|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 11/20/2008 2:59:16 AM PACIFIC |
 SnG vs Multi table tourneys, Brett LeMarinel, 28. Sep 2003 18:03 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| OK- I have been playing regularly for about 4 months now. I originally picked up poker at the 1/2 HE tables in the Taj Mahal of Atlantic City. Over the past 4 months I play mostly NL HE either cash games or SnG tournaments. Playing relatively small limits I have built my bankroll to just over 4000 from a 50 buy in. I am pretty happy with that but as everyone who plays poker should I aspire for greener pastures. Getting to the point... Over 4 months I have finished in the $$ of SnG tourneys roughly 75% the time in about 250 SnGs varying in buy ins from 10+1 to 100+8, but when I have not had much success in multi table tourneys. I usually try to play pretty tight through the opening rounds and build a moderate stack. As I approach the money, I am usually above the average only to find myself getting involved in hands where I usually hold a good starting hand (9s or better wired or AK, AQ, KQs). Recently I find myself either being outdrawn to a river flush who is allin with J6s or I end up being beaten by a small pair who catches a turn or river set. My question is, should I play more aggressive towards the money with moderate hands, or am I just dealing with bad beats? I suppose I could just keep playing SnG and make plenty of $$ from the fishes there, but Id really like any input on some things to do in multi table tourneys to get to the final tables. P.S my best finish in multi is 8th in a 20+2 NL tourney with 720 players. Usually I finish about 60-80th. "Some people dream of success, while others wake up and work hard for it every day." Brett | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: SnG vs Multi table tourneys, chasepoker, 29. Sep 2003 04:56 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I would say that if you are finishing in the money in 75% of your sit and go's then just stick to these you will earn far more per hour playing in these than you will in any tournament ! Chasepoker | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: SnG vs Multi table tourneys, Grateful Rooster, 29. Sep 2003 09:31 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Damn! 75% money on SNGs is the best result I've seen reported here. Looks like you're pretty much printing money there. I would be very interested to learn about your general strategy there. I think it'd be hard to top the SNG results with multi-table play, especially considering time invested. You don't have to place in many tourneys to show a big profit, but, from my limited experience, I think you face more of those bad beat scenarios in tourney play. You'll beat most of them, but it may only take one to put you out of contention. Also, you'll invest a lot of time when you come close in multi-table, but not in SNGs. GR | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: SnG vs Multi table tourneys, SmellsLikeVictory, 29. Sep 2003 09:57 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| You should give us advice. 75% in the money is almost too good to be true. I find it a little hard to believe, even if you played absolutely perfect poker, at some point you're going to take some bad beats. Most good, winning players achieve 50%, maybe a little better. Even if you only placed 3rd in every event, that's an ROI of 37%! If your 1st, 2nd & 3rd place finishes were evenly distributed, your ROI would be a stunning 127%, if my calculations are correct. You should be writing a book on how to beat SnGs, why would you even bother with full tourneys if you truely achieve this in-the-money rate? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: SnG vs Multi table tourneys, Kyle, 29. Sep 2003 12:31 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Maybe its beginners luck! For me it is. I have placed at least 3rd in 15 of 20 7 card stud SnG's. But I know now the tide is turning as I have placed below 4th in the last three. I did see a pattern developing, too. Midway through the 20 sng's I would find the same scenario: Two leads are in big money, (3 times my stack) and it would slowly bleed away. But I always seemed to hold onto third. Initially, I would place a lot of firsts and seconds, with an occasional third, then midway thru, the above pattern started developing. All online play. Kyle | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: SnG vs Multi table tourneys, modestmouse, 29. Sep 2003 23:38 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| 75% b.s. chance! sorry, just seems like bragging. 75%?? ha ha, and i though i exxxagerated my winning %! (ok very very tiny chance he's the luckiest man alive that just started poker) on 29. Sep 2003 09:57 SmellsLikeVictory wrote: > You should give us advice. 