Two-table vs. sigle-tables

[daetcher]

How do you guys think the single-table and two-table tournaments compare? I've played about 50 of each over the last few months, and I'm wondering which is the most best route. Some quick math leads me to think that placing in the money only 30% of the time in two-table tourneys would be more profitable than placing 40% of the time in single-tables. Should playing strategy be significantly different between the two? Thanks.

[xLukex]

Time is money.

[bluefeet]

9-handed 20+2
180 tot prize
90 1st
54 2nd
36 3rd

100 games
22 expense
2200 tot expense

0.4 ITM%
40 games ITM
14 # or 1sts
13 2nds
13 3rds
1260 1st $
702 2nd $
468 3rd $

2430 total prize
230 tot profit

------------------------------------------------------
18-handed, 20+2
360 tot prize
144 1st (40%?)
108 2nd (30%?)
72 3rd (20%?)
36 4th (10%?)

100 games
22 expense
2200 tot expense

0.3 ITM%
30 games ITM
8 1sts
8 2nds
7 3rds
7 4ths
1152 # of 1st $
864 2nd $
504 3rd $
252 4th $

2772 total prize
572 tot profit

----------------
230 (9) vs. 572 (18). if the 2 tables are twice as long as the STT, then technically you do come out a little ahead. i'm assuming your ITM difference (-10%) is a result of 33% cashing on a SST vs. 22% on the 2-table.

i do know from limited personal experience that my STT strategy doesn't work as well on a 2-table. the blind escalation up to the formation of the single table often creates a chip-to-blind ratio that i'm more accustomed to finding short-handed. you're essentially employing 'bubble' strategy with as many as 7, 8, or 9 players left -- much more difficult IMO. i don't know what the answer/strategy is (not a MTT guy). i know the game wasn't of my liking. perhaps a decent place for someone transitioning between MTT and STT or visa-versa.

if you have success though, the math seems to support your theory.

[daetcher]

[ QUOTE ]
bluefeet's math

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that's basically what I did, only I used Partypoker's numbers. The results were similar. One thing I have noticed, however, is that the two-table SNGs typically last 1:20 or 1:30, while the single-table SNGs last about an hour. What I'm especially interested in is the strategy differences. It's not as important to have a sizeable stack going into the final 7 or 8 players as one would think. At that point (having played conservatively for the until then) I'm only one timely double up from being among the top two or three stacks. Then I can open up to play what would be regular bubble play for a single-table SNG. Perhaps I'm over-generalizing. I dunno. I'm still a newbie. I'd like to be able to apply the collective wisdom of this board to two-tables SNGs.