If you believe in the fair card distribution, then you should believe in the fair multiplier distribution too, they're both tested in order to keep the gambling license (even if it's as 'easy' to get as the Curacao and Cyprus ones
).
Quote:
Originally Posted by p2 dog, p2
better reduce your table count
It will become a double-edged sword when JPTs are added into SnC: it redistributes rakeback to high volume grinders so dramatically that mass multitabling becomes viable for rich folks.
I've run swongsims, and they show that (speaking of the $40s) a twice bigger bankroll (that I think many people have) will suffice for those who'll have 34% ITM and top SnC, as opposed to having 36% ITM and not placing in SnC.
For smaller stakes, yes, there's little chance of smashing SnC anyway, so playing at fewer tables count becomes more viable.
P.S. The sims in question:
(I think that, once JPTs are added into SnC, the tourney part of the JP will give more seats but will be a smaller fraction of the top grinders' return; they'll benefit mostly from the cash part, which is extremely top-heavy.)
34% ITM, 110% RB (1M RP 5-Star General + SnC 1st-2nd places; calculated as a %-age of the total 6% fee, not the 4.5% non-SnC part)
Code:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Effective Specified Simulation
Place Finish Distribution Finish Distribution
1 0,00034% 0,000344%
2 0,00033% 0,000339%
3 0,00033% 0,000328%
4 0,0017% 0,001693%
5 0,00165% 0,001664%
6 0,00165% 0,001589%
7 0,0034% 0,003374%
8 0,0033% 0,003333%
9 0,0033% 0,003335%
10 0,034% 0,033905%
11 0,17% 0,169881%
12 2,55% 2,548568%
13 7,26444% 7,259463%
14 23,97612% 23,975256%
ITM 34,01056% 34,003072%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1000 simulations of 100000 games
Expected ROI (with 110% rakeback): 2,47% ($98750)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
99% had ROI below 6,04% ($241440)
97.5% had ROI below 5,48% ($219040)
95% had ROI below 4,72% ($189000)
90% had ROI below 4,07% ($162920)
80% had ROI below 3,44% ($137440)
70% had ROI below 2,87% ($114760)
60% had ROI below 2,44% ($97640)
50% had ROI below 2,17% ($86720)
40% had ROI below 1,91% ($76200)
30% had ROI below 1,66% ($66320)
20% had ROI below 1,48% ($59000)
10% had ROI below 1,20% ($47960)
5% had ROI below 0,99% ($39640)
2.5% had ROI below 0,75% ($30040)
1% had ROI below 0,59% ($23480)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
99% had a downswing greater than $6720
97.5% had a downswing greater than $7291
95% had a downswing greater than $7842
90% had a downswing greater than $8434
80% had a downswing greater than $9325
70% had a downswing greater than $9991
60% had a downswing greater than $10658
50% had a downswing greater than $11428
40% had a downswing greater than $12357
30% had a downswing greater than $13353
20% had a downswing greater than $14648
10% had a downswing greater than $16814
5% had a downswing greater than $18663
2.5% had a downswing greater than $20524
1% had a downswing greater than $23872
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
99% had a low point lower than $0
97.5% had a low point lower than $-59
95% had a low point lower than $-169
90% had a low point lower than $-363
80% had a low point lower than $-791
70% had a low point lower than $-1182
60% had a low point lower than $-1659
50% had a low point lower than $-2230
40% had a low point lower than $-3108
30% had a low point lower than $-4020
20% had a low point lower than $-5167
10% had a low point lower than $-7646
5% had a low point lower than $-10440
2.5% had a low point lower than $-12398
1% had a low point lower than $-15026
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
35% ITM, 75% RB (500K RP General but mediocre SnC prizes)
Code:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Effective Specified Simulation
Place Finish Distribution Finish Distribution
1 0,00035% 0,000362%
2 0,00033% 0,000346%
3 0,00032% 0,00029%
4 0,00175% 0,001858%
5 0,00165% 0,001648%
6 0,0016% 0,001578%
7 0,0035% 0,003554%
8 0,0033% 0,003324%
9 0,0032% 0,003216%
10 0,035% 0,035086%
11 0,175% 0,174232%
12 2,625% 2,625474%
13 7,4781% 7,477272%
14 24,6813% 24,678698%
ITM 35,0104% 35,006938%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1000 simulations of 50000 games
Expected ROI (with 75% rakeback): 3,17% ($63460)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
