Check out our brand new Local Poker Communities! Get updates and interact with poker players in your area.
Visit the United States Poker Community | Visit the California Poker Community | Read more about the Launch of P5s Local

Full Tilt 45 mans ROI

Reply to Thread
  1. Automatic Loser Automatic Loser is offline

    Phillipsburg, NJ
    United States

    Posts: 146
    Joined: May 09

    Jul 13th, 2010 (7/13/2010 8:52am)

    Finally decided to take poker seriously and improve my game. Tweaked my game quite a bit. Started grinding the $11s in June and moved up the the $26s. For the $11s I have a 29% ROI over 546 games. For the $26s I have a 20% over 375 games. Are these sample sizes even significant? I'm assuming my ROIs are at least decent, but I don't really know what the norm is for a solid player. Any input?
    Edited By: Automatic Loser Jul 13th, 2010 at 08:56 AM
  2. vats12 vats12 is offline

    Windsor
    Canada

    Posts: 420
    Joined: Nov 08

    Jul 13th, 2010 (7/13/2010 8:55am) in reply to Automatic Loser

     
    Originally Posted by Automatic Loser View Post

    Are these sample sizes even significant? Any input?

    the answer your looking for is no
  3. ozzieowen ozzieowen is offline

    Newcastle Under Lyme
    United Kingdom

    Posts: 147
    Joined: Oct 06

    Jul 13th, 2010 (7/13/2010 9:04am) in reply to vats12

    I'll answer your question properly since some (alot) of ppl just love to be d**ks.

    Your sample size is not the highest but a 29% ROI over that many games does indicate that you are at least competant or just on a hell of a run. The fact that you are a winner in the $26s ove a few hundred as well would push me in the direction that you are a decent player at them. I cant tell you what a decent ROI is for the tilt ones as I play stars normally. On stars a 15% ROI is decent over a large number of games.....5k+ games. 20% is amazing. With the structure of tilt though i think 20% ROI is definatly sustainable but I may be wrong.

    Just keep grinding.....posting hands and constantly trying to improve. Hope I could help a bit.
     
  4. Automatic Loser Automatic Loser is offline

    Phillipsburg, NJ
    United States

    Posts: 146
    Joined: May 09

    Jul 13th, 2010 (7/13/2010 9:07am) in reply to ozzieowen

     
    Originally Posted by ozzieowen View Post

    I'll answer your question properly since some (alot) of ppl just love to be d**ks.

    Appreciate it.
    Thread Starter
  5. dgillis dgillis is offline Moderator

    CA
    United States

    Posts: 1,903
    Joined: Mar 08

    Jul 13th, 2010 (7/13/2010 3:12pm) in reply to Automatic Loser

    well, they aren't nothing, but it is small. if you want, look up pimpindonks (FT) on sharkscope, he was crushing those last time i played them.
     
  6. vats12 vats12 is offline

    Windsor
    Canada

    Posts: 420
    Joined: Nov 08

    Jul 13th, 2010 (7/13/2010 3:35pm) in reply to ozzieowen

     
    Originally Posted by ozzieowen View Post

    I'll answer your question properly since some (alot) of ppl just love to be d**ks.

    buddy im not being a dick...he asked if it was a big enough sample size and i answered him by saying no...while i agree that op is doing quite well in them thus far 1000 games is not nearly a big enough sample size..im sorry that u felt i was being a dick by answering one of op's questions
Reply to Thread

Similar Threads