[Clayton]

[ QUOTE ]
Online 100 is meaningless because you can MTT.

But, 100 live tournaments still meaningless?

[/ QUOTE ]

Your live ROI should be larger than your online ROI relative to buyin (of course), but still 100 tournaments per year is a very small samplesize.

I mean, you could get mathematical to try and determine your true edge, but it requires gauging your assumed skill level versus a qualitative value of the relative skill of the field, which is really tough.

Basically, if you are a thinking good player you should have a very good ROI in live tournaments longterm. Determining whether or not your true ROI is worth the cost/expenses of the live tournament circuit means comparing your thought processes and talents and skill versus players you feel have a very large edge in MTT's.

NY, I think what you want to know is "what is the upper bounds of the possible ROI for a tournament player", especially applicable to live tournaments, since that's what you do.

Fact is, after years of live tournaments you still won't be able to figure out your true ROI relative to the field, and don't forget things like the strength of the field changing and your own skills improving or diminishing.

All that matters is that your ROI is definitely good enough if you continue to apply yourself and get better.