|
|
#51
11-11-2005, 03:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: To all of the downswing whiners around here
[ QUOTE ]
12% ROI equates to about 37% ITM. That's better than average and nothing to sneeze at. <shrug> maybe I just interpret "beating the game" as having a different meaning. FWIW, I realize as you move up to the higher levels, 45/36 ITM/ROI might be a pipe dream, but at only 12%, I'd still be looking for the leaks. [/ QUOTE ] I don't care how well you are doing, you should never stop looking for leaks. I doubt that multitabling 55's for a 36% ROI is doable though. 
|
|
#52
11-11-2005, 03:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: To all of the downswing whiners around here
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I beat the 55s for 12% No offense, but I don't consider a 12% SNG ROI to be "beating" anything. Randomly, you should be ITM 30% of the time. To my mind, the threshhold of "beating" them is a 50% increase over the average, or 45% ITM. At 45% ITM spread evenly over the 3 payout spots (assuming a 10-handed table), your ROI should be 36%. [/ QUOTE ] Semantics... [/ QUOTE ] What would 2+2 be without the occaisional beef over semantics. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] Vegetarian...you're right, that WOULD suck. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
|
|
#53
11-11-2005, 03:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: To all of the downswing whiners around here
[ QUOTE ]
I beat the 55s for 12% No offense, but I don't consider a 12% SNG ROI to be "beating" anything. Randomly, you should be ITM 30% of the time. To my mind, the threshhold of "beating" them is a 50% increase over the average, or 45% ITM. At 45% ITM spread evenly over the 3 payout spots (assuming a 10-handed table), your ROI should be 36%. [/ QUOTE ] I know you're not permanently insane, so I hope this temporary version passes quickly. Be well. Edit: Sarcasm....testing....testing....testing....inconc lusive. Second edit: Nevermind. Must be sarcasm.
|
|
#54
11-11-2005, 04:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: To all of the downswing whiners around here
I know you're not permanently insane
I know many who would dispute this point.
|
|
#55
11-11-2005, 04:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: To all of the downswing whiners around here
[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, I realize as you move up to the higher levels, 45/36 ITM/ROI might be a pipe dream, but at only 12%, I'd still be looking for the leaks. [/ QUOTE ] Do you play 55s? I don't think you would make these statements if you did. Yes, you should still look for leaks at 12%, but let's not get totally unrealistic here.
|
|
#56
11-11-2005, 04:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: To all of the downswing whiners around here
I play mainly 33's - 55's. Some 109's. Not claiming those were my numbers, either, but I dont think 40% ITM at $55 is unreasonable.
|
|
#57
11-11-2005, 04:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: To all of the downswing whiners around here
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] So the only one beating the game is Stanzee? Wow! Klingon math can be so enlightening. [/ QUOTE ] freemoney is beating the game too. [/ QUOTE ] So are "T.O.W., Kyro, TRex, and gOOt [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] You forgot Megabet.
|
|
#58
11-11-2005, 04:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: To all of the downswing whiners around here
Does anyone ever play the $500s or $1000s? Seems like I usually see one person waiting at PS but never more.
|
|
#59
11-11-2005, 04:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: To all of the downswing whiners around here
[ QUOTE ]
Not claiming those were my numbers, either, but I dont think 40% ITM at $55 is unreasonable [/ QUOTE ] Yes, I personally know people that claim to be doing it at 55s and 109s, so I would have to agree. Unfortunately, I'm shy of that (55s [party] and 60 Turbos[stars]), and I have a pretty small sample size.
|
|
#60
11-11-2005, 04:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: To all of the downswing whiners around here
I guess it's just semantics. 12%, to me is certainly beating the game. If someone gets very close to the highest ROIs around, I'd say more like killing the game. That would be more Klingon too.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
