![]() |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
This is my graph so far. I started out with -3% ROI for $2 playing 4 tables at once, and then moved up and had a 26% ROI for $5 playing 2 tables at once. I then move up to $10 and have a huge drop, playing 2 tables at once. The thing is, with a different username about 2 months ago, I had a decent ROI at $2 4-tabling, then moved up to $5 and faced a similar drop.
Here's my current graph: ![]() I started playing $5 around game 50, and the huge drop is when I moved up to $10. I know I could be facing a cold streak, but man...didn't think it would be this bad. I did suffer some dirty beats though... |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
It's probably just psychological. I can't tell any difference.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
its only 6 buyins...
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() ![]() It's not getting much better [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You are posting your results after playing 6 tournaments? That's not close to enough to tell much from the results alone.
After n single table tournaments, the standard deviation of your ROI is roughly 170%/squareroot(n). A rough 95% confidence interval (quite rough after only 6 tournaments) is about your observed results +- 2 standard deviation. After 6 tournaments with a ROI of -60%, your confidence interval ranges from -200% to +80%. Your description of your win rates at the other stakes was also unwarranted given the sample sizes. When you said your ROI was 26%, that should have been 26% +- 54%. It can take hundreds of tournaments to determine whether you are beating a level, and thousands or tens of thousands to estimate your ROI accurately. $10 SNGs are slightly tougher than $5 SNGs. There are fewer hopeless players, and a slightly higher concentration of half-decent players. However, you never established that you were beating $5 SNGs, and it is quite possible that you are a losing player at both levels. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You need to play hundreds of these games for statistics to have any real meaning. Keep looking at your graph after every few games will do your brain in. Expect a lot more variance than you have had so far.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On top, bankroll management is quite important. You should have at around 50 buy-ins to move up to the next level, i.e. for $5.50 you need a bankroll of $275 to be safe.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
very similar
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
On top, bankroll management is quite important. You should have at around 50 buy-ins [/ QUOTE ] Bankroll management is for winning players. Having 50 buy-ins may be safe for players winning at a decent rate for micro SNGs. More buy-ins are needed for players who are marginal winners, or who are winning at a decent rate for high stakes SNGs. The OP has not provided much evidence of winning, much less winning at a decent rate. Players without a winning track record should set a budget (which doesn't need to be aything close to 50 buy-ins) and stay within it. By the way, it is ok to take shots at the next level with fewer buy-ins that you would need to play at the higher level without ever moving down. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I completely agree, my post was more a suggestion to play a couple hundred STT at the $1 and $2 levels before moving to higher buy-ins. The OP implied that he was a winner at $2, then moved to $5 and had a similar drop. Good Bankroll Management would have forced him to move down to $2 to re-cover and re-build. I had a similar experience in moving up to fast and not realizing that I wasn't prepared - bankroll and knowledge wise - for the higher levels and am still working on getting my bankroll back to where it was.
|
![]() |
|
|