How much harder are the higher Sit N' Gos?

[Mother Mucker]

In my limited experience of playing sit n' gos (don't know how many games....played a few years mostly at Pokerroom), I noticed that the $5 tables used to be super soft but they have gotten just a little harder the past year or so (definitely not unbeatable though). I mostly play the $10 tables now and do decent at them but I recently jumped up and played a couplt $30 tables just for fun and they don't seem too different. They are a little tighter than the $10 tables, but not by much. Basically, what I'm asking is how different, in terms of "beatability", are the different levels of sit n' gos in your experience? I'm starting to think you can't compare the relationship between a ring 1/2 vs ring 3/6 and a SNG $10 vs SNG $30.

Thought?

[pergesu]

$22s are the same as $11s. I've only played a couple $33s, and they were a bit tougher than the lower games, but I was also playing during the day, which is apparently when all the pros are playing.

[Moonsugar]

55 and 109 play almost identical. 109 a bit tighter at times and more people have endgame down. Still some gamblers, very beatable. They are only moderately tougher than 22 or 33, which are extremely beatable.

215 totally different ballgame as it is a game of tight players trying to exploit other players' tightness. LOL.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
215 totally different ballgame as it is a game of tight players trying to exploit other players' tightness. LOL.

[/ QUOTE ]

So it's loose? /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[ur2god]

for me 11 and 22 sng are real different..
22 usually have more ppl when bubble time comes which
sux ass

[pergesu]

[ QUOTE ]
22 usually have more ppl when bubble time comes which

[/ QUOTE ]
You mean blinds are higher when the bubble hits?

Bubble's when you've got 4 players.

[Jman28]

[ QUOTE ]
55 and 109 play almost identical

[/ QUOTE ]

I think many will disagree with this.

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
55 and 109 play almost identical

[/ QUOTE ]

I think many will disagree with this.

[/ QUOTE ]

they will, because it's incorrect.

citanul

ps: do note that the op was talking about pokeroom sngs, if i recall correctly, not party.

[ur2god]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
22 usually have more ppl when bubble time comes which

[/ QUOTE ]
You mean blinds are higher when the bubble hits?

Bubble's when you've got 4 players.

[/ QUOTE ]
ya sorry i mean, blinds get real high and many times
there will still be 5-6 ppl left

[HoldingFolding]

I agree with this. At the 22s people seem to understand how to play close to the bubble and the blinds are usually at 200 with 5 still in. I think the point with the 5 & 10s is that for bad players there's nowhere lower to go so they stagnate there. Leastways my RoI has dropped significantly since I moved up.

[tech]

[ QUOTE ]
At the 22s people seem to understand how to play close to the bubble

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't believe this at all. It isn't true at the 33s and 55s, so no way it can be true at the 22s.

[freemoney]

215s and 109s are much more alike then the 55s and 109s.

[Turk]

For me the 22's are harder than the 11's for the same reason stated before...their is a bit more understanding of bubble play, hence more aggression.

[DJTech]

My bankroll wont let me proove it much, but I've ran my fair share of 22's and 11's (I'm an 11 player because I like to cash-out bi-weekly to pay my car payment) But my %'s go up when I run 22's, not sure why because I never change my general standards when I'm jumping limits, I'm thinking it's just because I play a fairly good game, and the 11 players arent up to par with basic skills, like starting hands, pot odds, etc. The 11s are almost as bad as the 6's in my opinion. I've had such a bad run at them since my last cash-out that i'm stuck peddling $25NL... I think if your SNG strategy is a well played game that 22's are best...

[xPuns1her]

u suck

[Phill S]

Ive played a lot of 10+1s at pokerroom, a fair few 20+2s and a couple of 30+3s. To be honest, ive noticed very little between them.

Its true they are a little harder in that players will hand around a bit longer, but your $/hr will outweigh your slight dip in ROI in moving up. If you can beat the 10+1s, you can probably beat the higher levels.

As for beatability in relation to party, i think, though dont have the numbers yet, that they are more profitable than the equivalent buy in over there.

The addition of 700 chips means that there is a lot more flop play, and less all in play. This gives the better player a much wider edge over a weaker player.

