Check It: DADI |

 




Goal Problems

As you might recall, a mere day ago I set a series of goals for myself. The purpose was fourfold: (1) get my game on some sort of regiment that I could hold myself accountable for, (2) compare my wins and losses across various games to see where my successes are, (3) force myself to single-table, and (4) do all of the above without limiting myself.

Anyway, I've found a problem with goal #2, comparing my successes. What do you consider a success? Or more importantly, how do you compare succes in an SNG with success in a limit game with success in a NL game?

A simple W/L won't do, because that wouldn't show how big a win/loss it was. I then thought about comparing ROI (return on investment), but I don't know how to compute ROI in cash games. In SNGs, you simply figure out the amount of money paid into SNGs (regardless of W/L) v. the amount of money won in SNGs. Similarly, you can't apply the BB rule to SNGs. The BB rule involves computing the amount that you won in comparison to the limit you are playing with. BB= big bet. So if you are playing 1/2 limit and win 14$, you won 7BB. The benefit of this number is that if I then play 2/4 limit and win $14, the BB would only be 3.5BB, which indicates that while I may have won the same amount of $$ I actually won more pots or pots with more bets in them at the 1/2 level. I don't even know if the BB system would work for NL, where you could conceivably play .05/.10 NL and win $100 for 1000BB!

So, what to do? The answer may be as simple as just relying on my profit per type of game to determine which one I did best in. "But Jordan," you ask, "why didn't you just go with this uber-simple system in the first place?" Well, let me preface my answer by telling you that I am impressed by your use of "uber", the German term for "super." Then, let me respond that you haven't considered the fact that my games will all be at different levels. My NL game may be .25/.50, my limit 1/2, my 6-person SNG $10, and my 10-p SNG $5.

But, too bad. I've made this hard on myself, and while I could change my goals, I will not. At least I was smart enough to give myself ranges that I will stick to. The ranges I have previously mentioned per game are essentially what I play anyway. So in the end, all I'm really doing is forcing myself to keep track of my wins and losses, and forcing myself to single-table. Both should be good enough to make this experiment worthwhile.

Now, onto other things. Roose and Hole went to Genoa Monday night, and they are going back tonight. WHORES! I want to go so badly, but Monday was class and tonight is wifey Kim and my 1st month anniversary, so we are going for a nice dinner at Ruth Chris steakhouse. Dave Ruff also called me today to ask if I was going to Genoa. I passed him off to Roose, so Ruff will be there too, popping his illegal card room cherry, while I'll be with my girl eating steak. I can't say I'm getting the short end of the stick in this deal, but I also wish that I could be at two places at once. I guess that is why one of my favorite superheros was Multiple Man, an obscure mutant from the X-Men and X-Force books. Multiple Man could create duplicates of himself through kinetic energy (i.e., pounds his fist into his palm), and when the duplicates returned to him, he would have all of their memories and experiences. Ah, to dream.

SteelerJosh has turned thirtysomething. Congratulations to him, and enjoy the Steelers/Browns game. GCox is spinning literary gold as usual. He's now doing the Vegas Poker Pro pimping to, and best of luck to him, but any prag would know that if you want to be cool, you'll sign up through me. All you have to do is click on my VPP link and sign up. But then again, you guys probably don't like free prizes and gifts, least of all around holiday season. On that very topic, I now have two referrals via Poker Source Online (referral code HighOnPoker). They are probably both via Aussie Dave (aka Buscade). I know the first one is for sure. Well, thank you Aussie Dave. I'd suggest you all sign up at PSO too, but we've already been through this. Tease.

That's it for now. I'm going to go drop off the kids at the pool. Enjoy!

posted by Jordan @ 5:36 PM,

3 Comments:

At 6:32 PM, Blogger WillWonka said...

You know, you might just look at your $/hr to compare.... still kind of apples to oranges though.

 
At 7:52 PM, Blogger DP said...

You said that your games will all be at different levels... well, certain bankroll requirements are needed for different games... NL Hold 'em = standard 15 buy-ins, Limit Hold 'em = 300x BB, and I don't know what the requirements are for SnGs.

The games you play for each should fit the same bankroll figure... and then you can just compare your success using money won. Obviously, if they all have the same bankroll requirement, you would be better in whichever you win more money at over the long run.

Also, while the standard bankroll for NL cash games is 15 buy-ins, most people use less, so if you're using say, 70% less (very doable) than 15 buy-ins, then you would calculate bankroll needed for other games such as Limit Hold 'em as also 70% less or 450 BB (4.5 buy-ins) for NL and 90 BB for Limit, respectively.

You should look up (at Two plus Two etc.) the bankroll requirements for SnGs, if you don't already know. I don't play SnGs, so I don't know. I would guess the standard bankroll is 20-50 buy-ins...

 
At 10:48 PM, Blogger HighOnPoker said...

I didn't expect such well thoughtout answers. Thank you Will and DP. I still don't know how I am going to do it. $/hr makes a lot of sense, but I fear that I am not the best at keeping track of time. I can see myself starting up, and recklessly not logging the time until I am done. What DP says makes a lot of sense too. I never have used 2+2, but I probably should. Thanks for the input guys.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home