Party Poker -- $5+1 vs $10+1 (screw the $5)

[sahala]

If you're 4-tabling 22s and 55s or higher, or are one of the resident poker deities in the forum, you can safely ignore this post. This is directed toward the meek mortals that play the lower level SNGs.

I realize this is redundant information and completely aligned with what everyone has said all along, but the numbers are making sense for me in the Excel-chart-in-your-face sorta way.

Background: I'm new to SNGs and have been playing since the beginning of April. I've run through more than 500 SNGs with about equal doses of $5 and $10. This isn't a stellar sample size, but here are my aggregate results and conclusions:

* My ITM% for 5s and 10s are equal
* My average place finish for 5s and 10s are very close (within .2)
* However, the difference in ROI between the two is 16%, with the 10s being on the higher side.

This leads me to believe that (duh) the 10s are only marginally harder than the 5s. I believe the difference in my ROI between the two are due to a few factors:
- Rake. The bigger percentage rake itself takes up at least 9% of the 16% ROI difference.
- Attitude. I have a tendency to goof around more when playing the 5s, since it's a cheap game. Drunk poker is fun.
- More multi-tabling in the 5s. It seems more affordable to 3 or 4 table 5s. I've read a number of threads here that suggest that it seems reasonable to expect a decrease in overall ITM/ROI when multi-tabling.

Qualitatively speaking, I have noticed slightly tougher/persistent play on the bubble in the 10s. However, I filtered my tourney data down to 4th and 5th place busts in the 10s -- it turns out that my $$$ losses due to these tougher opponents in the 10s are actually not very much compared to what I'm losing to the Party Poker rake in the 5s.

Again, I'm a beginner at SNGs and for that matter, at poker. You can indeed learn SNG style play at the $5 but realistically it's just not going to be profitable. I started with a $100 buy-in and went back and forth between the 10s and 5s. If I were to do it again I would instead buy in with $400 (to account for swings) and only played 10s. I'm certain this would have been significantly more profitable.

Right now I plan on playing 10s about 80% of the time and 20s 20% of the time (bankroll permitting on the latter).

[Blarg]

I went from being unprofitable at the 5's to profitable at the 10's just on the basis of the rake difference alone. If I had started at the 10's, I probably never would have been unprofitable at all.

There's a lot to be said for the confidence factor, though. Playing above your bankroll is always a bad idea, so maybe just playing the 5's isn't that terrible an idea for a lot of people with very short bankrolls. Playing at the 10's if you can't afford an extended run of losses might adversely affect some of the people with tiny bankrolls.

[revots33]

On Party, the play at the 10's is almost identical to the 5's, and you're paying half the rake. It's a no-brainer.

Party's crappy $1 rake at the 5's actually works out to advantage, since a lot of fish figure they might as well play the 10's for the same rake. If the rake was 50 cents like most other sites, they'd probably stick to the 5's.

[Misfire]

If your bankroll dictates that you play at the 5's, find a site with $5+.50's. UB, and I think Prima has them.

[BobTacoKing]

Pokerroom also has a $0.50 rake.

[J-Lo]

stars have $6+.50... even better

[sahala]

[ QUOTE ]
stars have $6+.50... even better

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. Had I shopped around more I probably would have started here instead of chasing a deposit bonus.

[Misfire]

[ QUOTE ]
stars have $6+.50... even better

[/ QUOTE ]

Those are 9-seaters, right? Does that make a difference? Is the payout structure still 50-30-20?

[valenzuela]

Great post, however dont make the mistake of thinking the $6s arent beatable because they are, but is MUCH more porfitable to play the 11s.

[zipppy]

I disagree with the idea that 6s and 11s are almost equal in all respects but the rake. I think you raise some valid points, but I also think that they don't necessarily make $6 SNGs worse than $11 SNGs.

[ QUOTE ]

This leads me to believe that (duh) the 10s are only marginally harder than the 5s. I believe the difference in my ROI between the two are due to a few factors:
- Rake. The bigger percentage rake itself takes up at least 9% of the 16% ROI difference.


[/ QUOTE ]
Obviously true, and a point worth mentioning.

