Discuss...

Sky_JP

ROI is less important than your average hourly rate.

Sky_JP

In Response to Discuss...:

ROI is less important than your average hourly rate.
Posted by Sky_JP

Not necessarily saying I agree with this, but would be good to hear thoughts.

percival09

I think it's almost pointless to fixate on your ROI. It doesn't take into account time at all, and time spent playing at a certain level is an important thing to consider.

It could depend on what you want to achieve by playing poker, though. For a professional, 1-tabling a £2 tournament for 6 hours just isn't the thing to do, even if you achieve a 100% roi. Conversely, some recreational players aren't so bothered about profit so perhaps they feel 1 tabling a £2 mtt for 6 hours provides them with enough fun to make up for it. 

Even if that's true, then I still can't say ROI is more important. It's still not important. If a recreational player doesn't care about profit, then they shouldn't kid themselves into caring about roi. They just care about fun and enjoyment, which is completely fine. 

A professional and some recreationals would be much more concerned with multi-tabling higher buy-in tournaments, for a lower ROI, but a higher hourly.

MattBates

In Response to Re: Discuss...:

I think it's almost pointless to fixate on your ROI. It doesn't take into account time at all, and time spent playing at a certain level is an important thing to consider. It could depend on what you want to achieve by playing poker, though. For a professional, 1-tabling a £2 tournament for 6 hours just isn't the thing to do, even if you achieve a 100% roi. Conversely, some recreational players aren't so bothered about profit so perhaps they feel 1 tabling a £2 mtt for 6 hours provides them with enough fun to make up for it.  Even if that's true, then I still can't say ROI is more important. It's still not important. If a recreational player doesn't care about profit, then they shouldn't kid themselves into caring about roi. They just care about fun and enjoyment, which is completely fine.  A professional and some recreationals would be much more concerned with multi-tabling higher buy-in tournaments, for a lower ROI, but a higher hourly.
Posted by percival09

I agree with the Russian lady, espcially if your doing it as a profession or trying to maximise £. This was discussed in a forum thread by Jordz (I think). Will try and find it later. 

ROI for vanity, hourly for sanity!

Lambert180

https://www.skypoker.com/secure/poker/sky_lobby?action=show_static&page=poker_community_forums&plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&plckDiscussionId=Cat%3a57795ac2-1793-4377-b4cf-e124b0f555f4Forum%3adf77f82c-151f-4bea-aae1-fb423dcae1faDiscussion%3a55c1bd7b-6b00-4a04-876e-d7688de7111d

BigHawk89

Be interested to hear what the top MTT players on the site can achieve per hour? What would you be hoping to achieve if you were a full time professional player?

hhyftrftdr

In Response to Re: Discuss...:

Be interested to hear what the top MTT players on the site can achieve per hour? What would you be hoping to achieve if you were a full time professional player?
Posted by BigHawk89

Fortunately we have one of the top MTT players on the site in this very thread.

Plus Lambert.

jordz16

I tried to roughly work out my hourly rate when i started the other thread and it came out roughly £19. Im going to try and keep a proper track of it next year as i guess its something thats important to know.

BigRonnieC

In Response to Re: Discuss...:

I think it's almost pointless to fixate on your ROI. It doesn't take into account time at all, and time spent playing at a certain level is an important thing to consider. It could depend on what you want to achieve by playing poker, though. For a professional, 1-tabling a £2 tournament for 6 hours just isn't the thing to do, even if you achieve a 100% roi. Conversely, some recreational players aren't so bothered about profit so perhaps they feel 1 tabling a £2 mtt for 6 hours provides them with enough fun to make up for it.  Even if that's true, then I still can't say ROI is more important. It's still not important. If a recreational player doesn't care about profit, then they shouldn't kid themselves into caring about roi. They just care about fun and enjoyment, which is completely fine.  A professional and some recreationals would be much more concerned with multi-tabling higher buy-in tournaments, for a lower ROI, but a higher hourly.
Posted by percival09

I agree with this. I am a "casual" player and just do 1  x £1 sng most nights. If I take a smoke and a sip of wine during the game it is probably costing more than the winning amount. I just enjoy playing the odd game, have taken poker back up past couple months and have a good winning rate (have won about 80%+ of last 15 SNGs) but I'd make more money per hour stitching shoes in Vietnam. It is fun to win, at this level, but losing is no crisis or major annoyance - just something to seethe about if a bad beat.

