Have a look at this table (click to enlarge). It gives my results in SNGs at Pacific. Does it seem to you that I should be moving up to the $20 SNGs?
I know that statistically, these results do not mean much. Still, if you add them all up I have now played over 80 games for $10 or less with very positive results.
One thing I find very interesting is that at this moment, I do not really see a difference between the skill levels of the players at the $10 and the $5 levels. This is remarkable, because when I just started to play for $10, I had the feeling that it was more difficult. Indeed, as I have written about, I lost my first four games for $10. But now, when I sit down to play I basically expect to win unless something goes wrong. Even in the heads-up phase, I often have the feeling that my opponents have no idea what they are doing, certainly many of them have never heard of SAGE.
But surely at some point the players must start getting better! I am just wondering where this point is. Another possibility is of course that I have been slowly improving over the past two months. Still, it is clear that there are a lot of idiots at the tables. So, time to move up?
PS I had a look at my opponents at the one $22 SNG that I played, where I lost connection. Nothing impressive, at least not for the ones I checked so far: the best player had a profit of $316 over 480 games, the worst a loss of $1200 over 1200 games...
PPS Correction: I was playing with two sharks! For one opponent, I accidentally looked him up at PokerStars instead of Pacific. At Pacific, he is a shark with total profit $7000 and a ROI of 29%. (At PokerStars, he plays for a lower average stake and also has a lower ROI - quite an interesting result for you PokerStars players out there...) One other opponent, that I looked up only now, has total profit of $2000 and a ROI of a whopping 48%! (he played less games than the other player)
Seems I might have gotten lucky with my early disconnect...
3 comments:
Hi Rob,
Can't really tell from the table, but how large are your moneyswings?
I was thinking that if the swings are about 10 times your money you can afford to give it a go.
I notice that your ROI in $5 buy-ins is as big as in $10. So this tells you (at least I think) the same idio...hm people are playing $10 tables as $5 tables.
cheers, Nard
To be honest you do not have a large enough sample yet to know that your a winning player.
Lets look at you $10 games. Not sure of the pay structure on pacific but I should be close.
I guess you get around 45 dollars for first. Now go to the bubble and switch just 1 big pair that held up, to not holding up. That hand could easily catapult you to a first place finish. If you lost it you got nothing. thats a 55 dollar swing from one hand. which in you case would cause your roi to drop 20%ish. No change the outcome of 5 coinflips. see what that does to your ROI.
Great players are known to lose 20 buy-ins in a row. I dont know what the comp is like at pacific. I have fight for everydime I earn over at stars.
Thanks for your comments.
Nard, my worst sequence of losses is four successive $10 SNGs. (I had worse sequences in the past on $5 SNGs but that is before I bought the Harrington books.)
Scott, good idea. I will look at my $10 games and see how often I had coinflips at the bubble. About the structure: payouts are 50%, 30%, 20% so first place is $50. Buyin is $10+$1.
I believe that the competition at Pacific is ridiculously soft. I never played at Stars, but it should be a lot tougher, have a look here. Stars is #20 in their list of 20 poker rooms (ranked by hardness)... You might want to try Sportsbook or something.
Post a Comment