Hi,
is it really true that you can't get much higher than 7% ROI at micro levels playing turbos? I ask this because I have tried to start playing HUSNG's like 3 times already, and everytime I have stopped after ~500 games and cashed out everything. The thing is - up to 5$ my ROI was about 14-16% everytime. Was I just lucky or at micros it's very possible to maintain something like 15~% ROI?
I'm ready to start again, because now I have all the time in the world. And even with 6-7% ROI at 7$ limit I would be able to play for living with 2500~games per month. Just wanted to hear about micros from "experts", so I don't get my hopes up.
Thanks in advance and sorry for my English.
Players, who have big ROIs on the micros, don't stay there. That is your problem; you won't find anyone with a big enough sample size who crushes them.
Hi.
Hi Aces4Two,
At 7% ROI net of rake, at the $7 level you will have an expected return of 7*0.07 = $0.49 per game.
If you play 2500 of these a month you will expect to make 2500*0.49*12 = $14,700 / year or $282 / week.
Where I live (Australia), that's defintely not enough to live on and is less than half of the minimum wage for a 38 hour working week.
If you're playing purely for the money, after you factor in the variance associated with poker compared to working and receiving a wage, a rational person needs to make more playing poker (to compensate them for the extra risk they take) than simply working for the wage their skills can otherwise demand in the labour market (opportunity cost).
Let
W = opportunity cost wage
p = risk premium for variable returns
V = volume of games you can play per year
ROI = return on investment net of rake
B = buy in level
Essentially playing poker becomes more EV than working when,
V * ROI * B > W * (1+p)
Say you are a minimum wage worker in Australia and would play poker for a living if you could make 20% more than your current earn playing poker. You can solve for B to see what buyin you need to be playing to make it playing poker more +EV than simply working.
For the assumptions:
V = 2,500 * 12 = 30,000
ROI = 4%
W = 600*52 = 31,200
p = 20%
Solve for B
B > (W * (1 + p)) / (V * ROI)
B > $31.20
So under the assumptions above (including you play just for money and don't value the fact poker is awesome fun) you would need to be beating games of at least $31.20 for 4% ROI in order to prefer playing poker for a living over working for the minimum wage in Australia.
Now, if you are intelligent and hardworking enough to crush these games over a huge sample, chances are your skills are worth more than minium wage in the job marketplace. Additionally, as you go up in stakes your ROI is likely to decrease and your variance (required risk premium) is likely to increase.
Regardless, this probably gives you a framework to think about your query.
I am a beginner poker player and am not in a position to comment on achievable ROI's or volumes for that matter. From what I've read, I understand that as you go up the stakes, 4% ROI is pretty solid. 15% is likely unachievable.
For example, backsolving for win rate, to achieve 15% ROI over a large sample with say 2.5% rake you can calculate your required win rate:
ROI = (w(B*(1-2r)) - (1 - w)*(B) / B
*Note ROI is actually independent of B in the above and so ROI is simply a function of your win rate 'w' and the rake charged at the buyin you play as a percentage of each buyin 'r'.
solve for w
w = (ROI + 1) / (2 - 2r)
w = 59.0%
So to achieve 15% ROI under assumptions above you would need to win 59.0% of your matches.
Given the number of HUSNG matches which end up in both players having equity equal to a few % points on either side of a coin flip, unless you are playing villains who are unusually exploitable, this is probably not achievable over the long run.
Well, its truly possible to have such ROI on micro, I know a guy who have 16% ROI, 61.7% winrate on turbos at the 50euros (60$), if you want to look at his stats, it's 18yoho18 on Winamax.fr. But i assure you that he's realy good, play only few games a day, and never sit reg, only play fish. But now you know that everything is doable :)
Hi Youpi,
If your friend has 16% ROI with 61.7% win rate, that means hes playing games with 12% rake.
Isn't standard rake like 2-3% for hypers and 4-5% for turbos and reg speed?
To break even in a 12% raked game you need a 53.2% win rate.
Is your friend intentially playing seemingly unbeatable games because they will be filled with fish?
Did you even bother to sharkscope the screen name given above, or are you content with spitting out presumptious calculations? Let me make it easy for you: http://www.sharkscope.com/#Player-Statistics//networks/Winamax.fr/players/18yoho18 Click 'statistics' above the graph.
Jt
No I didn't sharkscope the screen name.
I found an error in my algebra though so my backsolved 12% rake was double what it should have been. Hence my misunderstanding as to why a good player would play in such games. In case anyone not content with looking at a sharkscope spit out is interested:
ROI = w * (1 - 2r) - (1 - w)
rearrange for r
r = (2w - ROI - 1) / 2w
for
ROI = 16%
w = 61.7%
solve for r
r = 6.0%
This rake seems reasonable for the reg speed games and I guess if you just play against fish 61.7% win rate may be achievable.
To breakeven (ROI = 0%) at this rake you would need a win rate of:
w = (ROI + 1) / (2 - 2r)
w = 53.2%
But if I look at the sharkscope leader boards for super hyper turbo the average roi is around 3.48.
So... Do you therefore need to aim to be playing the $100 to make a comfortable living from poker ?
Hmmm where is my 100bi ?
Go forth and CRUSH !
It depends on what your idea of a comfortable living is and the assumptions you make about game duration and time per year you can feasibly play at a level which is statistically consistent with your expected ROI.
Say an average hyper goes for 3 mins, and net of waiting for games, and other inefficiencies you can grind out 50 mins of games for every hour you are playing.
This means you can play 50/3 = 16.7 games per hour.
At a 3.48% ROI @ B=100 you expect to return 0.0348*100 = $3.48 per game.
This is 16.7*3.48 = $58.12 / hour.
If you can grind at a focus level which will achieve the above for say 6hours a day, 5 days a week you will have an expected profit of 6*5*58.12 = $1744 / week.
This is a pre-tax expected earn of $83,712 per annum for a 48 week working year.
You can play around with the assumptions made above and calculate what you think is reasonable.
The 100BI rule of thumb is a derived from risk of ruin statistical calculations.
Poker as a business is a low margin, high variance game and so to stay in business you need significant working capital.
The more buy ins you have, the lower the probability you will go broke when inevitable downswings hit.
Have a play with the variance calculator on this site and see how crazy the downswings can get even for players with positive expected returns.