So, I've now played a total of 165 rounds on Bet21 since I thought to record my stats on 10/24. I figured I would post them here, so people can share what stats they compiled and see what is typical around here (which I would assume is a lot better than average) Columns are: Category, # of rounds advanced, # of rounds played, expected # of rounds to advance, % rounds advanced to average, Total % rounds advanced By # Advance 2.....33.....77.....23.7.....139%.....43% 3.....40.....60.....29.0.....138%.....67% By Buyin ...........................................Win/Loss........Win/round 0.......15.....35.....10.8.....139%.....43%.....$-..............$- 1.......3........7.....2.8......108%.....43%..... $(4.30)........ $(0.61) 5.......3........6.....2.5......121%.....50%..... $10.00 ........ $1.67 10......7.......9.....3.6......196%.....78%..... $221.00 ....... $24.56 20......12....18.....6.7......179%.....67%..... $989.00 ....... $54.94 50......31 ....62....26.3.....118%.....50%..... $1,130.00 ..... $18.23 100.....6......8.....3.4.......176%.....75%..... $1,564.00 ......$195.50 200.....3......3.....1.1.......274%.....100%..... $8,485.00.... $2,828.33 TOTAL.80...148....57.2.....140%.....54%..... $12,394.70 ....$83.75 By Round # 1.....41.....85.....31.6.....130%.....48% 2.....28.....42.....17.9.....156%.....67% 3.....9.......16.....6.7......134%.....56% 4.....1........3.....0.9.......111%.....33%
toonces Congrats on your fantastic 12K plus winnings. From reading your chat, I believe, you have had some big wins in tournaments. Would you mind highlighting those? Give us an simple summary of your big hits!
Well, $10,000 of that came over the weekend from winning the $25,000 event on Saturday and the $5,000 event on Sunday. But, I know that that was just having good luck at the right time. I was more curious about comparing the 140% figure (meaning that over 160 tounaments, I advance 1.4 times as often as chance would dictate). I believe that that number is the one that can best predict future performance, especially when broken down by buy-in size. I think trying to predict future results looking at overall win or % of final tables made is too much determined by randomness. Ken Smith seemed to think that about 150% is about the most that is reasonably sustainable in the long term, and I tend to agree. Unfortunately, I don't have enough statistics background to calculate a confidence interval for the 140%. Some of the interesting takeaways I got from my stats is that the $50 tourneys are pretty tough fields. I'm only at 118% of average in those events and I can think of many of those rounds where I just got schooled, including a great Secret Fake double-down by Nibbler last night. Also, the freeroll tournaments are not that much easier to advance. In fact, it may be that the low-limit events are easier fields than a freeroll, since the freeroll actually has a bigger prize at stake.
Help!!! Congrats again Toonces for your big win in the weekend. I have to admit that I find your stats confusing. I would need a little help understanding the concepts and would like to know if I could extricate my relevant percentage (the one you and Ken are talking about) from the stats I do keep. Personnaly, I update my stats regularly (three times a month), keeping separate templates (real money games and satellites) for SnG and Tournaments. I don't keep a record of the freerolls (should I?). As of my last update (January 21) I had recorded my results in 388 SnGs and 197 tournaments at Bet21, for a total of 585 games (from reading your post, it seems that I should also keep a record of the rounds advanced in a tournament even if I don't make the final...I know I advance a lot but could not tell from my stats). In SnGs, I only keep track of victories, in the money, cost and money won In tournaments, I also keep track of position when I make a final table.
