getting deeper ITM

theagent77theagent77 Red Chipper Posts: 32 ✭✭
I feel like I am blocked. I regularly go ITM around 25% of time, but up to now I made it to FT not even once. As a result, my ROI is -20%, but still my win rate is 13bb/10 (for what it's worth). How often do you get to the bigger prizes? I am getting tired to earn lousy payouts, I'd like to know if this is a common feeling or I am missing something in my MTT strategy.

My tournament sample is not that high though (about 100 tourneys).

Would you share with me your stats about your MTT results? (roi,itm%,number of tourneys)?
Thanks guys


  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 3,399 -
    I'm confused. How can you have a positive win rate and a negative ROI?

    Where your ITM% should be depends on the pay-out structure of the tournaments, particularly whether ~ 10%, 15% or 20% of entrants get paid.. For online it seems a little high and could be suppressing your ROI. It may sound odd to talk about ITM% being too high, but I've found it can be a diagnostic of overly conservative play near the bubble that limits the ability to make FTs.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • theagent77theagent77 Red Chipper Posts: 32 ✭✭
    I guess this is because win rate in bb/100 is calculated on chips won, not on money earned.
    Where I play (PS, microstakes), tournaments prizes reward about 15% of the field, which I think is a standard percentage.
    Anyway, I was suspecting to be less aggressive than I should near to the bubble.
    It would be nice if other users could share some stats or some of their story. I need to know whether it's only a matter of playing style.
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 3,399 -
    Before Black Friday my Stars ITM% was about 20% and ROI around 25% in NLHE tournaments, mostly in the $20 to $215 buy-in range with some bigger SCOOP and WCOOP thrown in.

    Thanks for the clarification of the win-rate. I guess that means you're winning bbs when they're small. Typically I associate that with loose-passive play early and tightening up later. Can you filter your stats for VPIP/PFR for different blind levels?
    Moderation In Moderation
  • theagent77theagent77 Red Chipper Posts: 32 ✭✭
    Here it is. Each category has at least 100 hands of history (I know, it is not much, but I am trying to build up at least 300-400 hands per day)


    30 24.1/12.5
    40 15.4/8.16
    50 22.9/15.2
    60 22.8/11.7
    80 16/8.73
    100 17/11.6
    120 17.2/10.6
    150 14.8/5.83
    200 22.6/18
    250 16/10.1
    300 17/12.7
    400 19/12.4
    500 20.3/15.8
    600 19.5/12.7
    700 23.2/12.2
    800 21.3/14.2
    900 20.3/14
    1000 21.5/14.3
    1200 21.6/15.2
    1400 20.5/15.7
    1600 19.9/15.3
    2000 19.7/13.3
    2500 20.4/15.3
    3000 23.1/18.3
    3500 22.4/18.9
    4000 20.7/17.1
    5000 19.9/18.5
    6000 25.7/21.8
    7000 28.5/27
    8000 21.3/20.6
    10K 23.9/20.2
    12K 21.9/18.2
    14K 25/24.3
    16K 18.9/19.4

    Then, my hand sample size shrinks down to below 100 per category.

    The main reason behind my nitty stats in the first levels is: early stages are full of aggro fish, I cannot steal as much as I would, I prefer seeing cheap flops in position and carefully select my starting hands. If I manage to win a huge pot, I can put more pressure on the table as long the bubble has long it has not burst yet.
    But in the early stage I prefer sitting back and watching bad players killing each other. I know I am probably giving up on the chance to get their money, but I cannot put in jeopardy my tournament trying to stack every fish off that open shoves 70BB unless I have KK+

  • jeffncjeffnc Red Chipper Posts: 4,998 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Tournament ROI is very unlike cash game profits, and quite unintuitive. It's because you can't win money on your current hand, and because chips don't = money. Payout structures are highly skewed and there isn't a linear relationship to your average performance. If a tournament of 100 pays the top 12, then a guy who finishes 100, 100, 100, 100, 100, 1 is going to crush a guy who finishes 20, 15, 12, 25, 13, 10.

    As far as I know they are not close to solving an overall tournament strategy like they are with heads up cash games. The best we can do is look at the guys with the best results and figure out how they play. I would recommend reading Arnold Snyder's Poker Tournament Formula books. They may not give you a complete strategy, but I think they explain some of things you should be thinking of. I believe, like he does, that some of the old ways of thinking about tournaments are wrong.

    Specifically, "I cannot put in jeopardy my tournament trying to stack every fish off that open shoves 70BB unless I have KK+" could be wrong, or at least is probably not the right way to look at things. To do well at tournaments long term, it is virtually required to finish very high in the money sometimes, and it is worth some risk to achieve that. Finishing just above or below the bubble is mostly a waste of time, and when you look at the parlay that is required to finish deep, the risk starts to look a little different.
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 3,399 -
    I wouldn't call your early level stats nitty. I play tighter than that pre-ante. Also I think having a tight AI calling range early on is fine, but if people are shoving 70bb wide enough, I agree with Jeff that KK+ is too tight a range.

    The wonderful thing about online MTTs is that if you bust one in a decent EV spot you just fire up another.

    Overall the VPIP/PFR look okay, although the gap between the two is a bit large. You probably don't have sufficient data yet, and in fact I'm not even sure if you can filter for this, but your preflop 3-bet% should show a distinct peak when your starting stack is ~ 16-25bb
    Moderation In Moderation
  • jeffncjeffnc Red Chipper Posts: 4,998 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2019
    TheGameKat wrote: »
    The wonderful thing about online MTTs is that if you bust one in a decent EV spot you just fire up another.

    Right and I think there's an attitude issue when people play slow, live tournaments as compared to say a hyperturbo SNG online at the other extreme. Technically you should play each of these the same (there will be some strategic differences based on payout structure etc. but I'm talking about how you approach them.) Live pro tournament players exploit amateur players who are simply trying to last longer for the experience, and who are afraid of busting.

    A lot of these strategic decisions become clearer as you play more of them in a shorter period of time. But really you should not be afraid of busting any more in a slow live tournament than if you're playing 20 simultaneous hyperturbos online. That is hard to swallow though because of the virtual time dilation.

  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 3,399 -
    The thing about live tournaments is there is usually a sort of utility overhead that makes busting more -EV. The bigger issue to me though is that because live players like busting less and play more defensively as a result, a good live player will exploit that. But the exploitation gets easier the deeper you get, so to me busting a live tournament within the first 6 levels is borderline criminal, whereas it's something you should be doing somewhat regularly in online ones.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • jeffncjeffnc Red Chipper Posts: 4,998 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Were they to "solve" tournament poker, then in theory all that is supposed to go into an ICM calculation, or whatever the more complicated version might be called. In theory that really shouldn't happen in a cash game, although knowing how many buyins someone has on them would be a little similar.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file