The Bax Limit Theorem
 

I was going through Bluff magazine's database of tournament results, and happened to check out the stats for Johnny Bax on Stars. The guy is obviously one of the top online players, and his overall ROI backs this up. The wierd thing is that his performance isn't consistent over all buy-in levels. He is killing the game at $100 BIs and under, but above that he is leaking like a sieve. This is not some sample size issue, this is over 400 tourneys at those levels since 1/1/06. I don't believe it has anything to do with field size either, since he is playing all sorts of field sizes at every level.

The question is, why does he seem to reach his "limit" at $150+ buy ins?

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

Still could be a sample size issue. Especially if you are using ROI as your guide. One sunday million win and I think he will be well into the black numbers for buy-ins over $150.

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

I'm not saying that this is why his results are like that, as there's obviously a ton of variance even with that many tourneys, but um... there's higher skill level at higher buyins? If you don't have higher roi at $10 rebuys than $100 rebuys, you need a bigger sample size.

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

You are stupid

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

I played next to a higher-buyin tournament player at TurningStone today.

He was about 50 years old and is an experienced high-buyin expert.

He told me his secret was ALWAYS folding the first hand of a new level.

In fact, he stressed that if an opponent went allin with KK and showed him the first hand of a $1K tournament, he would gladly fold AA.

I mean, whats best case scenario? You double up... who cares!

LOL EXPERTS

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]
You are stupid

[/ QUOTE ]

Can I safely infer that this comment is directed at OP despite the fact that the post indicates it is RE:Shermn27? My feelings are fragile.

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You are stupid

[/ QUOTE ]

Can I safely infer that this comment is directed at OP despite the fact that the post indicates it is RE:Shermn27? My feelings are fragile.

[/ QUOTE ]

oops, was directed at OP

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You are stupid

[/ QUOTE ]

Can I safely infer that this comment is directed at OP despite the fact that the post indicates it is RE:Shermn27? My feelings are fragile.

[/ QUOTE ]

if no rpelier is chosen, it, by default, chooses the last replier available when you start your post

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

I'm not gonna bother to look up his results but I know he kills the 109r which should definitely be considered $150+ BI tourney.

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not gonna bother to look up his results but I know he kills the 109r which should definitely be considered $150+ BI tourney.

[/ QUOTE ]

He does kill the 100r (only the prize pool portion is listed in the database not the fee), the 100 freezeout, and on down. But he falls off a cliff (no pun intended) at $150+, despite having won $10k in a $150 a few weeks ago. I'm not trying to bash him or anything, it just seems like there must be an explanation for this trend.

P.S. You call me stupid for posting this topic, but you let it slide when someone claims that a sample of over 400 tourneys at about -20% ROI is meaningless?

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

meaningless is one thing, but if you think it means he's a losing player with any degree of confidence, you should take a stats class

lol at "leaking like a sieve"

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

At the tourneys above $150 the players are better and therefor if you have an edge it is smaller. With a smaller edge it takes an even larger sample size for that edge to show.

Repost when Bax has 4000+ tourneys at $150+ buyins.

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]
meaningless is one thing, but if you think it means he's a losing player with any degree of confidence, you should take a stats class

lol at "leaking like a sieve"

[/ QUOTE ]

Thinly veiled beat?

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

If I never played a $150+ tourney on Stars I'd have so much more monies.

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

Id be a losing player at stars without $100+ buyins. yeah i suck

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]
If I never played a $150+ tourney on Stars I'd have so much more monies.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

lol @ trying to comprehend the variance in mtts.

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]


Repost when Bax has 40,000+ tourneys at $150+ buyins.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most Stars $150+ fields are enormous.

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

uhhh just checked the extended DB, Bax is up 11k in the 162 on stars.

LoL at OP



up 85k in the 11r WTF.

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]
I played next to a higher-buyin tournament player at TurningStone today.

He was about 50 years old and is an experienced high-buyin expert.

He told me his secret was ALWAYS folding the first hand of a new level.

In fact, he stressed that if an opponent went allin with KK and showed him the first hand of a $1K tournament, he would gladly fold AA.

I mean, whats best case scenario? You double up... who cares!

LOL EXPERTS

[/ QUOTE ]

If you can somehow supply a more detailed description of this guy I would be soooooooooooo grateful.

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

all of these

[ QUOTE ]


Repost when Bax has 4000+ tourneys at $150+ buyins.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I never played a $150+ tourney on Stars I'd have so much more monies.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
lol @ trying to comprehend the variance in mtts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I played next to a higher-buyin tournament player at TurningStone today.

