Major MTT Strength

aussie09

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength:

 Can I just say THANK YOU!  Despite the site not being perfect, what poker tracking site is. I have to say that the information you provide, FOR FREE, is excellent. As you have stated it is up to the individual what they pick and choose to use the information for but for that information to be updated daily, be accurate and be free is truly remarkable. I just hope that some of the negativity on here doesn't put you off continuing as I, along with many others I assume, appreciate the hard work and get a lot of enjoyment from your site.  THANK YOU!
Posted by 68Trebor

cheers trebor.

it's uplifting to read your post.


ps.  wp yesterday. 

HAYSIE

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength:

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength : yes, the number of runners is too low. i try and keep the "test" consistent.  the major games are those with a guarantee of £500 and over, they need a buy-in of £3 and over (recently lowered in order to include the 9:30 rebuy) and finally should be likely to have 30 entrants or more. the £500 guarantee bounty hunters at 12, 3 and 6pm were the three games that prompted me to add the third condition.  sometimes they were getting only 20-odd entrants and cash was paid only down to 3rd place.  Half the final table didn't get paid.  Comparing performance requires a consistent test. i used to include all three.  i like them, they are fun games.  i will include them again if they gain numbers, they are probably the next best games. i aim to measure performance in the top games each day.  generally 20 a day.  capacity for 30+. 
Posted by aussie09

Ok I just wondered

I am not sure how the fact that sometimes only 3 get paid affects anything, as the number getting paid is always proportionate.

I wasnt looking for an argument, I was just asking the question.

aussie09

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength:

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength : Ok I just wondered I am not sure how the fact that sometimes only 3 get paid affects anything, as the number getting paid is always proportionate. I wasnt looking for an argument, I was just asking the question.
Posted by HAYSIE

yes, i have considered the same things and cashing is proportionate. 

however, things might get distorted with small fields.  the distortion will be seen with counting final tables, or using points to evaluate performances.  for example, ten points is given for a win no matter the field size.  winning a 20 runner event is not likely to be as fantastic as winning a 1,000 strong game, hence the minimum field size condition.

i am trying to maintain the integrity of the method by ensuring that the test remains pretty much the same with each game.

HAYSIE

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength:

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength : yes, i have considered the same things and cashing is proportionate.  however, things might get distorted with small fields.  the distortion will be seen with counting final tables, or using points to evaluate performances.  for example, ten points is given for a win no matter the field size.  winning a 20 runner event is not likely to be as fantastic as winning a 1,000 strong game, hence the minimum field size condition. i am trying to maintain the integrity of the method by ensuring that the test remains pretty much the same with each game.
Posted by aussie09

I take my hat off to you for doing this. I must be really time consuming, and if this thread is anything to go by, a thankless task.

The stats are always correct, because they are the stats. However interpretation will likely differ and be argued about.

Your starting criteria has to be correct, but I couldnt see that winning a tourney with 300 runners would warrant the same points as one with 30 runners.
Should the points be related to the prizepool.

The 10.30 is included but doesnt pay out the whole final table,

aussie09

thanks tony.

yes, you're right.  cashing is a good measure and one of the best ways to evaluate performance.  slightly less so now that the proportion of the field paid has changed for freezouts.  even so, beforehand it had its flaws, for example it uses banding to determine places.  nevertheless, it is still one of the best yardsticks.

a more complete picture is formed by using other factors.  golf is a good example of this issue.  colin montgomerie is a fine player.  if we were counting major wins he would not feature.  if we include senior majors, he would.  i am going from memory here (no wiki or google) to say that he was ranked as the best player in the world at one stage, yet had never won a major.  i recall colin being referred to as the best player not to have won a major.  brian clough was deemed the best manager england never had. 

i looked at the 22:30hrs and field size.  it is included because of the likelihood that it will get 30 runners.  if the guarantee/buy-in ratio falls to a point where we expect fewer than 30 players it will become part of the same decision to include (or exclude) games like the 12noon, 3pm, 6pm in the major tournament list.




 

HAYSIE

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength:

thanks tony. yes, you're right.  cashing is a good measure and one of the best ways to evaluate performance.  slightly less so now that the proportion of the field paid has changed for freezouts.  even so, beforehand it had its flaws, for example it uses banding to determine places.  nevertheless, it is still one of the best yardsticks. a more complete picture is formed by using other factors.  golf is a good example of this issue.  colin montgomerie is a fine player.  if we were counting major wins he would not feature.  if we include senior majors, he would.  i am going from memory here (no wiki or google) to say that he was ranked as the best player in the world at one stage, yet had never won a major.  i recall colin being referred to as the best player not to have won a major.  brian clough was deemed the best manager england never had.  i looked at the 22:30hrs and field size.  it is included because of the likelihood that it will get 30 runners.  if the guarantee/buy-in ratio falls to a point where we expect fewer than 30 players it will become part of the same decision to include (or exclude) games like the 12noon, 3pm, 6pm in the major tournament list.  
Posted by aussie09

The Colin Montgomerie analogy is interesting. He was Europes top player over many years based on a simple system. He got the most points based on one point per £1 of prize money. So the bigger the prizepool the more difficult the tournament would be to win. The bigger tournaments with the most prize money attracting quality players from overseas.

