more seats = more money or more trouble?

[Misfire]

UB just added 20 and 30-seat sng's. They still pay out 3 places with 50%, 30%, 20%.

Would anyone recommend these over 10-seaters, or is the difficulty of beating more players not worht it?

[handsome]

You mean like the 2-table and 3-table SNG's on Party? They're tough to get started, but should be easy money.

[GrekeHaus]

There will be a higher variance associated with these games, but there's no reason they shouldn't be profitable.

[flyingmoose]

I was going to do a $33 18 seater yesterday, but it never filled up. It's a fun idea in theory, but they're hard as balls to get started.

[SumZero]

They do take a while to get started. I've played a few, took 2nd in one. My feeling is that these should be good (but obviously higher varience and harder to multitable). My thinking is that there are 2 reasons this should be better than normal SNG, at least for a while, because:

1. People aren't used to them yet. And if you put people in unusual circumstances better players should be able to play better/figure it out more than worse players.

2. The endgame will arrive with deeper stacks relative to the blinds. So far the 20s seem to take about 1.5 hours to finish where the 10 person SNG took me about 1.25 hour to finish. But an extra level is offset by twice the number of chips. The bubble last longer and has more big stacks, which allows for more patience and more post flop play which has to be better for the good player.

As an aside I don't like that you can no longer start 3 SNG at virtually the same time because of the waiting list. I like to start my tables in sets.