SNG $10 v. $20 & $20 v $30?

[Maulik]

I have the bankroll required to play either buyin, my question is the play similar at both levels. If the play is similar then, I don't see a reason to grind out the $10 tourneys when I could be using my time in a similar fashion to play $20 tourneys.

And, since I'm curious, what about $20 v $30?

[skipperbob]

You better hope that Irieguy is in a good mood when he reads this /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[The Yugoslavian]

[ QUOTE ]
You better hope that Irieguy is in a good mood when he reads this /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, c'mon, that can't be our answer to *everything*!

Yugoslav

[The Yugoslavian]

[ QUOTE ]
I have the bankroll required to play either buyin, my question is the play similar at both levels.


[/ QUOTE ]

You're missing a question mark. But I'll answer anyway. They are similar yet different. Both are beatable but by different degrees. I have no idea if you would beat one but not the other. Just don't play the $6s on party.

[ QUOTE ]

If the play is similar then, I don't see a reason to grind out the $10 tourneys when I could be using my time in a similar fashion to play $20 tourneys.


[/ QUOTE ]

But the play won't be of the same quality. Do you see why?

[insert game theory explanation here]

[insert explanation of why that doesn't matter if you can beat both levels solidly here]

[ QUOTE ]

And, since I'm curious, what about $20 v $30?

[/ QUOTE ]

[insert game theory explanation here]

Yeah, each level gets harder. The jump from 30 to 50 is probably the biggest but the jump from 50 to 100 and 100 to 200 is also quite big (I've heard).

Also, implicit in your post you assume you can beat any of the lower limit buying SNGs, no problem. If this is the case, and you have the bankroll. Play whatever will make you happy.

Yugoslav
(Whose dad would *never* defer to him on any subject, /images/graemlins/wink.gif )

[AA suited]

in feb i have a 1% roi at 30+3 but 24% roi at 50+5. 300+ games in each during that month.

go figure...

if you are a winning player at 10+1, then you'll be a winning player at 30+3. just make sure you have 50x your bankroll before playing at that level.

in dec, i had a -50 SnG swing at 30+3. /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

[bones]

I'll say it here, but I guess it applies to all "Should I move up" posts. Aside from bankroll considerations (and possibly ahead of them), the most important factor in your long-term sng success will be ability to handle losing. If you move up to 20+2s, can you handle losing 10 buy-ins in a row? If not, don't go anywhere. It will happen. Doesn't matter if you're Phil Ivey, doesn't matter if you follow Aleo's guide to the letter. You're gonna lose. If you can't stomach losing at that buy-in, it will spiral downward from there. Your play will deteriorate and you'll lose confidence.

I can tell you this from experience, as can most posters I'm sure.

[applejuicekid]

[ QUOTE ]
if you are a winning player at 10+1, then you'll be a winning player at 30+3

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope this true.

I just tried to move up to the 30's and lost $450 in 20 games back to the 20s for now.

-50 sorry that happened to you, but that makes me feel better in a strange way.

I've done real well at the 20s, but at this point feel like the 30s are unbeatable.

[djg40]

[ QUOTE ]
I'll say it here, but I guess it applies to all "Should I move up" posts. Aside from bankroll considerations (and possibly ahead of them), the most important factor in your long-term sng success will be ability to handle losing. If you move up to 20+2s, can you handle losing 10 buy-ins in a row? If not, don't go anywhere. It will happen. Doesn't matter if you're Phil Ivey, doesn't matter if you follow Aleo's guide to the letter. You're gonna lose. If you can't stomach losing at that buy-in, it will spiral downward from there. Your play will deteriorate and you'll lose confidence.

I can tell you this from experience, as can most posters I'm sure.

[/ QUOTE ]

What is this "Aleo's Guide?"

[cryptical]

[ QUOTE ]
What is this "Aleo's Guide?"

[/ QUOTE ]
Beating Party 10+1 SNGs (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=singletable&Number=602767& fpart=&PHPSESSID=)

[The Yugoslavian]

[ QUOTE ]

in dec, i had a -50 SnG swing at 30+3. /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah. But just wait until that happens to you at the $55s.

Then you'll be both /images/graemlins/shocked.gif and /images/graemlins/mad.gif.

Yugoslav

[The Yugoslavian]

[ QUOTE ]
If you move up to 20+2s, can you handle losing 10 buy-ins in a row?