I can't grasp how professional players can deal with extended losing streaks, esp if an MTT player paying out $5k/week and maybe winning 1/50 tournaments and cashing in say 1/20 (numbers out of nowhere). I know a pro personally, and he won a couple million in one year and I checked his record recently and he has been losing in live tournaments ever since. 

Long story short, ROI is nice to admire, how much you make, how much you can afford and what you want out of the game are more important.

Sky_JP

This was a bit of a leading question actually...

Everyone seems to agree that a higher hourly rate is more important than ROI. So, would everyone agree that it's better to be more aggressive in the early stages of a tournament, and potentially get chips in in riskier spots, in order to maximise your chance of winning/cashing when you play an MTT, while reducing the amount of hours your putting in?

ROI would decrease, but your hourly rate would increase.

Sky_JP

In Response to Re: Discuss...:

This was a bit of a leading question actually... Everyone seems to agree that a higher hourly rate is more important than ROI. So, would everyone agree that it's better to be more aggressive in the early stages of a tournament, and potentially get chips in in riskier spots, in order to maximise your chance of winning/cashing when you play an MTT, while reducing the amount of hours your putting in? ROI would decrease, but your hourly rate would increase.
Posted by Sky_JP

Once again, I'm not sure if I agree with this, but would be good to hear thoughts.

There's quite a few arguments against the point, and a few things to take into consideration, I think. There's a limited amount of tournaments, so you could argue that profits would decrease if you were to play this way. Then we have to consider that this would be a lot more volatile, and finally, what if you just want to play and do as well as possible in any given amount of time?

I'd say the strongest argument for, (only relevant to pros I guess), is that if you were working in a "normal 9-5" job, you wouldn't work double the hours for just a bit extra. Most people would jump at the opportunity to reduce their hours by 50%, for, say, a 10% pay cut.

Tikay10

In Response to Re: Discuss...:

In Response to Re: Discuss... : I agree with this. I am a "casual" player and just do 1  x £1 sng most nights. If I take a smoke and a sip of wine during the game it is probably costing more than the winning amount. I just enjoy playing the odd game, have taken poker back up past couple months and have a good winning rate (have won about 80%+ of last 15 SNGs) but I'd make more money per hour stitching shoes in Vietnam. It is fun to win, at this level, but losing is no crisis or major annoyance - just something to seethe about if a bad beat. I can't grasp how professional players can deal with extended losing streaks, esp if an MTT player paying out $5k/week and maybe winning 1/50 tournaments and cashing in say 1/20 (numbers out of nowhere). I know a pro personally, and he won a couple million in one year and I checked his record recently and he has been losing in live tournaments ever since.  Long story short, ROI is nice to admire, how much you make, how much you can afford and what you want out of the game are more important.
Posted by BigRonnieC

That is a terrific post Ronnie. Most of us are "fun players", & you sum it up perfectly imo.
 
It's completely different for Team Serious though, & rightly so, profit beats enjoyment for them, & probably rightly so.
 
Hope you continue to enjoy your poker.  

MattBates

In Response to Re: Discuss...:

This was a bit of a leading question actually... Everyone seems to agree that a higher hourly rate is more important than ROI. So, would everyone agree that it's better to be more aggressive in the early stages of a tournament, and potentially get chips in in riskier spots, in order to maximise your chance of winning/cashing when you play an MTT, while reducing the amount of hours your putting in? ROI would decrease, but your hourly rate would increase.
Posted by Sky_JP

You could maybe use this argument for your last game of the night but I feel like its an excuse/rationale for bad play or punting a stack. You want to be making the best decisions. Mid session you have a number of tables so this argument falls down as if you exit some games your still playing so there isnt a benefit to hourly. 

MattBates

In Response to Re: Discuss...:

Be interested to hear what the top MTT players on the site can achieve per hour? What would you be hoping to achieve if you were a full time professional player?
Posted by BigHawk89

Very rough and ready calc is £22 for me just looking at sky but most of the time I am playing a few sites. I dont track the hours I play so have made assumptions to get to hours and I havent included rakeback and as I said only includes sky so it could be significantly different to this. Using similar assumptions for a few others I think its around the £20-£30 level. 