99% had ROI below 10,03% ($200640)
97.5% had ROI below 7,41% ($148200)
95% had ROI below 6,86% ($137160)
90% had ROI below 6,03% ($120640)
80% had ROI below 3,96% ($79200)
70% had ROI below 3,33% ($66600)
60% had ROI below 2,99% ($59880)
50% had ROI below 2,70% ($53920)
40% had ROI below 2,45% ($49000)
30% had ROI below 2,22% ($44320)
20% had ROI below 1,93% ($38600)
10% had ROI below 1,56% ($31240)
5% had ROI below 1,28% ($25680)
2.5% had ROI below 1,03% ($20600)
1% had ROI below 0,59% ($11760)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
99% had a downswing greater than $4799
97.5% had a downswing greater than $5066
95% had a downswing greater than $5335
90% had a downswing greater than $5740
80% had a downswing greater than $6378
70% had a downswing greater than $6822
60% had a downswing greater than $7334
50% had a downswing greater than $7821
40% had a downswing greater than $8399
30% had a downswing greater than $9185
20% had a downswing greater than $10155
10% had a downswing greater than $11627
5% had a downswing greater than $13137
2.5% had a downswing greater than $14523
1% had a downswing greater than $16776
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
99% had a low point lower than $0
97.5% had a low point lower than $-38
95% had a low point lower than $-76
90% had a low point lower than $-180
80% had a low point lower than $-453
70% had a low point lower than $-764
60% had a low point lower than $-1149
50% had a low point lower than $-1590
40% had a low point lower than $-2043
30% had a low point lower than $-2780
20% had a low point lower than $-3820
10% had a low point lower than $-5528
5% had a low point lower than $-6769
2.5% had a low point lower than $-7926
1% had a low point lower than $-11810
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
36% ITM, 45% RB (200K RP General, mincashes in SnC)
Code:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Effective Specified Simulation
Place Finish Distribution Finish Distribution
1 0,00036% 0,00029%
2 0,00032% 0,00023%
3 0,00032% 0,000375%
4 0,0018% 0,001825%
5 0,0016% 0,001535%
6 0,0016% 0,00168%
7 0,0036% 0,00351%
8 0,0032% 0,003115%
9 0,0032% 0,00304%
10 0,036% 0,03571%
11 0,18% 0,1802%
12 2,7% 2,69855%
13 7,69176% 7,702285%
14 25,38648% 25,38045%
ITM 36,01024% 36,012795%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1000 simulations of 20000 games
Expected ROI (with 45% rakeback): 4,18% ($33400)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
99% had ROI below 14,15% ($113160)
97.5% had ROI below 12,75% ($102000)
95% had ROI below 11,34% ($90720)
90% had ROI below 5,70% ($45600)
80% had ROI below 4,82% ($38560)
70% had ROI below 4,31% ($34480)
60% had ROI below 3,92% ($31360)
50% had ROI below 3,56% ($28440)
40% had ROI below 3,20% ($25600)
30% had ROI below 2,86% ($22880)
20% had ROI below 2,47% ($19760)
10% had ROI below 1,88% ($15080)
5% had ROI below 1,40% ($11240)
2.5% had ROI below 1,01% ($8080)
1% had ROI below 0,58% ($4680)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
99% had a downswing greater than $2935
97.5% had a downswing greater than $3152
95% had a downswing greater than $3367
90% had a downswing greater than $3642
80% had a downswing greater than $4143
70% had a downswing greater than $4448
60% had a downswing greater than $4805
50% had a downswing greater than $5156
40% had a downswing greater than $5570
30% had a downswing greater than $6074
20% had a downswing greater than $6607
10% had a downswing greater than $7574
5% had a downswing greater than $8833
2.5% had a downswing greater than $9746
1% had a downswing greater than $10976
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
99% had a low point lower than $0
97.5% had a low point lower than $-37
95% had a low point lower than $-58
90% had a low point lower than $-151
80% had a low point lower than $-344
70% had a low point lower than $-554
60% had a low point lower than $-811
50% had a low point lower than $-1155
40% had a low point lower than $-1518
30% had a low point lower than $-2076
20% had a low point lower than $-2790
10% had a low point lower than $-3746
5% had a low point lower than $-4961
2.5% had a low point lower than $-6086
1% had a low point lower than $-7481
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by coon74; 04-20-2015 at 07:57 PM.
Reason: more realistic sims (imo)