[Fiasco]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
any sort of math

[/ QUOTE ]
Let's put aside the speculation and look at toerazor's numbers. First, some assumptions. 1. 514 games all 9-man SNGs with 10% rake. 2. ITM of 43% 3. Equal placements of 1st/2nd/3rd. (This equates to the reported 32% ROI).

Now we can establish a confidence interval that makes a quantitative statement about his true ROI. With 95% confidence we can state that the true ROI is at least 19%. That dog can hunt! (Coincidentally, if he loses his next 100 games... his ROI will be 19%!)

Naturally to 'go pro' you need more than just poker skills, but that's not my point. In this case 500 games is more than enough to draw some strong conclusions about long-term ROI.

[Calculation details: Assume normal distribution with sample std dev based on four types of placements: 1/2/3/none, weighted 5/3/2/0. Variance = 3.38, SSD = 1.84. 95% one-side confidence interval, alpha = 1.645. Subtract 10% rake.]

Now there is an expectation (think Bayesian stats) of attainable rates, and I think it fair to argue his true ROI is likely less than the current 32%. (Like a ball player who hits .460 in May is rarely finishes the season above .400). But at the same time he is not playing turbos (less variance and higher ROI) and is not doing extensive multi-tabling (which often is assumed when people discuss attainable rates).

[/ QUOTE ]

Friggin awesome, thank you. Over 19% ROI with a 95% confidence! Thats pretty damn good.

And if Im not mistaken that would mean that the upper bound of that 95% confidence interval is 45% ROI.

tyvm dktoller, this is exactly what this thread needed.