75% in the money is almost too good to be true. I find > it a little hard to believe, even if you played absolutely perfect poker, at some > point you're going to take some bad beats. Most good, winning players achieve 50%, > maybe a little better. Even if you only placed 3rd in every event, that's an ROI of > 37%! If your 1st, 2nd & 3rd place finishes were evenly distributed, your ROI would > be a stunning 127%, if my calculations are correct. > > You should be writing a book on how to beat SnGs, why would you even bother with > full tourneys if you truely achieve this in-the-money rate? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: SnG vs Multi table tourneys, Brett LeMarinel, 29. Sep 2003 23:51 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think everyone here is missing the point of my post, I wasn't trying to be boastful or brash, I was just stating a rough estimate. The percentage doesnt really matter to me, forget the percentage of placing in the $$, the point I am making is that I do very well at SnG's but have yet to have a consistently good showing in multi table tournaments and was wondering if anyone had any advice. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: SnG vs Multi table tourneys, modestmouse, 30. Sep 2003 13:34 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| sorry, its just hard to repsond to someone thats that good. kidding. but, it is weird you are having this problem, ive played a zillion sng and nl tournies and i dont think i play that differently and have equal results in both (pretty much). i might do more gear shifting because its much longer obviously. and the main thing people (and u) probably already know, i play less aggressive in a big nl tourney than a sng. i just think your problem might be playing against tougher opponants (i think u mentioned that) so whats the advice? hmm, i would examine overall stategy and try to make sure your not playing too loose especially towards the end when u may have won earlier with looser holdings but now get into to trouble. i see that a lot. sitn gos are usually very loose aggressive and ive youve won close to that many you HAVE to be too loose to beat those clowns(obviously your not as loose as them though and your picking your spots well or u wouldnt beat them) but for tournies u gottaa be tight aggressive most of the time. with you record my friend, enter evey godamn satellite and and get into some good tournies from cheap and learn by playing. there are no easy answers. i learned by playing. phil hellmuth doesnt read poker books and learned by playing. im not saying to ignore books or better players, but i think people put way to much into learing the non hard way, by playing. NL is just too complex to read a book and beat 700 players that have been doing it awhile. and you have 4 months. good luck and play hard. on 29. Sep 2003 23:51 Brett LeMarinel wrote: > I think everyone here is missing the point of my post, I wasn't trying to be boastful or brash, > I was just stating a rough estimate. The percentage doesnt really matter to me, forget the > percentage of placing in the $$, the point I am making is that I do very well at SnG's but have > yet to have a consistently good showing in multi table tournaments and was wondering if anyone > had any advice. > | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: SnG vs Multi table tourneys, Formless, 1. Oct 2003 02:24 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I play S & G tournaments almost exclusively now and my results in big tournaments have not been great. It's a much different style of play. So I just don't play big tournaments anymore. Big tournaments should be played for ego, fun, or as a longshot for a big payoff. If you are any kind of player, you should be able to find a more profitable ring game or play a few S&Gs. Take PokerStars $200 weekly tournaments. A tough field, you'd do well to have a 35% expected ROI, so it's worth, what, seventy bucks over maybe 4 hours? And that's a theoretical, volatile, usually-zero seventy bucks. Total waste of time in my view but hey, everyone wants to be a PokerStar. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: SnG vs Multi table tourneys, modestmouse, 1. Oct 2003 11:44 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| i think its well established that few people are great at both ring games and tournies and most people would consider sng and tounies more compatible than money ring games and sng's. but either way, that doesnt help our hero, he wants to play tournies not money games. also, suggesting that tournies are a total waste of time is laughable. just because your not good at them doesnt mean other people can't make them a profitable endeavor. using only pokerstars with a low buyin is not a good example. in many tournies i've been able to make 200 sng wins. i guess i should just stick to money games... on 1. Oct 2003 02:24 Formless wrote: If you are any kind of player, you should be able to find a more profitable ring game or play a few S&Gs. > > Take PokerStars $200 weekly tournaments. A