best hand. with the amount that have been handed to me, i could be at around 70%+ with about a 150-200 SNG sample since the beginning of the year.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bad beats are not, and never will be, your problem. They are an integral, inherent, part of the game. Considering them as a problem, and thinking about how much ITM or ROI you'll have *without* them, can be a significant flaw in your poker thinking. Please don't see this as if I'm telling you that you're not a good player or anything, not at all, I have no idea. I only strongly believe that thinking that your ITM can be improved if you just were a little bit more lucky (i.e, less bad-beats), will not bring you too far. Accept the fact you'll have these beats as long as you play poker, and strong players will have more bad-beats than weak players, since they more often have the better hand when the money is getting in.

Only some thoughts.

[/ QUOTE ]

no need to get touchy, homie. calm down [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]! it's not that serious. once more (i've explained this before also), i DO NOT include on the bubble/could've beens in the equation of ITM or ROI; i use them for my own particular reasons involving my development as a poker player. i use them as a way to go back and analyze where i went wrong, or what i could've done differently that may have never put me in the position to even need to go all-in on the bubble (regardless of whether i had the best hand or not). me going back at looking at my bubble finishes can sometimes even show me that i played some great poker, but yet, it was too great too late. for example, although i've yet to hit the one year mark in poker, i've learned how to fight back from the brink of extinction early on in a SNG only to be bounced out on the bubble. their a great motivator for me to get better because the better i am as a player, the more i win, the more money i make. when i take those beats away and i look at where i could've been as far as money and winning percentage, it's more a thing of, "You're almost there. a little tweak here, a little tweak there, and some more experience, the sky's the limit".

my advice to you and others is, quit jumping to conclusions --- they seldom lead to happy landings. not once has anybody ask me WHY i do it and what purpose it serves. maybe you don't care, go figure. so it's not flawed poker thinking, it's my own personal motivator to get better.

[Lori]

so it's not flawed poker thinking, it's my own personal motivator to get better.

If you want to pick on someone, pick on me, Mantis gave good advice, if it doesn't fit you, it will fit someone, so chill out.

The problem is, that although analysing your bubble play is fine, just looking at stats can be very misleading.

Would you rather come 1st 10 times and bubble 10 times, picking up $500 or would you rather come third 20 times and pick up $400.

Nobody is saying don't do this,, they are saying to be careful what you wish for and how you analyse.

Lori

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

I agree, Lori. I know I could improve both my ITM and ROI, but past a certain point increasing ITM will not increase ROI, and focusing too highly on ITM will reduce ROI.

You want to have the best hand most of the time you get all-in, of course, but if the percentage of time you think you have the best hand gets much over 80%, I'd say you're missing a lot of +EV opportunities.

As I said to the original poster, semi tongue-in-cheek, if you have the best hand every time you push in, you're playing too tight.

[peiper]

No, 42% in the money playing the $5 SNG's at Paradise, Absolute and Stars mostly.

Not sure how I would calculate ROI.

I will not elaborate or go into any other detail, since that seems to frustrate you.

Later