What percent ROI should someone have to be considered a shark

What percent ROI should someone have to be considered a shark

that really depends. some people are cash game sharks and some are tourney sharks. if someone is 20%-30% roi in tourneys i dont really consider that bad. if you look someone up and they are 458% roi then most likely they have only played a few tourneys and the roi isnt really very accurate. just my opinion. honestly if a guy cashes for a profit 1/3-1/5 of the tourneys he plays imma consider that person a shark n tough to beat

I dunno what % of ROI is good but ITM cashes would be good at 20% but you wont find many pros who are above 15% ITM cashes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PokerTony

What percent ROI should someone have to be considered a shark

---

ROI % by itself can be inaccurate when judging a player's ability. A player could have one big cash, but a small sample size of tournaments played, which can skew the numbers. A player could also be playing outside of their bankroll/ability, and as a result have stats that look far worse than the person's true ability.

You would need a lot more information beyond ROI to determine whether a player is a shark or not.

my ROI is 25% micro stakes. ima micro shark atm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abwil2

I dunno what % of ROI is good but ITM cashes would be good at 20% but you wont find many pros who are above 15% ITM cashes

---

I have to Agree here Roi% dont really determine anything ITM% is a far better judge of skill

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RavenKitty

I have to Agree here Roi% dont really determine anything ITM% is a far better judge of skill

---

Not entirely. If you're a min-cashing nit, you're most likely losing money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ssuglia

Not entirely. If you're a min-cashing nit, you're most likely losing money.

---

Like me??? that seems to me all i can do anywhere i play

Where do I start with this post. First off people, stop posting such ambiguous questions. Sharks are concerned with taking mtt's down. When you look at mtt's on merge, the fields are small and over 40%of the money is in the top 3 spots. ITM doesn't mean shit. If your going to win mtt's that have large fields, your going to have to play a higher variance style of poker. Because the fields on merge are on the smaller side, it makes sense that top players would have a slightly higher ITM% as compared to players who play with bigger fields like on PokerStars. I know a player that played here and thought he was a stud. Guess what? His ITM % was a lot higher than some of the top guys on the merge, yet he was a break even player in mtt's. You have to win mtt's to make them profitable. Sure your going to find spots where your best play is to sit tight and get in the money; but by and far your main goal in mtt's should be to set yourself up early for deep runs. I had a spot on the bubble in a mtt today. I contemplated jamming 30bb's on the button with blinds and antes out there to avoid getting 3bet shoved on by an active BB. Then I had a moment of clarity. I had KQ and decided to take the higher variance line and raise call-off a shove by him because I thought he would likely get out of line given the bubble. Sure enough he shipped it on me. Now he could have had hands that were flipping with me/slightly ahead or even have me dominated; but the point is I wanted more chips to go deep and wasn't afraid of stone bubbling it. I called and had his Q10 dominated and help for a real workable stack. I ended up making it down to like 50 left and ran JJ into QQ 25bb's deep. The point is to play to win. Hell what's an extra 5-10% ITM boost going to do for you, if your stack is never healthy enough to make the top 3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sickread23

Where do I start with this post. First off people, stop posting such ambiguous questions. Sharks are concerned with taking mtt's down. When you look at mtt's on merge, the fields are small and over 40%of the money is in the top 3 spots. ITM doesn't mean shit. If your going to win mtt's that have large fields, your going to have to play a higher variance style of poker. Because the fields on merge are on the smaller side, it makes sense that top players would have a slightly higher ITM% as compared to players who play with bigger fields like on PokerStars. I know a player that played here and thought he was a stud. Guess what? His ITM % was a lot higher than some of the top guys on the merge, yet he was a break even player in mtt's. You have to win mtt's to make them profitable. Sure your going to find spots where your best play is to sit tight and get in the money; but by and far your main goal in mtt's should be to set yourself up early for deep runs. I had a spot on the bubble in a mtt today. I contemplated jamming 30bb's on the button with blinds and antes out there to avoid getting 3bet shoved on by an active BB. Then I had a moment of clarity. I had KQ and decided to take the higher variance line and raise call-off a shove by him because I thought he would likely get out of line given the bubble. Sure enough he shipped it on me. Now he could have had hands that were flipping with me/slightly ahead or even have me dominated; but the point is I wanted more chips to go deep and wasn't afraid of stone bubbling it. I called and had his Q10 dominated and help for a real workable stack. I ended up making it down to like 50 left and ran JJ into QQ 25bb's deep. The point is to play to win. Hell what's an extra 5-10% ITM boost going to do for you, if your stack is never healthy enough to make the top 3.

---

now it all makes sense. obv that is your style and it works for alot of people...just not my style