Attainable ROI at the 6.5 or 3.25 45-man turbos?

iloveny161 · #1 07-24-2007, 06:01 PM

Hey, just wondering what a good ROI would be for these turbos on stars... thanks!

Sherman · #2 07-24-2007, 06:05 PM

Someone posted about this last week. There was a bit of debate. I did some math.

You need to play ~1500 of them to be 95% confident that you have a 100% ROI.

So as far as I know, no one really knows.

MJBuddy · #3 07-24-2007, 07:06 PM

No one can play 1500 of them with 100% ROI without moving up :P

flyingmoose · #4 07-24-2007, 08:31 PM

All this talk of 100% in 45-man turbos seems silly to me. For comparison, only a handful of people have 100% at the 180s, and those last 3 times longer. I don't see how you can find enough edges in 1 hour of play to attain a 100% ROI.

I've been playing the $55s a lot lately and have a small sample at this point (~300 games) but I'd say 40% at the 55s would be outright destroying them.

Sherman · #5 07-25-2007, 01:37 AM

[ QUOTE ]
All this talk of 100% in 45-man turbos seems silly to me. For comparison, only a handful of people have 100% at the 180s, and those last 3 times longer. I don't see how you can find enough edges in 1 hour of play to attain a 100% ROI.

[/ QUOTE ]

People at the 3/45 turbo's are so atrocious. By atrocious I mean you have way way too much FE. Which is way better for you than them calling with junk. When they call with junk, sometimes they suck out and that costs you ROI. When they fold fold fold, that is massively +ROI. I've quadrupled my stack before w/out ever showing down a hand in one of these.

Anyhow, not saying a 100% is long term attainable, just saying it would take about ~1500 of them to be 95% sure.

MJBuddy · #6 07-25-2007, 02:00 AM

Well I think generally the smaller the field the smaller expected ROI you can ever expect.

I.E. Maintaining a 100% ROI in a STT = how possible? Exactly.

100% ROI is very possible in large field MTTs. They are also possible in 180s. So somewhere between 10 player tables and 180 player MTTs, 100% becomes possible. People argue that 45s have this benefit. I'd like to see someone stand up with that even over a much smaller sample size, but I'm certainly not going to say that's not possible.

But at the same time I think I'm going to invest my time and my variance into games where 100% is attainable more frequently. I'd be more interested in the return you can expect from 10 table MTTs, personally, than the 180s.