g'day all... i am a newbie... i've just completed my first 500 $1 single table elimination blackjack at ultimatebet... what would be a good profit over 500 games? how much would the pros 'expect' to win if they play 500 $1 sngs (not that they would!!!) cheers... cafe au lait
I'm not a pro... but I played over 800 SnGs and kept stats. In my opinion, if you're in the money around 33% to 35% of the time, you're probably breaking even or close (+ or - depending on the number of 1rst and seconds). Anything over that is pretty good. Against that type of competition, my guess would be that pros would be in the money between 40 and 50 per cent of the time. Now, do the maths!!! Don't forget that the quality of the competition as a lot to do with your potential results. You can not assume that you would get the same results in $20 + game as in a $1 game.
any profit is good - remember that they take a 10% rake off the entries - so if you have a profit - you're at least 10% better than the average in those games - in fact - figure the number of games you have played - the total cost to buy-in with the rake - then compare to total profit - if profit is 25% of cost - you are running about 35% advantage - that would be pretty good - if you are making a profit at $1 - try moving up to $5 games -
g'day guys g'day archie and rkuczek... thanks archie... what are your breakdowns for the 800 sngs for 1st 2nd 3rd ... 7th? payouts are 1st (70%) 2nd (30%) using your numbers for the pros (45% in the money) assuming that they when they are in the money they come first 60% of those times... their return after the 10% entry fee is... 0.45 x (0.6 x 0.7 + 0.4 x 0.3) x 7 - 0.1 = 1.601 60% profit... WOW i have definitely NOT made $300 in my 500 games! rkuczek... you've mentioned that a profit of 25% is good... what about 10%, 15% and 20%? i am trying to evaluate whether i should move up to $5 tables... and i would only be happy to do that if i am convinced that i am 'very good' at the $1 tables... thank you... cheers... cafe
edge I played a lot of $1 tables when I first started playing UB/Bet21 - started with a $25 deposit - so $1 was pretty much what I had bankroll to play - I think your edge at $1 tables is actually limited by the bad play - so much wild betting - someone will get lucky and hit - so the advantage of skilled play is maybe actually reduced - remember to win at all - you have to be overcoming the 10% rake - so any level of profit - if you have enough bankroll to cover maybe 20-30 buy-ins - then move up - and give it a try -
You've forgotten to subtract the losses from the 55% out-of-the-money occasions. 1.601 - 0.55 = 1.051 That would be just 5% profit.
Here are my last updated stats on Bet21, covering a six month period between October 7, 2006 and April 12, 2007. As you can see in the attachment, I averaged around 115 SnGs a month (692 total) at different levels (629 SnGs at the 1, 5, 10, 20 and 30 levels, where I show a profit, and 63 games at the 50, 100 and 200 levels where I registered big losses because, in my opinion, I was not playing at a confort level money wise and could not afford to put in the numbers needed to get reliable stats). It took me awhile and it cost me money to find my highest confort level (30 +3), which is a level where I could still find the best players when the higher levels SnG's could not fill up. Note : I only played the 1 +.10 (16 games) when it was the only game in town (my 50% in the money at that level is as irrelevant as my 8% at level 100) My overall stats in SnGs, I think, are representative of my play (692 SnG's, 33.7% in the money - 110 first and 123 seconds; if you transpose these numbers at any one level, you would show a profit at that particular level : e.g. let's transpose these numbers at the 50 + 3 level : Cost : 692 x 50+5 = $38,060 Money won : 110 firsts x 245 = $26,950 + 123 seconds = $12,915 = $39,865 Spread = + $1805 Profit = 4.7% Sorry Cafe but I did not break my stats down after 1st and 2nd place in SnG's. I know something, though: third place sucks the most. I left the site April 12 and came back 3 weeks later under another screen name, but I havent compiled any stats the last two months. I play less SnG's but still over 50 a month (mainly the 5 +.50, the other SnG's levels having dropped dramatically on the site, except the 1 + .10 which remains the most popular). That's how I could say that I played more than 800 SnGs total (a minimum in my mind). Lesson : Find a level or levels where you're confortable money wise and stay there.