tough field, you'd do well to have a 35% > expected ROI, so it's worth, what, seventy bucks over maybe 4 hours? And that's a > theoretical, volatile, usually-zero seventy bucks. Total waste of time in my view > but hey, everyone wants to be a PokerStar. > > > | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: SnG vs Multi table tourneys, Grateful Rooster, 1. Oct 2003 15:10 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think about it this way. Assume for the argument that SNG and multis require the same skill set. Also assume fairly random distribution of entrants in both at the same buy-in. To make the money in a tourney you need to be inside top 10%. You only have to regularly beat 6 other shlubs in a SNG -- top 33%. Luck balances out in the very long run. Because of the smaller samples in SNGs, you are much less likely to face a great player in a random SNG. If you are in the top quartile of players skillwise, you are likely to be in the money in SNGs much more often (w variation due to luck). Yes the payoff for tourneys is much greater, so you don't need to place as often, but I don't think this overcomes your chances of cracking the money. This doesn't even consider the time investment. Anybody looked at it this way? Bottom line is that you'll face good players every time in a tourney, but not in an SNG. Think of it like in NCAA b-ball. Do you like your team's chances better in a conference tourney or the big dance? Of course this rests on a lot of assumptions, and you know what happens when you assume. GR | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: SnG vs Multi table tourneys, modestmouse, 1. Oct 2003 15:37 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| your post is at least somewhat reasonable. however, i don't think of the sng's i play as "easy" and i dont know where u play but in 10-30 sngs i see good players. but i never think of any poker game as easy. but whatever, the same players often play in both single and multi table tournies anyway, so if u can beat them all day in small tables, why not a multi? your only playing 10 at a time dude... of course what makes multis harder is beating more than 6 or 10 people. my belief is if you can beat 10 people in a sng 75% of the time outta 250 sngs, you should be able, with some adjustments, to make the money in multis. provided the skill level of the competition in the multis was the same. that is what the dude was posting about, how and why he is not successfull in the multis. as previously suggested, maybe he should just stick the lucrative sngs, and get back to us about his winning percentage, as i believe it is totally skewed and will fall by a lot. (not that i want him to lose, i just dont think its possible to keep up!) :) . on 1. Oct 2003 15:10 Grateful Rooster wrote: > I think about it this way. Assume for the argument that SNG and multis require the same skill > set. Also assume fairly random distribution of entrants in both at the same buy-in. To make > the money in a tourney you need to be inside top 10%. You only have to regularly beat 6 other > shlubs in a SNG -- top 33%. Luck balances out in the very long run. Because of the smaller > samples in SNGs, you are much less likely to face a great player in a random SNG. If you are > in the top quartile of players skillwise, you are likely to be in the money in SNGs much more > often (w variation due to luck). Yes the payoff for tourneys is much greater, so you don't > need to place as often, but I don't think this overcomes your chances of cracking the money. > This doesn't even consider the time investment. Anybody looked at it this way? Bottom line is > that you'll face good players every time in a tourney, but not in an SNG. Think of it like in > NCAA b-ball. Do you like your team's chances better in a conference tourney or the big > dance? > > Of course this rests on a lot of assumptions, and you know what happens when you assume. > > GR | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: SnG vs Multi table tourneys, Grateful Rooster, 2. Oct 2003 07:49 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| My intent was not to imply that players at SNGs are easy, but that in multi's you face many more players over the course of the event and it is harder %wise to get into the money. If we divide players into two sets -- good and great -- with great players being few in number and having a significant advantage over good players, then your earning potential is greater in SNGs, because you have a higher chance of not facing a great player in each SNG, and still making the $$ even if you do. In tourneys, you are much more likely to face great players, and though you might sneak into the money occasionally, the long term ROI will be less. Of course if you are a great player, like our 75% friend may be, then tourneys could be highly profitable. Here's an extreme example to explain my point. Givens: * universe = 10 great players, 70 good players, 20 