BigHawk89

In Response to Re: Discuss...:

In Response to Re: Discuss... : Very rough and ready calc is £22 for me just looking at sky but most of the time I am playing a few sites. I dont track the hours I play so have made assumptions to get to hours and I havent included rakeback and as I said only includes sky so it could be significantly different to this. Using similar assumptions for a few others I think its around the £20-£30 level. 
Posted by MattBates

Thanks for the replies thats the kind of numbers I was guessing. I suppose it is pretty tough to work out for MTT players cause you've gotta work out how many hours you've played. 

Lambert180

Yeah is gonna be in that region give or take, if you're decent. You can have a stab at working out your own if you grind MTTs, I just did it myself.

Most regs on here playing at MTTs at night probably play something along the lines of ...

2 x 22bh

3 x 11bh

2 x 55bh

main (usually £33)

mini (usually 5.50bh)

So total staked is usually say £225 per night. The first of those comps above is a 22bh at 7:30pm and on average that session will probably see you play till maybe midnight (that's avg obv, sometimes it's 1am when u go really deep in main, sometimes it's earlier) so say 4.5hr avg.

Then you can stick different ROIs in, so say a 30% ROI means you make £67.50 per session, then divide that by 4.5 and that's your hourly.

Tbh, I dunno if you should use avg ROI or total ROI for this, I remember Melt said avg ROI was the more important stat cos it's takes into account differing stakes but just looked at the avg ROI for me, jordz and bates and they all seem a bit 'too high'. If it's avg ROI tho, then around the £20 per hour mark seems to be in the right ballpark.

================

RE: JP's 2nd question, I was gonna say similar to Matt, that it seems like people may use that as an excuse to just punt. It's best to just view every spot as it's own individual situation and try to make the best decision, so whatever the situation is, you just try to play it in the fashion that you think is gonna win the most chips longterm (assuming no ICM blah blah, which won't really be a thing in the early stages anyway).

MattBates

In Response to Re: Discuss...:

In Response to Re: Discuss... : I agree with this. I am a "casual" player and just do 1  x £1 sng most nights. If I take a smoke and a sip of wine during the game it is probably costing more than the winning amount. I just enjoy playing the odd game, have taken poker back up past couple months and have a good winning rate (have won about 80%+ of last 15 SNGs) but I'd make more money per hour stitching shoes in Vietnam. It is fun to win, at this level, but losing is no crisis or major annoyance - just something to seethe about if a bad beat. I can't grasp how professional players can deal with extended losing streaks, esp if an MTT player paying out $5k/week and maybe winning 1/50 tournaments and cashing in say 1/20 (numbers out of nowhere). I know a pro personally, and he won a couple million in one year and I checked his record recently and he has been losing in live tournaments ever since.  Long story short, ROI is nice to admire, how much you make, how much you can afford and what you want out of the game are more important.
Posted by BigRonnieC

The way I see it is that you are getting paid to do a hobby which is a pretty good deal!

Firstly losing streaks are hard but they are just part of the game, you will have streaks where you crush so you have to take the rough with the smooth. 

In terms of cashing players get itm around 15-20% of the time, this year I have won 2.7% of games. To get around the variance of MTT poker putting in decent volume is important to reduce the variance (for example I have played nearly 7000 games this year). If you are playing live you cant get the same volume in so while you may get a higher ROI the variance of it tends to be more brutal. 

Really like your summary at the end.

BigRonnieC

In Response to Re: Discuss...:

In Response to Re: Discuss... : The way I see it is that you are getting paid to do a hobby which is a pretty good deal! Firstly losing streaks are hard but they are just part of the game, you will have streaks where you crush so you have to take the rough with the smooth.  In terms of cashing players get itm around 15-20% of the time, this year I have won 2.7% of games. To get around the variance of MTT poker putting in decent volume is important to reduce the variance (for example I have played nearly 7000 games this year). If you are playing live you cant get the same volume in so while you may get a higher ROI the variance of it tends to be more brutal.  Really like your summary at the end.
Posted by MattBates

Even if I had the poker brains I wouldn't have the temperament to handle the variance with amounts that meant anything financially to me. 

As for calling an early shove, go by feel and position, but be prepared to lose with AA-JJ against 84off  - it happens. You also have to think of table image. Calling loosely will make you seem like a maniac and you won't get value if you win against future opponents or will get slow played by premium hands.

yuranASSet

If we play 4 cash tables for 8 hours and load up a tourney fille here and therer, then hourly rate for cash and ROI for tourney's. It is completely dependent.

cyall

Does sky alter players odd on winning

cyall

Your a con site you milk player