$1,000 entry fee worth as much as $8,000?

[Iwind]

From HOH V.1:
"But the best no-limit hold'em player think that a £1,000 entry fee is worth $4,000 to $5,000, and in huge events like the World Serioes of Poker, with many beginniners in the filed, perhaps as much as $7,000 to $8,000."

Made me wonder when reading trough what Harrington is writing here, that is a ROI of 400-800%, isn't that extremely high? As far as I know the best MTT players online get a ROI of 100-200% somewhere on the long run, or am I way off with this? And if not, is it really that much easier to get in the money and win MTTs live, that the best can run extremely high ROIs like this? Or is it Harrington that overestimating this a little bit. I'm just curious.

[DaNutsInYoEye]

Let's assume you win the main event in the WSOP in this year and 1st is $10 million. Do you just win $10 million? No, because PokerStars is going to want you to endorse their site. You're going to charge appearance fees at all the events you'll now be asked to speak at. You're also going to publish a book of course. The list of additional sources of income continues well beyond the monetary sum you gain by just winning the event.

[WildBobAA]

I think he's describing why NHLE is known as the cadillac of poker if I remember correctly. You get the largest potential return on your investement. For the $1,500 stud tournament at the WSOP last year, first place was 192K but for the first NLHE event (The one Cunningham won) which was a $1,500 buy in, first place was 725K. Also, your edge over the average stud player will be less because all the donkeys are attracted to NLHE.

[mcatdog]

From HOH V.1:
"But the best no-limit hold'em player think that a £1,000 entry fee is worth $4,000 to $5,000, and in huge events like the World Serioes of Poker, with many beginniners in the filed, perhaps as much as $7,000 to $8,000."

Made me wonder when reading trough what Harrington is writing here, that is a ROI of 400-800%, isn't that extremely high? As far as I know the best MTT players online get a ROI of 100-200% somewhere on the long run, or am I way off with this? And if not, is it really that much easier to get in the money and win MTTs live, that the best can run extremely high ROIs like this? Or is it Harrington that overestimating this a little bit. I'm just curious.

It has nothing to do with live vs. online. The difference is that the more entrants a tournament has, the higher of an ROI an above average player will have. In a SNG, even if all of your opponents are terrible it's very hard to have an ROI of greater than 25%. But in a tournament that lasts twice as long as a SNG, you have twice as many chances to outplay your opponents so you'd estimate your ROI to be (1.25)^2 = 56%. The WSOP has 5000+ participants. A professional poker player will be getting into situations where he has the best of it, over and over again, over the course of several days. That's why his ROI will be huge.

In one of the big Sunday online MTT's with 2000+ participants, a great player could very likely have an ROI of 300% or more, too. But most online tournaments only have a few hundred entrants.

[Iwind]

Yes that's right, it's where he describes it as the cadillac of poker. And it makes sense that ROI would be far higher in NLHE, but it still doesn't make sense to me with ROIs as high as 800%. So I'm thinking it has to do with live giving the best players a bigger edge than online, and a much bigger one it must be looking at this huge ROI.

I see the difference from SnGs and heads up, but it's not true that online tournaments are so small. Just playing on stars I could play in several 1000+ MTTs every day, and the huge sunday tournament for instance with like 5000 participants. Are any of the good MTT players running ROIs even close to 500% in these big ones? I think not, but I might be wrong.

[michael1123]

No, but internet blind structures blow when compared to live tournament structures. If Ivey was able to play in the main event a million times, I don't think its out of the question that he could have a ROI of 800%.

[Fnord]

Not to mention tell warfare.

The lack of face to face contact and addition of multi-tablers (to cash games) gives online games very particular textures.

[Iwind]

Yeah that makes sense, thought it was something like that. Looking forward to participate in a live tourney some time and see what it's like Just need a bigger BR so I don't have to spend it all on one tourney

[Bmxicle]

Let's assume you win the main event in the WSOP in this year and 1st is $10 million. Do you just win $10 million? No, because PokerStars is going to want you to endorse their site. You're going to charge appearance fees at all the events you'll now be asked to speak at. You're also going to publish a book of course. The list of additional sources of income continues well beyond the monetary sum you gain by just winning the event.

If you are going to start counting silly stuff like that, you need to count taxes which will cut your roi by a huge amount.

[Renton]

Let's assume you win the main event in the WSOP in this year and 1st is $10 million. Do you just win $10 million? No, because PokerStars is going to want you to endorse their site. You're going to charge appearance fees at all the events you'll now be asked to speak at. You're also going to publish a book of course. The list of additional sources of income continues well beyond the monetary sum you gain by just winning the event.

I don't think if I ever make the big time I would even dare be a corporate shill for PokerStars or PartyPoker.

"If you do a commercial, you are off the artistic roll call. Every word you say is suspect, there's a price on your head and every word that comes out of your mouth, is a like a turd, falling into my drink"

-the late Bill Hicks

[underminedsk]

I don't think if I ever make the big time I would even dare be a corporate shill for PokerStars or PartyPoker.