Basicly, short stack poker tends to lead players to all in poker, and even the better players only have a small edge when all the chips move preflop. Dont get me wrong, party is still profitable to the nth degree, but having more flops at higher blinds mean you can move chips with more certainty of where your at. More streets increase the chances of them making a mistake a lot more often.

And, as you should be aware, it is mistakes that define the winners in poker.

To bring it back to one sound bite, the only factors that should stop you moving up are confidence and bankroll; and confidence can be easily overcome by taking the odd shot at the higher level.

Phill

[networkman]

About this much http://www.transitofvenus.org/fingers.jpg

[NYCNative]

So is the concensus that moving up from the 11s to the 22s should result in similar results ROI-wise? My ROI sucks (15%) but my sample size is even worse (only 49 recorded games although I played more before I staretd tracking) so I feel that it would naturally be at least 20% and possibly more. If I can expect about the same level of competition at trhe 22s I may as well move up, right?

[Phill S]

Confidence is as key as your bankroll.

You can track results and get a quantitative confidence, but this takes a long time. Or you can just move up for a few, with the intention of dropping down if you take a big hit.

This is the way ive gone recently.

Its your roll, so ultimately you must decide, but the difference between the 11s and 22s is so small that if your true ROI takes a hit of a few points, which long term is expected, your true $/hr will increase due to the increased returns per tourney.

Not sure who said it, but when it was written a few weeks back that if you wanna move up, just get a bankroll and do so, that person was right.

Nothing wrong with taking shots and being wrong that you can beat the level. Just dont worry bout denting your pride by dropping back down to re-group if your roll takes a hit.

Phill

[paperboyNC]

I have switched from party to stars lately and definitely love the bigger stacks.

- Losing 500 chips on the first round doesn't cripple me.
- I often go all-in with my opponent drawing dead or drawing to two outs.
- My ITM % shot up from 35% to 56%
- You can raise pre-flop, bet the flop and still have a lot of fold equity on the turn and the river.

The net result is that I'm up over $1000 this month.

paperboy

[Phill S]

I guess it helps to be on a heater too /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Ignoring your ITM% figures, the reasons you give are very much why i prefer 1500 chip games over the 800 chip ones.

I cant judge the 1000 chip ones, and i want to make it clear im not saying party is anywhere near unprofitable.

Horses for courses.

Phill

[Moonsugar]

All my comments are for Party.

I think the 55 play a lot more like the 109 than the 215 play like the 109. In May alone I have played hundreds of 55 and 109s simultaneously. They are not that different.

But, I have only played 50 215 so maybe I don't have enough experience to make a valid comparison.

[Voltron87]

About the 22s... seriously, they're ludicrously easy.

One more time... say it with me... just because there are a lot of players left late does not mean they are good. Thank you. Never disagree with me.

In a mix of 4 tabling and 8 tabling my ROI is over 30% at the 22s, not for enough SNGS that it will stay there, but it is very good. I was planning on learning to 8 table at the 22s and they have been so good and so easy I haven't moved up. I have not found any people who I could tell really knew what they're doing. There are people who think they do, and they generally play horribly.

[astarck]

My roi in the 11s is 22%, my roi in the 22s (through only 100 of them) is -11%. The play seems almost the exact same, yet my results don't show that at all.

I've played hundreds of 11s but have only been taking shots at the 22s as my br permits. I'm hoping through my first 100 22s i've just been on a horrible downswing.

How likely is it for someone to be a proven winning player at the 11s (anywhere from 10-20% roi) and then at the 22s lose so badly over their first 100?

[Bluff Daddy]

[ QUOTE ]
About the 22s... seriously, they're ludicrously easy.

One more time... say it with me... just because there are a lot of players left late does not mean they are good. Thank you. Never disagree with me.

In a mix of 4 tabling and 8 tabling my ROI is over 30% at the 22s, not for enough SNGS that it will stay there, but it is very good. I was planning on learning to 8 table at the 22s and they have been so good and so easy I haven't moved up. I have not found any people who I could tell really knew what they're doing. There are people who think they do, and they generally play horribly.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was about to say this. You might find 1 or 2 more players around b/c there arent as many maniacs that go all in on level 1 with 66 but other than that they are still terrible on the bubble. People are still trying to just fold into the money once they get a decent stack.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
55 and 109 play almost identical.

