Quote:
Originally Posted by RT999
5 straight years of losses at the WSOP but you all insist he could charge 4.0 markup. Mike Mcdonald booking all these absurd markups is the smartest guy in the room.
That makes me wonder...which player who has played 100+ events at the WSOP has the highest ROI? In other words, what's the highest realistic markup someone could charge?
As far as DN goes, I'm being very results-oriented, but this WSOP suggests that his best value is in the mid stakes $5-10k stuff because he's good at many games and the stakes at that buy-in level are high enough to keep him engaged. I'm sure he could have a great long-term ROI in low stakes events too, but I imagine it's hard on some level to get really motivated for a $1k when you're accustomed to playing much higher.
I'd be a little worried if I had invested in the high stakes package because the ability to fire multiple bullets in these expensive events and his desire to win POTY may not be conducive to fiscally-responsible decisions. The fact that the fields are pretty insane in those nosebleed events doesn't help.
When you look at his WSOP as a whole this year, he's had some really good results. If you're an MTT player and you're jumping around between different stakes, it's likely that your overall ROI is going to be defined by how you perform in your biggest buy-in events, and he has bricked out the big ones so far (the $25-50k stuff). That's obviously going to drag down his overall results and ROI, but that doesn't mean he's not hugely +EV in
most of the events he plays. I would guess that he's pretty solidly +EV in almost every event at the WSOP, but when you are playing (and bricking) high rollers, it's going to cancel out everything else.