ROI in MTTs
While playing at Fallsview WPT satellite, there was a middle age decent player talking about ROI at my table. He was saying that very good players make a ROI of 100% in MTTs. I told him this is not possible because this technically means they double their money in every MTT they play. Good players usually have around 20% ROI. He said: No, What i mean is that in the long run if they invest 300$ playing tournaments in the long run its 600$. It didn't make sense for me and i thought that was wrong, but i just said okay because i wasn't 100% sure.
May someone give me the right definition of ROI and a simple example?
Thank you.
May someone give me the right definition of ROI and a simple example?
Thank you.
Comments
total profits/total buy ins
mine is 0
Don't agree, reinforce their misbeliefs and profit! re ROI, is it possible to be -? If so that's me..
Does it matter how many tournaments is played or only the $buy-in?
I think it is possible, now if you played 10 1$ tournaments and cashed for 5$ (loss of -$5). -5/10*100% your roi is -50%.
tapatalk puts this here to annoy YOU
tapatalk puts this here to annoy YOU
Not sure I'm clear on it either.
Is ROI profit/buyins expressed as a % OR is it Winnings-Buyins/buyins? One way means you can't go negative whereas the 2nd way means you can go negative.
eg supposed I have total buyins of $1000. and winnings of $800. (therefore 0 profit) my ROI is also 0 calculated the 1st way or 800-1000/1000 or -20% the 2nd way.
If I had the same buyins and winnings of $1200. then my ROI is (1200-1000)/1000 an ROI of +20% either way
At least this is my understanding.
trick question... both forumlas are the same!
profit = winnings-buyins
therefore profit/buyins = winnings-buyins/buyins
damn right you can go into the negative... this is poker!! The profit can go both ways so you have to include all losses in ROI, you cant just use 0.
buyins = 100
winnings = 110
profit = 10
ROI = 10%
buyins = 100
winnings = 95
profit = -5
ROI = -5%
lol, oh I agree we need to show a negative ROI if it is there... Just wondering why we never see anyone with a -neg ROI.. Selective formulae's perhaps?;)
Have you seen my 2013 live poker spreadsheet? thats a big negative number!
2014 gonna make up for it tho.
Was this the one that resulted in a ladies wear shopping trip?
You are the one of the few people on here whom I trust to accurately reflect your results if you so chose to publish them... At some point I would love to have a chance to play at your table again.... Your poker style is something I can only aspire to...
Return on investment (%) = (Net profit / Total buy-ins) × 100.
Only the buy-ins are put in the formula, but the number of tourneys or sample size is very important. Looking at my OPR, my ROI is -100% in Limit tourneys, i.e., I did not cash in only SIX Limit tourneys that I mistakenly played due to the bad software. My ROI in Omaha tourneys is +205%, since I cashed in 1 out 3 Omaha tourneys I played. For NLHE, my ROI is 99% with 24% ITM.
regards, Mathtard..???
it's called a (not so) subtle brag >:D
regards. i am the fish at the table:)
Its the same reason we don't see BAP threads for blackjack
I'd like to see a rake calculation on the ponies
With buy-ins of <$200: My ROI over 145 tourneys in the last 3 years is 80%
With buy-ins of >$200: My ROI over 43 tourneys in the last 3 years is -35%
This is without what I would call any 'binks' at the bigger buy-ins.
The problem is, with one bink, your ROI can go from -35 to +50
Bottom line.....binks are needed
Return on Investment...
For example the old guy was right if ...
Phil Ivy: $2,000,000 loss walking past a craps table to a $4,000,000 Poker win in a fully sponsored tournament.
100% ROI.
For example the old guy was right if ...
Russ Hamilton:Spends $1 on bus fare to go steal candy from babies and gets at $2 bullet in the head.
100% ROI.