Better than averege per round
Here is system I devised and I’ve been using for years now and being pretty happy with it.
For every tournament round that you advanced give yourself points that are result of number of players at the table divided by number of places advancing to the next round. Divide your total score by total rounds you’ve played. That’s all.
This method presents a rather good estimate of how much better you are than the average player per round.
It helps to estimate expected value for different tournaments depending how many rounds they are scheduled for.
For example, five players and two advancing, advancing entitles you to two and half points. For one advancing out of five players you would score five points.
If you played total of twenty tournaments rounds, fifteen rounds where two advanced and you succeeded eight times, and five times where one out of five advanced and you succeeded twice, your total score would be:
Eight times 2.5 plus two times 5 equals 30. Divided by twenty (rounds played) equals 1.5.
That would mean that you represented 50% better result per round than the average player (which would be a very high score).
If you have a tournament where there will be three rounds including final you could assume that you will have 1.5 better chance to advance into the second round, and almost the same advantage for advancing and playing in the final (there is a very small effect of elimination of weaker players), so your total value for such tournament would be about 3.3 bigger than for the average player. So, if the entry fee was $50 you would expect to win $165, minus entry fee $50, your net profit about $115.
I recommend that you exclude final rounds from your stats, as there may be different goals for playing it, some players may go strictly for maximum $$ win and some can go for the prestige of winning, or placing high, or some mix of the above.
A better way for the final round is to divide money you won by the average prize for all finalists. So if you finished second for $300 and prizes were $500, $300, $100, $60, and $40. Total money $1,000, five players, average $200, your $300 is worth 1.5 points.
You can mix and match all formats. For heads-up, you have two players, one winner. Two divided by one makes two points for winning, zero for losing. One out of seven advancing would afford the winner (advancing player) seven points.
The best players would get around 1.3 to 1.5 score. I don’t think you can get anything higher than that even with perfect play but without knowing exact ratio of remaining cards left in the deck. Anything over 100 rounds played should be rather representative of players’ skills.
Hope it helps.
PS
Of course you may need other statistics, so jot down every round you played. I do it like this “2 oo 5 Y/N”, which means two advancing out of five players, yes/no advanced.
For heads-up you may have two sets of data, whether you were first or last to bet on the last hand.
S. Yama
.
