ROI after doubling up early

[HesseJam]

I looked at the issue again. A couple of months ago I said that my ROI after doubling up early was around 125%.

Latest research yielded lower figures. My ROI once I reach between 2800 and 3200 chips during the first 3 rounds and at least 8 players left is around 110%.

Conclusion: A real coinflip (50:50) at even stakes (like only SB and BB in the hand) yields an expected average ROI of 5% . Thus I should probably not engage in true coinflips. A 55:45 I should definitely do.

Keep in mind that this figure is only valid for me (a career 10% ROI player at the 15+1s).

[AJGibson]

Very Interesting, what sample size was this over?

[AJGibson]

Can you also account for the times you busted out early when attempting to double up, and adjust your ROI with this in mind.

[Bubblefish]

Interesting! A lost ”coin flip” will of course result in a negative ROI, but it allows you to play more SNGs per hour. Is this effect accounted for?

[suzzer99]

No, and just how much to account for it would be an interesting discussion.

[mackthefork]

Would you agree it makes sense to assume a big stack is worth more when you are against better players, because they know they have to fold, where poor players will just call you with 22/A2s on the bubble, and think they are geniuses because it held vs your 87s/KQo.

Mack

[K䲰䮥n]

Umm. Help me out here.

You play "loose aggressive" in the beginning; double up; have ~120% ROI.

You play "loose aggressive" in the beginning; bust out; fire up a new one; play more STTs/hour.

So after doubling up early you don't need to play shortstacked late game and bust out 5th or 4th frequently like you do when you play tight early. This works when playing continuously, not in sets.

Eh? [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[AJGibson]

[ QUOTE ]
You play "loose aggressive" in the beginning; and frequently bust out early

You play "loose aggressive" in the beginning; bust out; fire up a new one; play more STTs/hour and have a lower ROI and probably lower $/h.

[/ QUOTE ]
Busting 4th or 5th sucks as you've wasted more time and still got nothing, however at least you gave you self a better chance.

[K䲰䮥n]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You play "loose aggressive" in the beginning; and frequently bust out early

You play "loose aggressive" in the beginning; bust out; fire up a new one; play more STTs/hour and have a lower ROI and probably lower $/h.

[/ QUOTE ]
Busting 4th or 5th sucks as you've wasted more time and still got nothing, however at least you gave you self a better chance.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have slightly smaller $/hour (dunno, would you?); play more STTs/hour; generate more rake/hour; get more RB/hour; get more FPPs&VIPs/hour; buy an iPod with disappearing buttons.

[Gelford]

My intuition says this: Your tournament equity does not double when you double up your chips, so first impression is that while you are 50-50 to double up in chip, you are not accepting a 50-50 wager on tourney equity as this does not double when doubling chips.

To me OP makes no sense ... it is a partial analysis. You have to subtract from that amazing 110 roi the times you lose a coinflip.

If this should be interesting, then you should take a nice sample of sngs and filter those in to two camps. Those where you take a coinflip early and those where you do not. Compare ROI's between those two categories.

Intuitively for me taking coinflips early is a nay nay. (off course if there is a nice overlay, that is something else)