(Chips won/500 - # tourneys*0.04)/(# tourneys)

based on your BB and chip graphs, you seem to be doing good when stacks are relatively deep and leaking when stacks become shallower. Check if that's the case on pokertracker

no need to check that very clearly is teh case

anywhere i can find an explanation on how that equation was created? doesnt seem to make sense to me

thanks for the feedback better lucky than good then

Chips won - # tourneys*0.04*500 = total chips won after 4% rake
(Chips won - # tourneys*0.04*)/500 = total buyins won
(Chips won - # tourneys*0.04*500)/#tourneys/500 =total buyins won/#buyins=ROI(in decimals)

...simplifies to equation above

Yup, quit while you're ahead

See my explanation attempt above (Poisonlolz forgot to multiply the value of net won chips by 0.96 - the rake lowers the monetary value of all chips in play, incl. the net won ones; the error is small, though).

When you pay 1 BI, you purchase 500 chips by it, but the prize pool equity of those 500 chips is only 0.96 BI because rake has been paid. All the chips are devalued already at the moment when the tourney starts, as that's when the rake is taken.

na i did find the explanatian hence the thanks for the feedback

MrCoon I don't get it didn't u just subtract the rake twice?

It's amazing how you're owning the regs of the $30s. Aren't they supposed to be way better than those of the $15s in the long run just because many of the former have experience of playing HS (are overrolled at times) and hence at least have solid study routines, i.e. they won't sit down to play without at least a leak correction plan and will plug them faster?

No, first I subtracted it from the net won chips, then from the initial stacks (chips received at the start of the tourneys); hence, in total, I subtracted it from all the gross won chips.

Hehe I guess time will tell. Seems I am maths fish too....I understand how your calculations are right now. Guess my EVROI is only 7% now :P

His math is correct. It's like in husngs the chips graph and the buyins graph are similar shape but the buyin graph is lower by the amount of rake paid. Basically I m sun running like a mofo

9evbb wooohooowowowo

stillg ambling btw

u ****ing wot m8

Hello everyone. I'm a newbie. tell which strategy is better in these tournaments?

ive been regging and openshoving the 60s. seems to be less than ideal.

i obv havent been regging a lot obv...

It's called bink and run

Made my day.

thanks!

Could somebody share a simulation graph (excel) for given winrate with best and worst run?

It's now just a matter of time before this:

Right now, it seems that everyone has become divisive on what is and isn't good for poker. Players play with different motivations whether fun or fun and profit. The goal IMO is to find a way to keep everyone happy. It is pretty obvious that this new game type is here to stay so I think the argument needs to go from banning it to reducing variance so that everybody wins. This would help the players playing for fun and profit and the ones playing just for fun. Telling the recreational players that the game they currently find fun and think they have a huge chance at winning huge prizes should be banned will only create a big pushback(as is seen in NVG). Telling them that this new game can be improved so that they don't get stuck with 2x prize pools all the time will help the argument and all players involved. Showing some SWONGSIM of recreational player graphs where they play like 200 of these in comparison to 200 of them in 6 max hypers may help the argument towards reducing variance. Recreational players aren't thinking about the fact that a higher % of them will wind up worse off than in other game types. They are only thinking of that 30k and how fun this game is. This type of thinking is also highly profitable for Pokerstars which is a company trying to make a profit. The game is too new to get people pissed off at how they only ever got that 2x multiplier. The only way to get through the divide is to try and show how it helps everyone to reduce variance in the game. After all, poker is a game of skill with variance and rake added in but if those last factors are too high then you get gambling.

I get that players who make a living on poker are pissed off but by wanting to outright ban this it will only create divisions between pros and recs. When has banning things outright ever worked in the world? Why not focus the effort on improving the new format for everyone which IMO is reducing variance, while at the same time keeping the jackpot essence that recreationals(and regs may) find so fun.

http://www.highstakesdb.com/5156-pok...-spin-gos.aspx
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x27...-go_videogames

They are going hard on this.....obv they knew the impact on other formats....their math tells them that they shouldnt care

Yeah i think you have some points there and by reducing variance basically everyone kinda wins.. im pretty sure a rec doesnt bother much if he can win 10k or 30k max but is more bothered when he hits 20x 2x in a row...

Man that ad is sick. I wish we would've had one of those when hyper HUSNGs came out. Not that traffic wasn't awesome when they debuted, but it would've been cool to have such marketing behind them.