There were more points awarded for The Open, than the Huddersfield Matchplay.

The best player is usually the one that makes the most money.

aussie09

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength:

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength : The Colin Montgomerie analogy is interesting. He was Europes top player over many years based on a simple system. He got the most points based on one point per £1 of prize money. So the bigger the prizepool the more difficult the tournament would be to win. The bigger tournaments with the most prize money attracting quality players from overseas. There were more points awarded for The Open, than the Huddersfield Matchplay. The best player is usually the one that makes the most money.
Posted by HAYSIE

yes, much like the "returns" league here.  it is one way to determine best, but i don't think that a simple total is the best way. 

68Trebor

 Just a quick question.
 On the Hero Card are all the atats just based on the major MTT's or do they take into account all MTT's on Sky. And if they are only based on the major MTT's how does the history work for say 2013 as surely the MTT schedule has changed significantly.

HAYSIE

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength:

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength : yes, much like the "returns" league here.  it is one way to determine best, but i don't think that a simple total is the best way. 
Posted by aussie09

How else could you do it?

raggy94

When you say 'returns' do you mean profits?

aussie09

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength:

 Just a quick question.  On the Hero Card are all the atats just based on the major MTT's or do they take into account all MTT's on Sky. And if they are only based on the major MTT's how does the history work for say 2013 as surely the MTT schedule has changed significantly.
Posted by 68Trebor

hi trebor,

all the stats are based on major mtts.  there are about 7,500 each year.  all other mtts are not included.  the Hero Card shows this year in the first panel, the charts are for the current year too.  the lower panel shows 9 key stats from each year 2014 to 2017 plus a summary part.

other than start date (first known major game by my records) the hero card contains no stats for 2013 or earlier.  i have them but don't include them.  the list of games that feature remains quite similar; the biggest games on skypoker. 

aussie09

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength:

When you say 'returns' do you mean profits?
Posted by raggy94

no, returns and profit are different.  there is also ROI% (with a threshold).

returns is just a simple tally of prizemoney.  profit takes off entrance fees paid, whether cashing or not so includes buy-ins for all major games.

volume plays a huge part.  the league is still helpful.  not my favourite though.



 

aussie09

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength:

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength : How else could you do it?
Posted by HAYSIE

that's the problem, there are hundreds of ways.  each one has its merits, each one has its flaws.  so take your choice.

raggy94

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength:

thanks tony. yes, you're right.  cashing is a good measure and one of the best ways to evaluate performance.  slightly less so now that the proportion of the field paid has changed for freezouts.  even so, beforehand it had its flaws, for example it uses banding to determine places.  nevertheless, it is still one of the best yardsticks. a more complete picture is formed by using other factors.
Posted by aussie09

Hi,

Is there a simple way of explaining what you mean by banding?

This is all i got from wikipedia In mathematics, a band (also called idempotent semigroup) is a semigroup in which every element is idempotent (in other words equal to its own square) but i couldn't figure out how to apply it in the above context?

If you assumed 'cashing' in this instance meant either average roi%(with min gamesthreshold) or profits would that change anything as it seems like either of those two measurements would be preferable to returns?

I struggle with technical stuff so thanks for trying to help:)

aussie09

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength:

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength : Hi, Is there a simple way of explaining what you mean by banding? This is all i got from wikipedia  In  mathematics , a  band  (also called  idempotent semigroup ) is a  semigroup  in which every element is  idempotent  (in other words equal to its own square) but i couldn't figure out how to apply it in the above context? If you assumed 'cashing' in this instance meant either average roi%(with min gamesthreshold) or profits would that change anything as it seems like either of those two measurements would be preferable to returns? I struggle with technical stuff so thanks for trying to help:)
Posted by raggy94

hi raggy.  the banding i mean is just grouping. 

for cashes it is to say that, for example, in any field of 40 to 59 entrants the first 6 will be a cash place.  it isn't done as a percentage of the runners (rounded up or down to a whole number) it is done as a band of entrant numbers, whether 40 or 59 entrants, it will be the same number of cash places that are paid.

roi% or profit are, in my opinion, better assessments of performance than returns.

we think pretty much the same, i think.

raggy94

Thanks, I understand now.

