Say i am playing HUSNGS anywhere between $200 and 1k

When this graph jumps sharply, is that wins in a row or could it be just playing 200 games - than sitting in and and winning say a 1kg game?

Basically what i am trying to ask when someone posts a graph showing only their BI not winnings can it be misleading when they jump up to a higher stake?

So say they lost 5 x $200 games total 1k - but than sit at a 1k game and win it - it would bring them back to even, or would it show a 5 BI downswing followed by a 1 BI upswing?

This is your answer.

The graph you are showing show someone down apprx 10 buyins... but they could still be up or down a decent chunk of money.

Is there a way of showing BI only not winnings, like say you win 10 games at $200, but lost one game at a 1k game - is there a way for it to show the actual BI loses instead of winning, so in this example it would be showing winning 9 BI?

hem is on my other computer.. but there is a setting to change it from buyins to $... Taking a guess, it'll be on the bottom left of the of the graph section.

maybe you misunderstood my average English writing sorry

yep the first graph i posted ITT is BI the second graph is winnings so i know how to change them but i was just trying to work out if there was a way to do this...


I'm thinking not right?

You can put it in BI

This would mean if you won 5BI at $200 and then lost 1BI at $1k then it'd show you up 4BI

What you have to remember there is that the BI Variable doesn't take into account the BI size, it sees all BI's as the same

Then you can put your winnings in $

This would mean if you won 5BI at $200 and then lost 1BI at $1k it'd show you having $0.

You can't do anything else as a standard.

But in this graph same as in OP just changed it to winning



Its shows that i won a 1k game where highlighted so this is where im getting confused

You saying it Variable doesn't take into account the BI size but it seems to have here or am i wrong?

because it jumps up 1k sharply that wasn't 5 x 200 wins but a 1k win

?

Probably better off posting in the HEM support forum or in the support forum on hem's webpage.

ok thanks

That jump at game 141 is not one game. It goes a quarter of the way from 141 to 161, looks like five games. If you put your mouse EXACTLY on the graph at the red arrow, it will tell you what game number that point is. Like this, today I was up 1.2 buyins at game #66

ah ok AirmanSpecial thanks

Just one other thing if ok my graph ITT shows down 10 Buy ins

but i played 175 games 1st 87 2nd 87 so why is it showing down 10 buy ins should be even?



also 87 x 2 = 174

but Tag count says 175 games played hmm

87-87 means you lost money to the rake, that shouldn't be worth ten buyins though, so I don't know what happened to the rest. Well it might be. It would be 6.3 BIs on Stars, maybe your site has slightly higher rake and it probably shows you as losing a BI in the 175th game that wasn't recorded properly. If those SNGs are 200+10 then that's def it. 8.3 BI in rake and 1 BI from the extra SNG = just under -10BI.

As for 174 vs 175, you probably had an internet problem and the hand histories didn't get saved properly and HEM couldn't figure out if you won or not. You can open the Tournaments report and find the game with a finish position of 0 and try to figure out why it didn't get recorded in HEM.

so its not really a 10 BI downswing as in BI but rake in the graph

that seems a bit misleading from Hm2 or no?

That's right. You have to pay the rake every game, so you need to be above average just to break even. It doesn't make any difference to your wallet if you play ten SNGs and lose them all or play 175 and win half, either way you've lost 10 buyins when you're done so that's what HEM shows.