Not a topic of huge discussion but Ryan Laplante posted on his twitter that he bought 6 pros at 5.0 (5.0!!!!) and thought that their ROI was even higher than that. In a response, Mike McDonald mentioned that the highest anyone was trading on pokershares was Michael Addamo at 4.6

https://twitter.com/Protentialmn/sta...04142093766667

What do you guys think? Is this just an attempt to inflate the earnings of tournament pros and try to sell his tourney classes? What is the highest possible main event ROI?

In a response, Lynne Ji mentioned she was willing to sell almost anyone at 4.5 but noticeably didn't want to sell Addamo (wanting 6.0).

https://twitter.com/helloitslynne/st...10933024276481

i havent clicked any of the links but i'll just assume timex is correct.

Edit: i'll also add that i think protential is an idiot

Only person I'd take at 5.0 is Postle

Timex being willing to both sell and buy players at a not huge spread kind of gives the best answer there is. And while it obv isn't an actual objective answer, at least it's backed up by a market and their own money

So.. If their highest lines are 4.6-4.7, accounting for vig I guess they estimate the highest possible to be about 4-4.2ish?

I would think virtually everyone is below 1.5, which is not an option?

Do people honestly think the edges in tournament poker are this big?

I mean if you honestly believe that then you could print money by shorting all the top players of the field, whom others rate at 3.0+. I'm sure you could even work out a deal for it that keeps variance low.

If you genuinely believe this, that is. Because there's plenty people willing to throw infinite amounts of money at you if you're right

In a really well-structured tournament that is probably the softest 10k on planet earth? Yes, people have big ROI's. 5.0 seems ridiculous though.

about tree fiddy

In my haste I forgot to add it as an option. Not sure how to change it now that there are a bunch of votes there. If enough people think that's the case can a mod add it as an option?

That's my vote.

IMHO I think people vastly over estimate the skill factor in tournament poker.

I also don't think the fields are as soft as some think they are.

Maybe in years past where internet poker supplied quite a number of entries but
not now.

divide(jamiegoldwinnings,jamiegoldbuyin)

I'm not sure if it was Greg Raymer or Scotty Nguyen....but one of them said that he was 4 times better than the field. Even went on to say that if he had been playing in the Main Event every year since the time of Christ that he would win 4 times in 2,000 years.

I don't know how "4 times better than the field" would translate into ROI or markups.

Ike Haxton, speaking on Pokergo Run it Back, said that no one is above 28% in the Main Event.

I don't think the WSOP was running back then. If it was though then the Son of God could probably ask for 6.0 or higher.

Top pros at >3 seems fine, the premium is for the optionality as stacks get deeper

Agree that buying anyone at 5 is high-risk, i'm sure like top 10-50 best tourney players in the world could be worth the price, but roi can't be too hicg.

Would be fun to see if lets say top 5 (Adamo, bonomo, brynn, ike, koon… my personal opinion) cashes for more than 250k in the main this year.

At most, only one of those players has a higher ROI than Phil Hellmuth.

5.0 lmfao

agreed

This just can't be true. You must be mistaken lol

In the following video, Isaac Haxton talks about the subject of tournament ROI from the 1:22 to he 1:28 mark. He specifically talks about the WSOP Main Event sometime around the 1:25 mark.

https://youtu.be/yBAOOgleoZ4?t=4920

Let me know your interpretation and summary.

It's pretty much true. Here is the relevant part of the interview time-stamped: https://youtu.be/yBAOOgleoZ4?t=5102

Interviewer asks what Ike thinks his ROI would be in the WSOP main event

"Rating myself as well inside the hundred highest ROIs but probably not the top
ten I think maybe 25 or 30 percent"

Ike also says earlier on that he thinks the highest ROIs possible for poker tournaments in general is roughly 50%.

FWIW I think that probably Ike Haxton isn't an exceptionally great live poker player. His views about ROI might be sensible within the realm of on-line poker. But in live poker there are a lot more opportunities to increase one's edge, the most obvious of which being live tells. I think it's easily conceivable that Ike's ROI is 30%, while the best exploitative, intuitive player's is >100%.

Plus, at around 1:28 something of the interview, Dominic Nietsche pops up in the chat and says that he agrees with Haxton completely. That's 2 top 30 tourney players with millions in cashes agreeing with each other about tournament ROI.

What stakes though? That's important to know.

https://twitter.com/Chris_D_Brewer/s...17002817007622

And Chris Brewer claims that it is impossible to find 50 players with an average of a 100% ROI. Some pretty high profile players have taken the other side though.

Watch the video that I have a link to in post #20 of this thread. I've time strapped it to start at the 1:20 mark and keep watching to around the 1:28:30 mark. Haxton talks in terms of in general as well as some specifics.