ROI - What is a good target for small live SNG's?

[AMT]

ill talk to micro, he forgot to nap today.

[Ibanez8185]

No lock yet? wow

And 400% is not at all sustainable. I play SNGs in a very very VERY soft home game and I'm hovering around 90%-100% over 150 games. Unless your playing against the mental handicap I don't think over 150% is sustainable.

[microbet]

[ QUOTE ]
No lock yet? wow

And 400% is not at all sustainable. I play SNGs in a very very VERY soft home game and I'm hovering around 90%-100% over 150 games. Unless your playing against the mental handicap I don't think over 150% is sustainable.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're probably just getting unlucky. I understand you lose a lot of 70/30s.

[Webster]

You are saying LIVE SNGs are 5 times easier then online?

So basically it is 60% flops?

[fishyak]

400-500% would make SNG's VASTLY more profitable than LLHE. Yet, most SNG's charge a higher percentage in fees than the standard rake in either LLHE or 1/2 NL. At the 30-50% ROI range, the profits look closer to comparable, which makes a lot more sense.

I am just keeping a basic spreadsheet of all my live play to make sure that I am honest with myself and hopefully can demonstrate long term improvement in any part of poker I choose to pursue. I believe that winners keep score and that golf courses have a par that you play against. In LLHE "par" is 1 BB/hr. That measure doesn't work in SNG's. What's "par" here? It looks like ROI of 130%+ or so. And yes, I know that is only meaningful after a sufficient # of rounds.

[fishyak]

[ QUOTE ]
POS live SnGs

[/ QUOTE ]

eurythmech - you obviously have me mistaken for someone who cares what you think or say. Don't waste your precious time on me by responding to any of my posts, OK?

I heard bigjoe was crushing $40,000 9 man's for 1000% so it's definately sustainable moran's.

[microbet]

Ok, sorry. I was just kidding. 30% is probably about right, maybe even a little less because the rake usually sucks live.

Except the question still is silly since you can't target an ROI and you'll never ever know what your ROI is.

[fishyak]

Your ROI is easy to know - (all$out/all$in)-1. Just keep track. Right now my math is 646/440 for an ROI of 56%.

I'll admit it is not "statistically significant" but it remains a usable measure of performance. Even if you've played golf only once, your score against par means something.

If it's so "silly" can you suggest a better measure of performance that captures: 1) all income and expenses, 2) includes information about profit or loss, and 3) allows for comparisons between players and "courses" if the players keep score honestly?

[DevinLake]

He saying that your 56% ROI as calculated would have a very small confidence level Like your ROI may be 56% +/- 60%. Therefore, regardless of what you calculate it really isn't a measure of how you are doing in the game until you have played thousands.