First of all, I apologize for the formatting difficulty in posting a table here...I've been cleaning it up. I posted a thread on how to track these numbers here. The reason I do round-by-round tracking is that it gives you more data points, and there is little differenc between a round 1 and a round 2. Also, since the probability of making a final table is pretty low, it takes a long time before you can trust the number. For example: If you ask 100 people if they are democrats, and 40 say yes, the actual number is likely to be close to 40%. But if you ask 100 people if they are athiests and 2 say yes, it's far less accurate to say that the number of athiests is 2% (because the variance is higher). So, we're better off tracing events that are closer to 50%. So about the actual numbers, look at the first row of my stats, the "By # Advance" row. The row is as follows: 2.....33.....77.....23.7.....139%.....43% 2 - category; i.e. looking at only rounds where 2 people advance 33 - I advanced 33 times in rounds where 2 players advanced 77 - I played 77 rounds where 2 players advanced 23.7 - If advancing was pure luck, I would advance 23.7 times out of 77 rounds. Everytime there was a 6-person round, I would advance .33 of the time. Everytime there was a 7-person round, I would advance .29 of the time. If I played, say 36 6-person rounds and 41 7-person rounds, overall I would advance about 23.7 times 139% - equal to (33 / 23.7) and represent my pecentage compared to an average of 100%. Therefore, I am 139% of average at 2-advance rounds. 43% - equal to (33/77). Shows that I advance 43% of the time in 2-advance rounds. It's meaningful here, but less meaningful when you mix 2-advance and 3-advance rounds. For the breakdown by buy-in and overall, I am also tracking the less predictive stats of overall win and average win per round. Since a round generall represents about 40 minutes of time, looking at win per round tells you essentially your hourly rate playing online. Notice that for me, it says that to date, I make more per round at the 10 and 20 buyins than the 50 buyins, but much of that is because I haven't played as many $10 and $20 tourneys.
toonces congrats on your performance - this is a very good showing, obviously I haven't tracked my online play for a while - but a little while ago - right after I had made some changes to my playing strategy - I tracked 200 tables - both sng and tourney - and it came out to a 47% edge - caution here - these were all cheapos - mostly $5 - a few $1 and some $10 - just a couple of $20 - rule of thumb seems to be that you need 100 tables to get a meanigful number - in live tbj - I would say at least that in online ebj - which has more variance - so your over all total is probably pretty good - the money won, obviously is excellent - way more than I've won online - I use online play for practice and to try out new strategies and tactics a lot of the time - so play cheap usually - then when the bankroll gets down - play the $5 stuff and build back up - so this would affect performance stats as well - I have a higher edge in live tbj than online - whether from nature of ebj/tbj - or using online to try out new stuff - I think some of both a lot of the 'pro' edge comes from Wong type betting - do the math - if you min bet until a couple of the ploppies bankrupt out - odds right there go from 1/7 to 1/5 to win/advance - that's a 40% edge! - obviously - that edge simply disappears if everyone bets the same Wong style - the fact that you are keeping an edge in the higher money games says that you are doing something right - even if you toss out your two big wins as 'luck' - you are still making pretty good money - so - feel very good about your performance - my feeling - is that I keep very careful track of live tbj - as part of the learning process - only occassionally keep track of online play - too many tables in too short a time span - too much work - as long as my bank balance keeps me playing - I'm content - I don't know how much in casino tbj you've played - but I would think that you could expect to do better live than online as a general rule - go for it
BTW, tracking this stuff in a spreadsheet once you set it up is pretty easy. I keep a worksheet open when I'm playing EBJ. As each round begins, I enter on a line the date and time, buy-in, round #, # that advance. When the round ends, I add a 0 or 1 whether or not I advanced and my actual placement (especially if a sit-n-go or final). If I won a final, I add the amount I won. Everything else just happens with formulas. I recommend that everyone keep vigilent statistics. It was a lesson that I learned from Bob Dancer, probably the most famous video poker expert in the US. He pointed out that people love to keep statistics when they are doing well, but slack off and stop keeping track when they are not doing well. If you do that, your memory becomes unreliable, and you start to kid yourself that you are doing a lot better than you think you are. If you discipline yourself to always record your losses, then you will have a much more accurate idea of if you are playing well enough to beat the opposition and the house advantage.
I agree it actually is pretty easy - and I use a spreadsheet for live play - where I just enter each table - for the appropriate round - #players, # advance, and my finish position - and enter prize pools, etc. - in a different section - and everything calcs out - even track edge through three different methods - but when I started tracking online - I was using a different spreadsheet - more complex - and trying to track - like you - by buyin, sng, tourneys, etc. - and playing both UB/Bet21 and Golden Palace - and was too much hassle to do every day - so now I just don't bother with the online anymore - I know I am still playing off my initial $50 in deposits from September - and have played probably close to 1,000 tables - so - figure I still have some kind of positive edge - actually - anyone who wants a spreadsheet to track their play by - just PM me - with your email address - and I will send you the one I use -
BUMP... Does anyone else have results to share? BTW, if anyone would like a copy of the spreadsheet I used to create the data above, leave me your email address in a private message.