He was about 50 years old and is an experienced high-buyin expert.

He told me his secret was ALWAYS folding the first hand of a new level.

In fact, he stressed that if an opponent went allin with KK and showed him the first hand of a $1K tournament, he would gladly fold AA.

I mean, whats best case scenario? You double up... who cares!

LOL EXPERTS

[/ QUOTE ]

If you can somehow supply a more detailed description of this guy I would be soooooooooooo grateful.

[/ QUOTE ]

Some older guy sitting on my left who was telling me how some young kid made a horrible call when he shoved 77 and the young kid called with AK. I said that if the kid folded AK in the situation, it would be like throwing away money, he didnt get it.

He also advocated not playing AA the first hand of each level.

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I never played a $150+ tourney on Stars I'd have so much more monies.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

cuz tougher players

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

my limit is exclusively the $162 level, anything below or above I "suck" at.

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]
lol @ trying to comprehend the variance in mtts.

[/ QUOTE ]
QFTQFTQFTQFTQFTQFT

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

You're calling this a "theorem"??

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

I'm down $6,300 after 214 $150s, and I won that tournament once.

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

i'm a losing mtt player on every site but ftp now

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

Shaniac,

How often have you cashed in the 214 tries? 214 X $150 is "only" ~$32K spent on the tournament & most wins these days are for close to $30K. How long ago was your win & how much was it for?

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

Buy-in Played ROI Expectation Winnings Buy-in Rake Profit

$150 214 -18% -$29 $28,368 $32,100 $2,568 -$6,300

http://www.bluffmagazine.com/thepoke...asp?tid=154980

PokerStars -
Tourney ID: 20002201 Buy-in: $150+12 Players: 586
Game Type: NL Hold'em Rebuys: 0 Add-ons: 0
Start Time: 2/20/2006 - 21:10 End Time: 2/21/2006 - 02:24 Prize Pool: $87,900
Place Username Payout
1. shaniac $21,975

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]
i'm a losing mtt player on every site but ftp now

[/ QUOTE ]

Brag: 3.83% ROI on Stars.
Beat: -9% ROI over 108 $100 rebuys despite winning it once.

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]
Beat: -9% ROI over 108 $100 rebuys despite winning it once.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you're pretty much down the rake.

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

brag: up 85K+ in $162s,
beat: down a [censored] in $215s/320s
variance: break even in $530s and 1ks

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]
Buy-in Played ROI Expectation Winnings Buy-in Rake Profit

$150 214 -18% -$29 $28,368 $32,100 $2,568 -$6,300

http://www.bluffmagazine.com/thepoke...asp?tid=154980

PokerStars -
Tourney ID: 20002201 Buy-in: $150+12 Players: 586
Game Type: NL Hold'em Rebuys: 0 Add-ons: 0
Start Time: 2/20/2006 - 21:10 End Time: 2/21/2006 - 02:24 Prize Pool: $87,900
Place Username Payout
1. shaniac $21,975

[/ QUOTE ]

Ty Nat. You're a gun.

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Beat: -9% ROI over 108 $100 rebuys despite winning it once.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you're pretty much down the rake.

[/ QUOTE ]

At the risk of being a nit, the rake is a much smaller % in those. I've never paid much attention to my actual results, partly because I want to believe I'm better than they would lead me to believe, and partly because I realize they're basically meaningless.

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]
At the risk of being a nit, the rake is a much smaller % in those.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, forgot the 'rebuy' part kills the rake %... whoops.

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

Okay, using a measure beyond ROI, I get the following for JohnnyBax only using his Stars Results:

Buyins less than $110. Also includes $55 Rebuys. Total tournaments = 1798.

Bax is 4.01 Times more likely than random chance to win a tournament on average. Using a 95% CI, his upper limit is 5.92 and his lower limit is 2.68 times more likely than random chance to win the tournament. For those who don't know...this is damn good.

Buyins over $110 (includes $109 rebuys). For a total of 1202 tournaments.

Bax is 2.13 Times more likely than random chance to win a tournament on average. Using a 95% CI, his upper limit is 3.55 and his lower limit is 1.26 times more likely than random chance to win the tournament. Pretty good evidence that he is a winning player even at this buy-in level.

Note that these estimates are representative of size of field.

End debate.

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

shermn...

can you explain these numbers and where they come from....I find it very interesting.

ty

Re: The Bax Limit Theorem
 

[ QUOTE ]
This is not some sample size issue, this is over 400 tourneys....

[/ QUOTE ]
lol?