Positive EV = 2 x's buy-in

I've heard a lot of people use the rule of thumb... if you are better than 50% of the field... your EV value on every tournament is about twice the buy-in.

Does this sound fairly accurate?

I'm having great success in tournaments right now (PP, online $2- $30 buy-ins) and want to know what constitutes good, bad, and/or great EV.

[mts]

sounds like some bullshit someone made up. Feel free to provide some evidence though.

i don't have any. That's why I'm asking.

I have played 7 of the 2,000 + entrant tournaments on PP. I have 3 cashes + 1 first place for like $5,000. I would consider this both lucky and a by-product of my good play against a relatively weak field.

I feel like cashing is pretty much a matter of avoiding the mine feilds of donkey play and feel I could atleast "make the money" 30-40% of the time (even if the "money" is only a couple dollars profit).

I don't know what type of realistic EV i should be considering.

[pfkaok]

my understanding is that 100% ROI is very good, but sustainable for those level online tourneys if you play really well. however, the variance is so high for these things that looking at your ROI, and comparing it to any number is just plain stupid. you'd have to play 10's of thousands of tourneys before you could have a good confidence interval on large field MTTs.

[pfkaok]

[ QUOTE ]
feel I could atleast "make the money" 30-40% of the time (even if the "money" is only a couple dollars profit).

[/ QUOTE ]

if you make the money that much then you'd have to be like the best player ever, and you'd have to be playing improperly around bubble time trying to survive.

[Pat Southern]

If you're better than 50% of the field you're an average player and therefore slightly losing.

[ QUOTE ]
my understanding is that 100% ROI is very good, but sustainable for those level online tourneys if you play really well. however, the variance is so high for these things that looking at your ROI, and comparing it to any number is just plain stupid. you'd have to play 10's of thousands of tourneys before you could have a good confidence interval on large field MTTs.

[/ QUOTE ]

cool... but how then do more experienced tournament players guage their win/lose rate? In bottom line figures? -/+ EV? I'm just trying to quantify things a bit.

[pfkaok]

[ QUOTE ]
cool... but how then do more experienced tournament players guage their win/lose rate? In bottom line figures? -/+ EV? I'm just trying to quantify things a bit.

[/ QUOTE ]

well. its like LHE. the more you win, and higher your WR the more likley it is that you're a very good player. but your "true" WR will likely never be known. if you play a few thousand tourneys, and you're ROI is over 100%, then you're almost certainly a winning player. if you're behind after a couple thousand then you're probably not winning a whole lot (EVwise) or you are actually a losing player.

basically, just as in LHE, you can usually tell after a while if you're a winning player, but will never be able to quantify it. its tough to fully accept that fact, but once you do you can begin to focus on actually playing better and stop worrying about pointless stuff.

[pfkaok]

[ QUOTE ]
If you're better than 50% of the field you're an average player and therefore slightly losing.

[/ QUOTE ]

i assumed that he meant 50% of the winning players. is that correct?

[flyingmoose]

[ QUOTE ]
feel I could atleast "make the money" 30-40% of the time (even if the "money" is only a couple dollars profit).

[/ QUOTE ]

You've been on a heater and you're wrong. Making the money that often would be insane -- and probably mean that you're playing too tight on the bubble.

[ QUOTE ]
I have played 7 of the 2,000 + entrant tournaments on PP.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't remember the last DAY when I only played 7 tournaments. Your sample is totally insignificant. Just keep playing and learning and don't worry too much about EV values at this point. Trying to estimate your "value" in a tournament will either elate or depress you -- and both feeling will get in the way of learning the game.