Oh What the Hey: I'll reveal myself for what I REALLY AM. From Jan. 4 to Feb 4: The Following: On line tourneys: 72 Total 1st or 2nds all denominations. --19=====.2638. 2 firsts in 16 of $50 or $100 sngs.======.125 17 first or seconds in 56 sngs & tourneys under $50.--===.3035 No tourney wins or final tables any denomination. about 50-50 advancing beyond first round. So Far For February 3 0f 9 in sngs $20 and under. 3 are firsts. I labor in the Salt mines of the $1 sngs and the coal mines of the $5 sngs to work up a stake into the 50 and 100 tourneys, only to get yellow submarine Curt revenage me in a tourney after doubling up 4 times in a row, from the last five hands out. Obie Wan and British Petro lurk and hide and walla their max bet hits and my protective bet losses.( Kaminairi, John Chai, Stubbs, I'm jealous) I'm a super star minor leaguer, get my chance at a cup of coffee, (Reachy's blend by the way) and get sent back down for more seasoning. (add some bitters and tears) But, time and age are running out. No one wants a designated hittter with a .125 batting average. Now one can claim luck, or cards, or position. But the summary reality is: In the lower stakes games with lower to average players such as I....I can hold my own. When you get into the bigs, then the blessed Karma of THOSE who can prevails. Somes got it. Somes don't. And dat's da twuth. badda bump bump. By the way, the overall percent win while adequate is still an overall $ loss. Not unlike, I more than presume, most(I said MOST. Not the exceptional) players experience. Only so many get to be top 5%.
cost of SNG Keep at it, Noman. The stats you keep now will help you find the levels you are sucessful at, as well as when you turn the corner on your $50 games. I also have the feeling that playing primarily SnGs are not as good of a deal than the scheduled Multi-table tourneys. Not only to the MTTs often go off with an overlay, but the format allow you to parlay your advantage over multiple rounds and pay less in rake. For example, lets say that you take 1st in a 7-person SNG 16% of the time and 2nd 16% of the time (and 3rd 16% of the time). For a 50 SNG, that's (.16*245+ .16*105 - 55)/55 = 1.8% profit. But for a 3-round 49 player tourney (49 to 14 to 6), the return is ((.32 * .48 * (2450/6) -55)/55 = 14% profit. The 3 rounds allows your small advantage to increase exponentially to get a better return.
SnG's play needs good money management Here are my online stats in money games at Bet21 as of January 31 2007(see attachment). The period covered is almost 4 months (started October7). I played a total of 638 money games (424 Sng's and 138 Prize Pool Tournaments). I'm in the money 33 % of the time in SnG's (424 games), but it still a losing proposition. I make up for my losses there in the Prize Pool Tournaments, where EV is very high. SnG remains the best practice field, in my mind, for EBJ, but you have to manage your money carefully. Two months ago, I posted my stats (367 games). At that time, I was + $56. Now, after almost doubling my number of games, I stand at - $203. Since November 1 (three months ago), my bankroll fluctuated between a low of $174 to a high of $1,800. I tried high level SnG's ($100 and $200) when the BR allowed me to take a shot. However, I'm convinced that too many SnG's at a high level can put you in the hole very fast. Think about it. If you only play at the $100 level, you would need to be in the money at least 33% of the time to be somewhat even. To make money at that level, I think you would need to be regularly at close to 40%. Now, tell me, with the level of play one finds at that level, I would be surprised to find anybody at 40% +, including the pros.