[/ QUOTE ]

You better be able to handle losing more than that and not going on tilt. Although, you did say in a row. IMO losing 10 in a row isn't nearly as difficult to deal with as say, losing 50 buyins over (let's say) 200 STTs.

So, can you and your bankroll handle losing 30+ buyins and still play well and get better at this higher buyin?? If the answer is 'yes' then taking a shot isn't a bad idea (of course assuming your play in the lower buyin is already solid).

Yugoslav

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
if you are a winning player at 10+1, then you'll be a winning player at 30+3. just make sure you have 50x your bankroll before playing at that level.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is absolultely true. And if you're having trouble, you are likely playing too tight. And if you really want to increase your ROI, sit to the right of TheYugoslav.

[AA suited]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

in dec, i had a -50 SnG swing at 30+3. /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah. But just wait until that happens to you at the $55s.

Then you'll be both /images/graemlins/shocked.gif and /images/graemlins/mad.gif.

Yugoslav

[/ QUOTE ]

not a problem. i have the bankroll to handle it ($4k in the acct) /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[kevstreet]

[ QUOTE ]
-50 sorry that happened to you, but that makes me feel better in a strange way.


[/ QUOTE ]

I know exactly how you feel. During my last bad run I found solace in other's misfortune. Although I wish everyone the best of luck, it still helps to hear you're not the only one struggling. If I can remember correctly, I think it was an old post by Daliman and one of his bad streaks that made me feel better. I really like the candidness on this forum. Especialy because the caliber of the players is so high. To hear AA Suited and Yugoslav running bad you know it's just the nature of poker.

[Maulik]

It's great to hear people being honest with their play and that they are losing. When you invest money in a company or put your own time in for something (such as your own business or I hear people play poker around here) you may run dry for some time before you hit gold, or perhaps bronze. Profit is inevitable at some point if you keep at.

You may lose the shirt off your back at the same time, but if you saw that coming good, if not shame on you, for you were not being fair to yourself and accepting such consequences.

It may take you a few years before you are able to resolve things or as many as five companies (for entrepreneurs) they say before you get going with 1 you can expect to fail the first 4 times.

I'm just glad more often than not that this forum is providing me with a good picture of what I can expect, for that I thank you.

[UMTerp]

Dude, you have to give me my avatar back. Everytime I see it, I think it's me posting.

Can't you find a different Terp picture?

[The Yugoslavian]

[ QUOTE ]

Can't you find a different Terp picture?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ummm. This logic will get you nowhere. I hope you see why, /images/graemlins/wink.gif.

Yugoslav
(who, for the record, does think Maulik should get a new avatar)

[1C5]

You guys really think that if a player can beat the 10s he can beat the 30s? And I don't mean having a 2$ ROI at the 30s, I mean for a decent ROI. The way Irie has talked in the past, the 30s are quite different from the 10s. (and the 20s are in between /images/graemlins/grin.gif)

[The Yugoslavian]

[ QUOTE ]
You guys really think that if a player can beat the 10s he can beat the 30s? And I don't mean having a 2$ ROI at the 30s, I mean for a decent ROI. The way Irie has talked in the past, the 30s are quite different from the 10s. (and the 20s are in between /images/graemlins/grin.gif)

[/ QUOTE ]

If someone is truly beating the 10s for a high ROI then he/she should be able to beat teh 30s for a high ROI. The problem is that no one has enough stats to *know* their ROI. So, players who have plenty of leaks will be beating the 10s for, oh let's say, 30% ROI when they're really beating it for 10% ROI. Now, when they move up to the 30s, perhaps they're breaking even or even slightly +ROI -- well, that will all change when they hit a bad run or deal with variance of 3x the $$. Now the player is very likely losing at the 30s.

IMO, the similarities between the 10s, 20s and 30s outweight the differences. However, they still are quite different and not only do adjustments need to be made but one's ROI can fall significantly if certain ones aren't made. Some not optimal plays in the $11s are still +$EV (just not optimally so) but at the $33s all of a sudden they become big leaks and are -$EV.

Anyway, I think there is a pretty big difference in play between the 10s and 30s that *does* have a significant impact on ROI (which only gets more significant at the 50s+).

Yugoslav

[bunky9590]

i dunno about the others, but I played a $20 +2 today, my first one ever. The play did not impress me in the least. seems like eveyone is pretty tight early on, but plays really weak around the bubble.

I finished 2nd. Sorry if that doesn't help, but I wasn't impressed with my table, a couple donks but in general the play was bordering on weak tight, there were a couple people that had a grasp on it though.