"If you do a commercial, you are off the artistic roll call. Every word you say is suspect, there's a price on your head and every word that comes out of your mouth, is a like a turd, falling into my drink"

-the late Bill Hicks

Even the most righteous people have their price.

[Lukie]

Kinda random, but in 2007 I plan on buying a WSOP main event package with FPP's from pokerstars.

If by some huge longshot I win, I'll do all the endorsements for pokerstars they want. I'm sure I'd be more then fairly compensated for my time.

[Renton]

you get that many fpps?

[Lukie]

hehe, well it's 700,000. And I have a bit under 20,000.

But I've also used a bunch and it seems like since I've gone up to NL200, they've come in much faster.

If It's unreasonable to get it with the FPPs, I'll probably just play some satellites and eventually win one and get in.

Of course before I go, I'd have to really fine-tune my tournament game and play more live, with the specific intention of minimizing live reads. The only live experience I have is my home game with friends.

[boost]

err.. how many fpps to you earn weekly or monthly that you expect to make 680k in 1-2 yeras time?

[mcatdog]

2000 a week really isn't that hard to get if you play at least medium stakes.

[Demiparadigm]

I get much more than 2k a week.

[Renton]

If he 8-tables 200nl, where I would assume 2/3 of hands are raked enough for a FPP (is this a liberal or conservative estimate?), and each tables plays 60 hands in an hour, and he plays 20 hours/week:

60*8=480 hands/hr *2/3=320 raked hands/hr.

320 fpp * 20= 6400 fpp/wk.

Is this about right Lukie?

[Renton]

oh wait I just realized

with the 250% supernova bonus this would turn into

6400+ (6400*2.5)= 22,400 FPP/wk

[Lukie]

Renton.. I'm going to be honest with you. I have no idea. It looks like you know more about it then I do...

[Renton]

na not really. Don't even play on stars anymore.

Seems gratuitous though, you could get a new monitor every two weeks with FPP earnings of that magnitude.

[Lukie]

From the stars FAQ page:

Q. How much play does it take to earn a trip to the WSOP main event?

A. It depends on the individual's specific playing habits, but probably in the range of 250,000 VPP-earning hands or the equivalent in tournament play. For a player who plays four tables at a time for twenty hours a week, this can be accomplished in less than a year.

Anybody know what constitutes a VPP-earning hand? If I remember my talks with fearfact correctly, it was something like, if a hand generated $1 total rake or more, everyone at the table got a VPP/FPP (multiplied by their bonus status). If it didn't, nobody got anything. So let's just say if I play 350,000 hands by next year, 250,000 earn VPP. That's only about 7000 hds/week or less then 15 hrs/week.

My calculations could be way off.

[Renton]

so you only need 250000 vpp?

i thought it was like 800000.

[Renton]

also, if the rake is 3.00 does everyone get 3 fpps?

I doubt it.

[Lukie]

Heh, well I only have 21k right now, but I havn't got around to playing as much as I'd like to.

[Renton]

The party points system sucks. They give the same amount for a raked hand at the 25nl level as they do at 2knl.

[Lukie]

so you only need 250000 vpp?

i thought it was like 800000.

700,000, but it's fpp.

so if you have supernova status, and you earn 100,000 vpp, then you earned 350,000 fpp in that same time period.

[Lukie]

also, if the rake is 3.00 does everyone get 3 fpps?

I doubt it.

I'm pretty sure no.

I think $1 is the cutoff. At or above that, everyone gets 1. Below that, nobody gets anything. If that's correct, that would mean the microstakes basically never earn any FPP.

[Renton]

I think they do fractions for lower limits. I play 10nl there for a while when I first started and somehow accumulated like 40 points.

[Lukie]

$20 pots happen...

[Renton]

ya you're probably right. Seems like I read somewhere about fractions of a FPP tho.

[givememyleg]

One (1) Frequent Player Point (FPP) is awarded for playing a hand in which the rake reaches:

* $0.50 for fixed limit poker games with stakes $0.50/$1.00 and lower
* $0.75 for fixed limit poker games with stakes $1/$2
* $1.00 for
o pot limit poker games
o no limit poker games
o fixed limit poker games with stakes $2/$4 and higher


Hm, so does that mean if you're dealt cards and the rake reaches $1 you get 1 FPP? Orrrr say you fold UTG and the rake reaches $1, do you get nothing?

[Iwind]

Well this tread has certainly changed topic, lol

[Lukie]

Hm, so does that mean if you're dealt cards and the rake reaches $1 you get 1 FPP? Orrrr say you fold UTG and the rake reaches $1, do you get nothing?

Actually I THINK (and i could be wrong on this) that you get 1 VPP for every hand the rake reaches $1, and to figure out your FPP's, you multiply it by your multiplier (depends on your silverstar/goldstar status or whatever). And it doesn't matter what you did in the hand, as long as you were dealt cards, you are just as qualified to get your points as the mega lagtard raising 50% of his hands.

[Lukie]

Well this tread has certainly changed topic, lol

lol, yeah

not my fault, I swear .

On topic, I don't hear of many (read: none) online MTTer's with ROI's of 700%...