ok guys - no one feel bad - more dismal results - went over my last month of play on UB/Bet21 - 38 sngs, most $5, but some $10 and $1 - won 8, 2nd 6 - 21.05% win, 15.79% 2nd - giving an edge of 47% to win - and 10.53% for 2nd - edge of 29% for in the money 51 tournaments - again - focus on $5, but also some $10 and $1/$100guaranteed - also the $25,000 guaranteed in here - 9 final tables - giving me 17.65% in the money net profit +$17.40 odd fact - all of my profit came from the $5 sngs - lost money on all other formats/buyins - even if only marginal loss - why are we doing this
Good Stats, Archie! As I posted earlier, I agree that the Sit n Gos are going to be a drag to most people's bankroll. I also don't think they are that wonderful for practice, since the payout does not match any payout commonly seen in tournaments (first pays 2.3x what second pays, and 3rd pays 0). I think the best practice is probably actually the freeroll tournaments (learning to beat ploppies is an important skill). Some things pop out at looking at your stats, Archie. At the $50 tourneys, your finals % is quite high, but you are tanking in the finals. Is there something you are doing differently in the finals? 2 of 3 in satellites is great, as well. The thing I don't like about tracking % in money is that it's hard to make anything out of it, since the field sizes change so much. You are in the money 22.8% of the time. For a 30-man tourney, par is 20%, but for a 50-person tourney, par is 12%. That's why I use as my primary metric the "Rounds advanced compared to average". It has the advantage of being a consistent metric in most situations. I finally figured out how to post a file, so I am posting my spreadsheet template with some example lines if people want to use it as a way to track their results.
Well, i think everyone's reasons are different. But I would argue the following: By tracking stats religiously, you can have proof that you are a winning or losing player, or whether it is too small a sample to trust. To find leaks in your game, especially for those that can beat the smaller games but not the high stakes games. To see how you are doing compared to your peers, at least the peers willing to post honestly. To help determine your "hourly rate", so you can make a decision as to whether your time is better spent playing BJ tournaments vs. other things you could be doing.
Keeping Stats is well worth it Keeping personal records, I find, is a good habit for the following reasons : 1 - Time to regroup, time for a reality check - You're in a slump, don't get the cards, the results are not there, you're down on yourself : take a few hours to do your stats. Psychologically, it's a major break in the action and a good way to start anew with a better attitude. You might actually be surprised that you're doing better than you thought and that you're only one or two good results away to being back where you want to be. 2 - Time to learn - Your record speaks for itself. You learn where you do well and where you don't. Yes, Toonces, I'm very well aware of my dismal performance in finals of tournaments (way too many 6th spots). Now it seems that everytime I make a final, I'm saying to myself don't finish last. Bad attitude. Too tentative. I should think more about playing the game and less about the result I wish to have. Bad attitude, unconsciously,affect your game, I believe (it changed this week : I had a win in the $1000 Guaranteed and, in the $2500, a second and ...a sixth ). As for my observation about SnG's being good practice, I stand by it. To improve, you need to confront different level of competition and that's where you'll find them. The best players mainly play the $30 + games. That's where you'll find the most interesting jockeying around, strategic playing,etc. Also, there's money for the taking every round. As for freerolls and learning how to beat ploppies, the effort is not worth it. The SnG's freerolls, I believe, is about the most boring and frustrating game in the world. I play them because I have too for qualifying events. I still win one in three. Believe me I can plop with the best and also beat them being conservative (the dealer deck is definitely different than in the money games at Bet21: the busting streaks of dealers are unreal).
why we do this my question was really meant to be a little sarcastic comment about why we play online at all - given my $17.40 profit for the month - I do think that keeping stats is very valuable - it is a reality check - at times when I am not making many final tables - (live tbj) - it is reassuring to be able to go back and see I do have an edge - and then can be reassured that it is only a matter of time until that edge pays off - also - when I am making final tables - a reality check that maybe I am not really that good - but going through a lucky streak - I see online play as practice for live tourneys - especially because ebj gives you so many final hand type situations with the elimination hands - also - a chance to practice/try out - different strategies - so am not really that concerned with my edge on line - just that I have enough BR to keep me playing the cheapo games to play around with new strategies and tactics - though the $25,000 guarantees are very tempting - with the cheapo qualifiers and the positive ev when you get through on a qualifier - of course if I was toonces - I would have a different perspective I have found - over the months I have played online - I generally do better when I go up a little in the buy-ins - better at $20 than $10, better at $10 than $5 - etc. - most likely because I play more seriously as the money goes up - I think I do better in the sngs than the tourneys - because I play so much live b&m tbj, where it is single advance - so play something of a win or die strategy - and do best when doing that - when it is 3 or 4 advance - I tend to get more conservative - and that is not my best way of playing -