[/ QUOTE ]

Baloney.

eastbay

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
For me the 22's are harder than the 11's for the same reason stated before...their is a bit more understanding of bubble play, hence more aggression.

[/ QUOTE ]

I kind of like this aggression in the 22's. It means my aggression is generally more respected too, and I can steal more blinds. Stealing blinds seems harder in the 5's and 10's, because people don't understand the gap concept, love to make spite calls, and just really want to play their cards and not be cheated out of a showdown. Sometimes in the 10's you find someone to exploit who is just too new to understand the importance of blinds, so he lets you steal his all the time, but that doesn't seem to happen all that often; usually it's more like what I described -- people are looking or a reason, ANY reason, to call, and so you have to be prepared to showdown a lot of your pushes, which often means you can't steal quite as much as you'd like to without running a very high risk of getting caught, even by people holding crap, even if you haven't raised a single hand all game.

Anyway, I don't mind folding to people's steals in a game where they also fold to mine.

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
My roi in the 11s is 22%, my roi in the 22s (through only 100 of them) is -11%. The play seems almost the exact same, yet my results don't show that at all.

I've played hundreds of 11s but have only been taking shots at the 22s as my br permits. I'm hoping through my first 100 22s i've just been on a horrible downswing.

How likely is it for someone to be a proven winning player at the 11s (anywhere from 10-20% roi) and then at the 22s lose so badly over their first 100?

[/ QUOTE ]

No matter who you are or how you're doing, it's gotta be -- not too unlikely. 100 is a joke of a number for drawing conclusions, really. It sounds pointlessly repetitive to keep talking about sample sizes, but you can't get away from the truth of it -- they need to be pretty big. At that size, questioning your play as play in itself, not according to numbers, is where it's at.

[octaveshift]

[ QUOTE ]
One more time... say it with me... just because there are a lot of players left late does not mean they are good. Thank you. Never disagree with me.

[/ QUOTE ]

While I agree with you, I do think the more players left late, the more difficult it becomes to advance. Would anyone argue otherwise?

On a side, and this is purely anecdotal, if you run a bunch of players through Poker Prophecy, most of them show a dip in their $20+2 ITM numbers. I have no idea why this is, and I might just be seeing a pattern that isn't there, but it seems kind of odd to me.

They end up looking something like this:
5: 38%
10: 35%
20: 22%
30: 34%
50: 32%

Yes, small sample size- but seems fairly consistent.

[Voltron87]

[ QUOTE ]
My roi in the 11s is 22%, my roi in the 22s (through only 100 of them) is -11%. The play seems almost the exact same, yet my results don't show that at all.

I've played hundreds of 11s but have only been taking shots at the 22s as my br permits. I'm hoping through my first 100 22s i've just been on a horrible downswing.

How likely is it for someone to be a proven winning player at the 11s (anywhere from 10-20% roi) and then at the 22s lose so badly over their first 100?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you have a 22% roi at the 11s you should be able to beat the 22s. its only 100 sngs, think about it, turning two 4ths into firsts (not unreasonable, i do this all the time from pushing with a small edge and losing a 60 40 in a 4000 chip pot) and your even.

keep taking shots and posting hands, you will get to know the game better and have a better idea of where you stand the more you play and post.

[Voltron87]

[ QUOTE ]

While I agree with you, I do think the more players left late, the more difficult it becomes to advance. Would anyone argue otherwise?


[/ QUOTE ]

I would disagree. If these players are playing for 3rd place then they are not very hard to get by, unless they get AA and KK 3-4 times.

[Moonsugar]

Expound on the vast differences, oh great one.

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
Expound on the vast differences, oh great one.

[/ QUOTE ]

is there something compelling him to help you by making a long, details oriented post about a key subject, that has, but not often, been covered before? certainly you don't think that it's your incredibly polite post that's going to convince him to spend a large amount of his time helping you.

citanul

[Newt_Buggs]

I jumped one level at a time from the $10s to the $50s and never noticed a significant difference between each level. This morning though at 7am during not peak hours though I fired up a set of $20 for fun and have to say that I have never played a set of $50s with worse players, ever. I surely got a lucky set of extra tables, but it was still the furthest from peak hours that you could get.