Mini Step 5, I was excited for all of 8 seconds...

[FatalError]

Until i saw the most disgusting payout schedule i've ever seen
2000
1000
500
300
200

So 2 of the people in the money lose money, and 3rd place wins 70$ after the rake... does anyone here think these might be even worth playing for the average 100 or 200 4 tabler? i just get the feeling that aggressive bubble play goes out the door unless the accumulation methods become more important IN the money with a focus on 1st or 2nd as others accept the 100 and 200$ increases up to 3rd.

I'd like to be able to play some bigger SnG's but the 1000 Steps are too much for me and i'd rather not do step 4 as some others suggest

Anyone else here have an opinion on the profitability of these in terms of estimated maximum ROI?

[obex]

[ QUOTE ]
i just get the feeling that aggressive bubble play goes out the door unless the accumulation methods become more important IN the money with a focus on 1st or 2nd as others accept the 100 and 200$ increases up to 3rd.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure I get that sentence. I don't really see a downside to the payout schedule. The better player will still be rewarded but with less overall variance. My guess is that a 20% ROI would still be very attainable.
Difference is that your payroll will not need to be twice that of the $215 game.

[Shoe]

Since they payout 5 spots, play is going to be super tight until 5 players are knocked out. Although the blinds will be lower, I think there will still be good accumulation period when there are 6-8 players or so.

[Apathy]

[ QUOTE ]
My guess is that a 20% ROI would still be very attainable.
Difference is that your payroll will not need to be twice that of the $215 game.

[/ QUOTE ]

These two sentences are both very wrong, very wrong.

That being said a different payout structure just means you need to adjust the way you play and to the way others play. There really is no "bubble" so you will see a lot of loose calling.

Expert players will still find a pretty big edge in this game but 20% is probably not close to attainable imo.

[Sponger15SB]

I'm bored of playing NL cash for right now, so I threw $120 into party.

So far in the mini step 1's I've played 7 and been ITM in every one

2 1sts
3 2-5ths
2 6ths

I'm [censored] god.

I have a feeling the payout structure won't matter to me cause i'm going to win every one.

[Shanemex]

I bought into one step 2 and so far I've paid almost $60 in rake for my one $22 entry. So I'm almost even because of rakeback. I've played ten step 2s, six step 3s, and three step 1s. I almost didn't even bother playing my step 1s. The first two times I just joined and put it on post and fold the whole time. I was going to see how many times in a row I could get in the money this way, but I decided to play out the third one once I was in the money and ended up winning. Now I'm up to step 4.

[Newt_Buggs]

I wonder if the poeple who won their way in would play tight just out of the money even though it won't even pay for the buy in. They didn't buy in, so they would see 5th place as a 194 profit if they bought into level one and would play too tight to make sure they get here.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
rakeback...step 1s...post and fold the whole time

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmmmmmm...

[DaveKForty7]

[ QUOTE ]
So I'm almost even because of rakeback.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't know they paid rakeback on the Step's. Especially the ones your freerolling into.

[obex]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My guess is that a 20% ROI would still be very attainable.
Difference is that your payroll will not need to be twice that of the $215 game.

[/ QUOTE ]

These two sentences are both very wrong, very wrong.

That being said a different payout structure just means you need to adjust the way you play and to the way others play. There really is no "bubble" so you will see a lot of loose calling.

Expert players will still find a pretty big edge in this game but 20% is probably not close to attainable imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

If 20% is attainable in $109 games (it is), what makes you think it won't be at this level? I doubt the competition is that much better - it may in fact be weaker (has been this weekend if you believe prophecy stats). I don't argue that the optimal strategy will change but paying out the top 5 HAS to reduce the overall variance. DO YOU SEE WHY??
To understand this, extend the scenario to the top 9 players getting paid. How big would your bankroll need to be then? Compare that to only the 1st place player getting paid.

[gasgod]

TKeller19 has been playing regularly in these, so they must have something going for them.

GG

[Apathy]

[ QUOTE ]
If 20% is attainable in $109 games (it is), what makes you think it won't be at this level? I doubt the competition is that much better - it may in fact be weaker (has been this weekend if you believe prophecy stats). I don't argue that the optimal strategy will change but paying out the top 5 HAS to reduce the overall variance. DO YOU SEE WHY??
To understand this, extend the scenario to the top 9 players getting paid. How big would your bankroll need to be then? Compare that to only the 1st place player getting paid.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you can acheive 20% roi in the 109s 4-tabling. I don't know anyone that does but I know a few people who are very very close (myself included), so no argument there.

But can't you see why the overall flat payout structure while reducing variance also makes a lower possible roi in these?

Plus these games are tougher then the 109s from what I've seen, no doubt, that and the lack of bubble seems to equal out skill a bit since calling pushes with marginal holdings is not as incorrect as it would be in a regular SNG.

I totally agree with the not needing double the BR, I mis-read your post last night and thought you were saying you would need a bankroll double the size of the 215s.

Not to mention the $/hour hit you would take since they don't start up as frequently. (You would need to mix them in with your regular game.

I probably would play them if I had rakeback on party (which I don't) as I think my edge would be signifigant 5-10%roi. I just can't see how 20% would be acheivable against the lineups I've seen thus far and the payout structure.

[Degen]

[ QUOTE ]
I probably would play them if I had rakeback on party (which I don't)

[/ QUOTE ]

So are these not available on the skins...? I was about to switch to my new Empire rakeback account and start attacking them.


Degen

[Apathy]

No they are only available on party because Party is run by greedy bastards who wouldn't share this kind of cash flow. If after reading my other post in this forum you still want to buy in at any other STEP then step 5, lord help you.