Two Plus Two Poker Forums STT Simulations: a graphical look into variance
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Video Directory TwoPlusTwo.com

 Notices

 STT Strategy Discussion about the play of single table tournaments.

 04-08-2009, 08:36 PM #106 Pooh-Bah     Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Russia Posts: 3,522 Re: STT Simulations: a graphical look into variance Ah sorry misread your post
 04-10-2009, 11:26 AM #107 journeyman     Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 394 Re: STT Simulations: a graphical look into variance when the graph is titled "chance of a downswing" what constitutes a downswing? is it 20 buy-ins, 40 buy-ins, 60 buy-ins, etc? If I missed it in the thread my apologies.
 04-13-2009, 01:59 PM #108 centurion   Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 186 Re: STT Simulations: a graphical look into variance can someone help me with inputting these results so i can analyze them, i'm having trouble working out the ITM % and stuff like that, and what do i put for ROI? i just want to analyze these results. 1.25 SnGs tested: 1000 1 prize: \$4.50 x 44 = \$198.00 2 prize: \$2.70 x 95 = \$256.50 3 prize: \$1.80 x 187 = \$336.60 ITM: 326 OTHER: 674 won = \$791.10 invested \$1250 = \$458.90 lost. \$2.25 SnGs tested: 500 1 prize: \$9.00 x 17 = \$153 2 prize: \$5.40 x 56 = \$302.40 3 prize: \$3.60 x 140 = \$504.00 ITM: 213 OTHER: 287 \$5.50 SnGs tested: 250 1 prize: \$22.50 x 6 = \$135 2 prize: \$13.50 x 23 = \$310.50 3 prize: \$9.00 x 49 = \$441.00 ITM: 78 OTHER: 172 won = \$886.50 invested \$1375 = \$488.50 lost. \$10+1 SnGs tested: 125 1 prize: \$45 x 2 = \$90 2 prize: \$27 x 18 = \$486 3 prize: \$18 x 32 = \$576 ITM: 52 OTHER: 73 won = \$1152 invested \$1375 = \$223 lost. \$20+2 SnGs tested: 75 1 prize: \$90 x 11 = \$990 2 prize: \$54 x 4 = \$216 3 prize: \$36 x 20 = \$720 ITM: 35 OTHER: 40 won = \$1926 invested \$1650 = \$276 profit. \$50+5 SnGs tested: 50 1 prize: \$225 x 6 = \$1350 2 prize: \$135 x 12 = \$1620 3 prize: \$90 x 7 = \$630 ITM: 25 OTHER: 25 won = \$3600 invested \$2750 = \$850 profit. TOTAL GAMES: 2000 TOTAL ITM: 729 TOTAL INVESTED: \$9525 TOTAL WON: \$9315 TOTAL PROFIT: -\$210
 04-13-2009, 02:14 PM #109 adept     Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 950 Re: STT Simulations: a graphical look into variance Import into PT/HM
 04-13-2009, 02:35 PM #110 centurion   Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 186 Re: STT Simulations: a graphical look into variance i want it to be analyzed by this spreadsheet
 08-05-2009, 07:14 PM #111 stranger     Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Carcare (SV) Posts: 5 Re: STT Simulations: a graphical look into variance nice thread
 11-09-2009, 12:35 AM #112 enthusiast   Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 82 Re: STT Simulations: a graphical look into variance Pretty awesome thread, thanks Shrooma.
 02-10-2010, 12:34 PM #113 grinder     Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: acceptance Posts: 533 Re: STT Simulations: a graphical look into variance reviving this antique to commend OP... well done!
02-11-2010, 11:50 AM   #115
grinder

Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Sheffield, UK
Posts: 432
Re: STT Simulations: a graphical look into variance

Quote:
I don't really know anything about MTTs, and so about Q2, but I expect that in the quote in Q1 he really meant that the downswings aren't much worse. You would expect greater variance I believe (in the actual statistics definition of variance), but because you are making more per game by having a higher ROI, the bad end of variance may often only mean winning less rather than losing money.

02-21-2010, 12:44 PM   #116
Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,384
Re: STT Simulations: a graphical look into variance

Quote:
 Originally Posted by dave_w11 I don't really know anything about MTTs, and so about Q2, but I expect that in the quote in Q1 he really meant that the downswings aren't much worse. You would expect greater variance I believe (in the actual statistics definition of variance), but because you are making more per game by having a higher ROI, the bad end of variance may often only mean winning less rather than losing money.
Hmm... yes but that would have to be under the assumption that your ROI clearly is much higher than in single-table SnGs. Which I'm not necessarily doubting, just saying that 40% seems pretty damn high and unrealistic to maintain in the long term.

Surprised that no one else has anything to say on the matter.

 02-21-2010, 12:57 PM #117 Pooh-Bah     Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: It's starting to get a lot annoying Posts: 3,823 Re: STT Simulations: a graphical look into variance In general, more people in a tourney = higher attainable ROI, so yes the attainable ROIs for 45 and 180 mans are going to be higher than those of 9-mans.
02-21-2010, 04:27 PM   #118
veteran

Join Date: May 2005
Location: Anchorage, AK
Posts: 2,177
Re: STT Simulations: a graphical look into variance

Quote:
 Originally Posted by dmisfh1 Hmm... yes but that would have to be under the assumption that your ROI clearly is much higher than in single-table SnGs. Which I'm not necessarily doubting, just saying that 40% seems pretty damn high and unrealistic to maintain in the long term. Surprised that no one else has anything to say on the matter.
40% ROI doesn't seem unrealistic at first glance because those tourneys take significantly longer than a 9-man. If you had a similar ROI (or even just slightly higher) to STT's it wouldn't be worth playing MTT's at all.

Also, given that these graphs have been around a couple years I think people who recommend 100 BI bankrolls are way off. Even with 5% ROI an 80 BI bankroll is only a 2.5% risk of ruin. If you're willing to drop down you could easily make do with a 50 BI bankroll, even less if you've got a higher ROI.

02-21-2010, 05:34 PM   #119
Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: yo no soy por aqui
Posts: 15,808
Re: STT Simulations: a graphical look into variance

Quote:
 Originally Posted by dmisfh1 2. He goes on to say that these multi-table SnGs are the most profitable game on Stars and that a 40% ROI is "definately sustainable" (or about "\$5 a game" as he says a few seconds later.) I dont even know how to address those statements. Everything I have learned from this forum over the years makes me believe that such a winrate is improbable for the long term, and certainly not sustainable. Have I been wrong about this all along?
AFAIK that video was made right before the 45's got really tough to beat for a good clip.

 04-01-2010, 01:40 AM #120 grinder   Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Tuscaloosa, Alabama Posts: 604 Re: STT Simulations: a graphical look into variance why are the lower ROI players more likely to be at the higher extremes of profitability than the higher ROI players according to the probability distributions of profitability for various winrates?

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is OffTrackbacks are Off Pingbacks are Off Refbacks are Off Forum Rules

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:05 AM.

 Contact Us - Two Plus Two Publishing LLC - Privacy Statement - Top

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.