poor players * Great players always beat good and poor. Good always beat poor. Random wins within class. * All players play 1 of two 50-player multis paying top 10% lasting 5 hours and 5 9-player SNGs paying top 3 lasting an hour each (equal time in multis and SNGs). * Player mix is random. In this example, on average the tourneys will populate 5 great players to take all the money. An individual good player will win only very rarely (when variation puts less than 5 great players in a tourney and he beats the other good players). In SNGs, average is 1 great player 6-7 good and 2 poor. In a split like that, good players have around a 30% chance to make the money in a given SNG. Variation will also allow a good player to win some SNGs, but very rarely a tourney. Yes, poker is not that linear nor definable, but I think it's close enough to make my point. So play tourneys for fun and to test your skills, but don't expect to see good profits unless you find you are one of the great players. That's more than my 2-cents allowance. -GR | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: SnG vs Multi table tourneys, betelgeese, 2. Oct 2003 14:54 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| btw, congrats to eman for winning $1150 in a multi last night, i wonder if he plays sngs?! just kidding! i think your kinda right, but i dont know. i just believe that sng are pretty smalltime and and there can be more profit in tournies. thanks for noticing my point: OUR HERO SAYS HE WINS 75% AT SNG's!!! i think my comments to formless are with that in mind.(btw, im modest, it wont let me logon) > Of course if you are a great player, like our 75% friend may be, then tourneys could be highly > profitable. i was responding to formless: So I just don't play big tournaments anymore. Big tournaments should be played for ego, fun, or as a longshot for a big payoff. If you are any kind of player, you should be able to find a more profitable ring game or play a few S&Gs. Take PokerStars $200 weekly tournaments. A tough field, you'd do well to have a 35% expected ROI, so it's worth, what, seventy bucks over maybe 4 hours? And that's a theoretical, volatile, usually-zero seventy bucks. Total waste of time in my view but hey, everyone wants to be a PokerStar. ive noticed that some people miss the point of the original post here. maybe i miss the point. maybe people should put the pipes down. heh. but the point for our hero is he should continue to play multis with that winning percentage at singles (indicating good skill) and he will prevail, and it could very well be profitable and fun. if anyone told me the same story, i would encourage them not to give up 'cause its "to tough" or "not a good roi"...i would tell them they have the talent to win multis with work eventually. btw dude was playing live, which with sng and multis are obviously not the same as net....and many people on this forum seem to be skewed to analysing net poker patterns. if this guy can read people and play this well live, he's even more likely than a net player to do well in tounies at the same casino with the same players. "Big tournaments should be played for ego, fun, or as a longshot for a big payoff. If you are any kind of player, you should be able to find a more profitable ring game or play a few S&Gs. Take PokerStars $200 weekly tournaments. A tough field, you'd do well to have a 35% expected ROI, so it's worth, what, seventy bucks over maybe 4 hours? And that's a theoretical, volatile, usually-zero seventy bucks. Total waste of time in my view but hey, everyone wants to be a PokerStar." | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: SnG vs Multi table tourneys, Grateful Rooster, 2. Oct 2003 15:12 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Good points. Especially if he's refering to live games. I would likely be very weak reading tells in a live game and maybe even give a few away myself. But, hey, Money can do it, so why not us? Yes, our hero should keep trying at tournies, especially if he can use SNGs like a bank to support his tourney entries. SNGs may be small time, but they can be good earners, and to me, more fun than ring games. At least at my low levels. GR | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: SnG vs Multi table tourneys, betelgeese, 2. Oct 2003 17:22 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| totally agree with all....finally heh. -modest on 2. Oct 2003 15:12 Grateful Rooster wrote: > Good points. Especially if he's refering to live games. I would likely be very weak reading tells in a live game > and maybe even give a few away myself. But, hey, Money can do it, so why not us? Yes, our hero should keep trying > at tournies, especially if he can use SNGs like a bank to support his tourney entries. > > SNGs may be small time, but they can be good earners, and to me, more fun than ring games. At least at my low > levels. > > GR | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|