Quote:
Originally Posted by RedOak
If you use the double up model to calculate ROI, here is some data from the 2010 main event.
If you were to go allin as an average 54.47% favorite, you would win the event 4x as often as an average player who gets it allin at a 50% rate. With a
4x chance of winning, your ROI would be 80%.
2010 Main Event $10,000 NL Holdem
All in % 7319 Players ROI
50.00% Average Player -6%
52.77% 2x Average Player 41%
54.47% 3x Average Player 80%
55.70% 4x Average Player 117%
However, it gets discouraging if you never have a top 36 finish.
Here is your expected ROI fi you never have any top finishes as an average player:
Average Player ROI If :
No Top 3 Finishes -19%
No Top 9 Finishes -38%
No Top 18 Finishes -44%
No Top 27 Finishes -46%
No Top 36 Finishes -49%
Here is your expected ROI if you never have any top finishes as a 2x player:
2x Average Player ROI If:
No Top 3 Finishes 16%
No Top 9 Finishes -17%
No Top 18 Finishes -27%
No Top 27 Finishes -31%
No Top 36 Finishes -34%
Here it is for a 3x player:
3x Average Player ROI If:
No Top 3 Finishes 45%
No Top 9 Finishes -1%
No Top 18 Finishes -15%
No Top 27 Finishes -19%
No Top 36 Finishes -24%
Here it is for a 4x player:
4x Average Player ROI If:
Actual
No Top 3 Finishes 70%
No Top 9 Finishes 12%
No Top 18 Finishes -5%
No Top 27 Finishes -10%
No Top 36 Finishes -16%
So even if you are 3x more likely to win the main due to skill, with an overall ROI of 80%, your ROI will be -24% if you never finish in the top 36.
Now how often can a 3x player make the top 36 out of a 7319 player field?:
Once every 105 years! This from the table below:
How often in years of expected finishing positions:
7319 Players Top 3 Top 9 Top 18 Top 27 Top 36
Average Player 2440 813 407 271 203
2x Average Player 1329 482 255 175 134
3x Average Player 931 356 194 136 105
4x Average Player 723 286 159 113 89
Even a 4x player will only make the top 36 once every 89 years on average!
A 2x player will make the final table once every 482 years on average.
One way to make tournament play better is to lower the variance by both reducing the top payouts and expanding the number paid from 10% to say 12.5% of the field. I will show why this makes sense in a later post.
My suggestion would be that the rake needs to vary in proportion to the quality of the field, tournament NL is close to a solved game, and everyone shares the formula, so raking the entrants in that game at the same rate it was 20 years ago, and the same as a Razz e.g. or a mixed game tournament is raked is just robbery.
For poker to continue to thrive (or even survive), the Harrahs et al need to seek their profits from sponsors, and think of the professional players more as employees.