[ QUOTE ]

- Attitude. I have a tendency to goof around more when playing the 5s, since it's a cheap game. Drunk poker is fun.


[/ QUOTE ]
This may be true for you, and it may be true for most players, but that doesn't mean the 6s SNGs are LESS profitable. It should mean that they are MORE profitable. Do you see why?

[ QUOTE ]

- More multi-tabling in the 5s. It seems more affordable to 3 or 4 table 5s. I've read a number of threads here that suggest that it seems reasonable to expect a decrease in overall ITM/ROI when multi-tabling.


[/ QUOTE ]
I encourage you to not compare multitabling 6s to single-tabling 11s, look at the difference in your ROI, and decide that 11s are only marginally harder. Either compare them both single tabling, or compare them both multitabling.

Also, I assume that while multitabling the 6s you still have +ROI, so which has been better $/hr for you? It would take a large increase in ROI on the 11s (single-tabling) to compete with 3-4 tabling the 6s.

I've played hundreds of SNGs at both levels, almost exclusively multitabling. I think people clump the level of play for 6s and 11s together because the skill at these levels is closer than it is between 11s and 22s. However, it isn't really very close at all.

Oh, I just saw this quote from the end of your post:

[ QUOTE ]

Again, I'm a beginner at SNGs and for that matter, at poker. You can indeed learn SNG style play at the $5 but realistically it's just not going to be profitable.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is very, incredibly, most certainly not true. If the rake at the 6s provides such a disadvantage for you that you can't profit at the 6s, you won't profit at any level until you get much better at poker. Some of the players don't even have a pulse.

On a scale of 1 to 10 for softness, I give the 6s an 11. Play them with the same attention that you give other levels, and you will beat them with a much higher ROI than other levels, even with the 20% rake disadvantage.

Good luck, and keep posting!

>>>Zipppy

[zipppy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
stars have $6+.50... even better

[/ QUOTE ]

Those are 9-seaters, right? Does that make a difference? Is the payout structure still 50-30-20?

[/ QUOTE ]

These are 9-seaters, and the payout structure is 50-30-20. They are "turbo" SNGS, which is nice if you're used to party since you get to the higher blind levels faster.

[zipppy]

[ QUOTE ]

Party's crappy $1 rake at the 5's actually works out to advantage, since a lot of fish figure they might as well play the 10's for the same rake.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe some fish do, but how many sharks do you know that play at the lowest level possible? Since every "smart" player goes to where the rake is 10%, this leaves the 6s with HORRIBLE players.

[sahala]

I think I may have been a little too conclusive with my results. Halfway through analyzing my stats I realized that there may be other factors other than the rake that are contributing to a lower ROI on the $5. That's why I added other hypotheses which seem to account for the 7% ROI gap. You're right, given the same attention, my ITM would likely be higher. Had this been a more empirical analysis I would have had the computer randomly select a 5 or 10 table for me to play and not reveal win amounts until analysis at the end.

Let me clarify though... I don't think the $5s are unprofitable or unbeatable. It's certainly not the case for my play so far. I just see this gap which is mostly due to the rake. Even if I toughen up my 5 game +7% ROI i still have the rake to deal with.

Regardless I'll take your reply seriously. I don't think I'll move on to 20s just yet. I think I can squeeze a little juice out of the $5s still.

[valenzuela]

nooooooo, this forum is supposed to help you, dont play the $6s!!!!.Now if u want to play $5+0,5 on stars or on UB now thats another thing, anyway play the 11s , play tight early, push or fold later on and be very agressive ITM.

[treeofwisdom7]

i play at ultimate bet.. 5.50

[zipppy]

[ QUOTE ]
nooooooo, this forum is supposed to help you, dont play the $6s!!!!.Now if u want to play $5+0,5 on stars or on UB now thats another thing, anyway play the 11s , play tight early, push or fold later on and be very agressive ITM.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. I've played hundreds of $5 SNGs on both party and stars, and the play at party is much softer. It is easier to make money at party than stars, even with .50 more in rake. AND, since the games go much, much faster, you can make money at a quicker rate.