g'day colin to rkuczek... do you find a great difference in the play between $1 and $5 tables? i have found a bit of a difference between $1 and $5 tournaments... london colin... g'day... thanks for your reply... i think i did subtract the 55% out of the money occassions by multiplying initially by 0.45 (which is 1 - 0.55)... am i right? to archie... thanks for your honesty in posting your results... do you find that there is a big difference in play between the $30 and $50 level or are they just the same set of players... looking at the number of games played... do you think it is just variance that you've done much better at some levels than others? i've played a handful of $30 ones... but i've made sure that each time phil hellmuth was playing! :laugh: cheers... cafe
oops Sorry. Brain failure on my part. I was thinking in terms of an EV calculation, but the way you've done it the subtraction that I thought was missing is actually the part right at the end, where you subtract 1 from 1.601. Doing the calculation my way, I do indeed get the answer 0.601. For the record, it's - Code: Result Prob Value (lose) -1.1 .55 -.605 (2nd place) +1 .18 .18 (1st place) +3.8 .27 1.026 ------- 0.601 -------
difference in play I think the higher the buy-in the better the play as a general rule - I have played from $1 to $30 SNGs and Tournaments - and think there is a noticible improvement in play as you go up the levels - the biggest jumps are from the freerolls to the $1 tablea, then from the $1 to the $5 tables - not really all that much difference between $10, $20, $30 - but some - probably because the same players all bounce between the $10, $10, $30 games - I have actually found that over the long run - I do a little better in the higher level games - most likely because the play is more predictable -
difference in play archie... 3rd place is indeed annoying... although... quite often it is quite correct to go for first even if it means bubbling out sometimes... the difference between 1st and 2nd prize money is greater than that of the 2nd prize money itself... rkuczek... i strongly agree with you about the difference in the level of play between playchips and $1 buy-ins... as for $1 buy-ins themselves... the way most table plays... somebody gets out to a big early lead by betting half or all their stack... and if they actually have the sense to sit on that lead... its not easy to beat them... which leads to the question... is it a profitable strategy to go all-in first up? i've seen some people do it with moderate success london colin... i live in australia and actually made my way to manchester united's last game of the premiership season against west ham united... do you know what the chances of getting some cricket tickets for the lords test match? cheers... cafe
all-in? my opinion - it is foollish to go all-in on the first bet - or on any bet that you don't have too - if needed to survive - do it - but not otherwise - I think some people delude themselves into thinking it is a good idea - because one can luck out and hit several times in a row - but - the probability is only 44% to win a single bet - and 48% to lose - even if you hit - some one will come after you - and there is no guarantee that you will either win or finish second - in the long run - the all-in up-front strategy is a money loser I also think the minimum bet strategy is only marginal in ebj - with only 5 hands to work with - before you need to set up for the first elimination hand - it is unlikely that you will get a lead from min betting - it is very likely that someone (or two or three) will hit a few and get out ahead of you - a lot to consider/talk about on this - but I like to go either low or high - but not the lowest or highest - depending on what the other bettors do - take what they give you - but not to an extreme -
I had my suspicions! I presume you are not saying you travelled half way around the world just to watch a football match? I'm afraid I'm a bit of an armchair sports fan, so I'm not familiar with how easy it is to get test match tickets. Are you talking about the next match at Lord's - England v. India, 19th - 23rd July? Does this mean you already have a trip to the UK booked? I found the relevant web site, which seems to indicate there are a limited number of tickets still available. - http://www.lords.org/tickets/information-availability Are you Australian, or do you just live there? I enquired whether there were any Australian members on the forum, at the start of the last Ashes series. As it turned out, I was glad there weren't any at the time, to gloat over England's humiliation.
all-in coup rkuczek... in a 7 seater game... seat 2 and 3 are almost always going to be early position for the first elimination hand (seat 1 does get lucky from time to time when somebody gets eliminated before their button and therefore seat 1 would have one of the best positions for hand 8) it may not be such a 'bad' idea to go all-in if you have seat 2 or 3... the thinking is like this... assuming your numbers are correct about percentage wins and loses (w = 44% l = 48% push = 8%)... the chances of you doubling up (or 150% up with a blackjack) before busting is 44/(44+48) = 47.8% if out of these 47.8% of the games you manage to get into the money 2 out of 3 times (a bit of an assumption but not so unrealistic given you've doubled up???) and out of those times you win half the time... then your profit is... $3.50 = 50% x $4.90 + 50% x $2.10 $1.10 = entry fee 0.478 x 2/3 x $3.50 - $1.10 = $0.16 a profit for a bad seat... not bad huh? cheers... cafe
armchair sports london colin... i did travel half way around the world to watch the football... i won a package all expenses paid for... it was awesome... i am also a big fan of the sports... football... cricket... you name it... with no warne or mcgrath... the poms are definiately a chance in 2009... i have no respect for the england oneday team but their test team is not bad at all compared to the rest of the 'top 8'... what's your footy team? cheers... cafe
brag post i just won the 12am $100 guarantee tournament $1 buy-in tournament! the field was 60 strong (actually... 1 strong and 59 weak :laugh: ) and i took down $37.50... a profit of $36.40... which means... 33 more buy-ins!!!! :laugh: i bet bragging about a $1 buy-in win must be a first at this forum!
actually you've got 6 $5 tourney buy-ins! time to move up! and some gloating/bragging is always allowed
Excellent. I hope the package included a few days for sightseeing. Even all expenses paid, it's a long way to come just for the football. Ironically, it was only in the onedayers that England salvaged any pride in Australia. But then came the World Cup and that all vanished. 2009 is a long way away. I think there is plenty of time for England to either get much better or much worse, judging by the huge difference in their performance in the previous two Ashes series. We shall see .... The Twenty20 World Cup in South Africa sounds like it could be entertaining. I don't suppose you know of anyone offering a free trip as a prize? I still count Blackburn Rovers as my team, since that's where I'm originally from. Plus, it's good for the soul to support a team with little chance of winning anything. Back on the subject of blackjack; do you have any live tournaments in Australia, or are you limited to online play, just like we are in the UK?
London Colin I know they host blackjack tournaments in Australia and New Zealand at land base casinos, or at least did 8 months ago. Their tournaments are normally about no more then 36 players at a $5,000 entry fee, or at least the ones I have been told about. They also have team play down there.
