Jump to content


Sharkscope-i Don't Get It...


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 Chisox6

Chisox6

    Poker Forum Newbie

  • Members
  • 71 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Milwaukee, WI
  • Favorite Poker Game:PLO

Posted 30 September 2007 - 09:10 PM

Was looking someone up today and they had 54 games with a ROI of 44% but a total profit of negative $17. Any help on explaining how this is possible would be appreciated.

#2 ThePhoenix88

ThePhoenix88

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 3,093 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boca Raton, FL

Posted 30 September 2007 - 09:15 PM

Well if they min cashed most of the time it would make sense.
I date fat chicks just to balance my range.


Pokerstars, Full Tilt, Ultimate Bet: ThePhoenix88
Bodog: talonwhacker

#3 onlyme386

onlyme386

    I have a "stack" and I know how to use it

  • Members
  • 5,004 posts

Posted 30 September 2007 - 09:34 PM

View PostChisox6, on Sunday, September 30th, 2007, 10:10 PM, said:

Was looking someone up today and they had 54 games with a ROI of 44% but a total profit of negative $17. Any help on explaining how this is possible would be appreciated.
They played a couple games higher than their average game and didn't cash.
s

#4 XXEddie

XXEddie

    I have a pair, I have a top pair.

  • Members
  • 13,401 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Centennial, CO

Posted 30 September 2007 - 09:39 PM

Mine400 games playerdAverage stake $17Average Profit $5ROI: 6%Total profit: $1922me confused too

#5 Teck_72

Teck_72

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,227 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stevens Point, WI
  • Favorite Poker Game:7 card Stud

Posted 30 September 2007 - 09:42 PM

obv brag eddie
Travisteck - Pstars/FT

#6 pokerfan1080

pokerfan1080

    Poker Forum Groupie

  • Members
  • 756 posts
  • Location:Lakelands, Nova Scotia

Posted 01 October 2007 - 03:23 AM

View Postonlyme386, on Monday, October 1st, 2007, 2:34 AM, said:

They played a couple games higher than their average game and didn't cash.
This is what I understand it to be too.Check out the FAQ on sharkscope, it's explained there.
Big fish eat little fish...

I'm hungry!

#7 hblask

hblask

    Perpetual slow learner

  • Members
  • 9,860 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minnesota
  • Interests:Just deal the cards already

Posted 01 October 2007 - 05:54 AM

View Postpokerfan1080, on Monday, October 1st, 2007, 6:23 AM, said:

This is what I understand it to be too.Check out the FAQ on sharkscope, it's explained there.
I believe this is the quick explanation:4 Sngs:1. $5 buy-in, win $10, 100% profit2. $5 buy-in, win $10, 100% profit3. $5 buy-in, win $10, 100% profit4. $50 buy-in, out of the money, -100% profitAverage profit = (100 + 100 + 100 + (-100))/4 = 50%Total loss = -$35No, that's not how I'd figure it either. But it's a complicated issue over the long run. Basically, the %profit is only valid over a single level. Total return is a more meaningful figure, but they don't compute that for you, unless you only play one level.
"Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?" -- J. Coulton


#8 eYank

eYank

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 4,344 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Massapequa, NY
  • Favorite Poker Game:Micro Stakes NLHE

Posted 01 October 2007 - 06:05 AM

View Posthblask, on Monday, October 1st, 2007, 5:54 AM, said:

I believe this is the quick explanation:4 Sngs:1. $5 buy-in, win $10, 100% profit2. $5 buy-in, win $10, 100% profit3. $5 buy-in, win $10, 100% profit4. $50 buy-in, out of the money, -100% profitAverage profit = (100 + 100 + 100 + (-100))/4 = 50%Total loss = -$35No, that's not how I'd figure it either. But it's a complicated issue over the long run. Basically, the %profit is only valid over a single level. Total return is a more meaningful figure, but they don't compute that for you, unless you only play one level.
yes you are rightgo read the sharkscope FAQ'sit does it by avg. ROI not overall ROI




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users