HAYSIE

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength:

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength : that's the problem, there are hundreds of ways.  each one has its merits, each one has its flaws.  so take your choice.
Posted by aussie09

What do you think then?

aussie09

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength:

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength : What do you think then?
Posted by HAYSIE

which is my favoured league?  for me, the best way is "best7"

after this is best31.

yours?



 

HAYSIE

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength:

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength : which is my favoured league?  for me, the best way is "best7" after this is best31. yours?  
Posted by aussie09

I am not sure. If you go for the most profit you are only looking at the bigger volume players. Those that play less may argue unfairness because they play less volume. If you go for roi, then your chances improve because of the less volume. Yet the high volume players could argue that they are entitled to less roi because of the increased volume.

Sharkscope do a rating, but I wouldnt have a clue how they work it out.

I am happy if I can win a couple of quid, enjoy the games, and wind Tikay up.

aussie09

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength:

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength : I am not sure. If you go for the most profit you are only looking at the bigger volume players. Those that play less may argue unfairness because they play less volume. If you go for roi, then your chances improve because of the less volume. Yet the high volume players could argue that they are entitled to less roi because of the increased volume. Sharkscope do a rating, but I wouldnt have a clue how they work it out. I am happy if I can win a couple of quid, enjoy the games, and wind Tikay up.
Posted by HAYSIE

well played last night in the main event. 

you wait for a bus for ages, then two come along at once.  excellent, excellent.

aussie09

you're top of the day profit league, "dayprofit"

up to 18 in the rolling week league, "best7"

you also join an elite group of 6 players who have won 3 main events this year, "mainmini"
www.PokerSuperHero.com/mainmini

aussie09

NEW WINNERS

 

3 more players won their first major tournament yesterday;

 

Jk1503

Komander

TheTrick04

www.PokerSuperHero.com/strength

 

aussie09

HEADLINES

HAYSIE wins a third Main Event and joins an elite group of 6 players who have achieved this in 2017

www.PokerSuperHero.com/mainmini

MattBates is Best Player at Sky Poker, winning 2 major tournaments in one day

www.PokerSuperHero.com/best

MrTucker is the day best player

NEW WINNERS yesterday 3 more players won their first major tournament (since jan 2014); Jk1503, Komander and TheTrick04

www.PokerSuperHero.com/strength

HAYSIE takes most profit in the day

www.PokerSuperHero.com/dayprofit

 

RESULTS

1,376 players in 20 major tournaments

www.PokerSuperHero.com/results

Follow on Twitter @PokerSuperHero

.

HAYSIE

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength:

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength : well played last night in the main event.  you wait for a bus for ages, then two come along at once.  excellent, excellent.
Posted by aussie09

Thanks.

HAYSIE

In Response to Re: Major MTT Strength:

you're top of the day profit league, "dayprofit" up to 18 in the rolling week league, "best7" you also join an elite group of 6 players who have won 3 main events this year, "mainmini" www.PokerSuperHero.com/mainmini
Posted by aussie09

Thanks I will have a look. Dont tell Tikay, he will be distraught.

aussie09

HEADLINES

 

devil_tear wins one for charity
4 win their first ever major tournament yesterday;

antoniat, Dexta08, KingRaff and purdual
www.PokerSuperHero.com

STRENGTH

 

7,207 have won a major tournament in the past 4 years.

How strong was each major game yesterday?
www.PokerSuperHero.com/strength

aussie09

HEADLINES

 

2 jackpot near misses
www.PokerSuperHero.com/jackpot

 

5 new winners of a major tournament
www.PokerSuperHero.com/results

 

 

 

FIND

 

See where you feature in 60 leagues
www.PokerSuperHero.com/find

 

 

 

 

 

 

aussie09

WINNERS

6 players win their first ever major tournament

www.PokerSuperHero.com/results

.

aussie09

HEADLINES

2 players in their first ever major tournament, Dalglish72 and meddie

www.PokerSuperHero.com

BEST

MattBates is Best Player at Sky Poker

www.PokerSuperHero.com/best

NEWBIES

JR12Booom is June's best newbie

www.PokerSuperHero.com/best

STRENGTH

So many of the 22 major games played last night were soft

www.PokerSuperHero.com/strength

RESULTS

1,821 players in 22 major tournaments

www.PokerSuperHero.com/results

Follow on Twitter @PokerSuperHero

.

aussie09

HEADLINES

8 players won their first major tournament

DOYLIE took the most heads, 25, in one tournament yesterday the Mini at 20:30hrs

4 Final tables achieved by bearlyther

MattBates is Best Player at Sky Poker

RESULTS

1,692 players in 21 major tournaments

www.PokerSuperHero.com/results

.