for the 10$ guys

[A_PLUS]

Dont you think you will make more $/hr 4-tabling 25 max NL, especially on weekends? I can understand if you want to move up to 20$s and are learning SNGs, but I cant imagine from a strict money making perspective a <20% ROI being better than a even a mediocre player could make at the 25$ tables.

I just happened to look at my PT stats, the other day, and I generally 4 table 25$ to clear bonuses. Boring as hell, but decent money, and I generally am watching a movie and dont 4 table all that often

[Isura]

I had a 35% ROI over 350 games at the $10s, so it was about $24/hr 4-tabling. I'm pretty sure I was running well too.

[A_PLUS]

when I am done with this bonus I will check my exact stats, but I guesstimated at least 15-20$/hr + you get to whore bonuses. I dont know what my sample size is. I only have PT for 10K or so, rest I just tracked time, # tables and profit/loss.

I may even have to try to whore off my 300+$ in UB bonus money. At least they have mini-view

[skierdude1000]

some people, like me, just struggle at NL ring or aren't as good at it, while still being able to crush SNG games... I don't knnow why.

[A_PLUS]

Really? I can understand higher levels, but party 25$? Have you played a lot of hands, and sure it isnt variance?

I just had a serious discussion with a friend on wether I could teach my mom how to beat it for 3$/hr per table.

I'm willing to bet that you just ran bad, the swings can be nuts. But Im sure you would crush it long term

[PrayingMantis]

I think that some of the problem in playing those low buy-in ring games, is that it gets so boring, some people simply start looking for action, overplaying, bluffing, etc, which is very costly of course.

While in SNGs, it's structured in such a way, that you'll get your share of drama whatever you do (bubble play, ITM, HU, etc), so you won't have enough opportunities to outplay yourself like in a boring cash game. Only a thought. Otherwise you might be correct about the better $/H in NL if compared to low buy-in SNGs, but I think that strong players who choose to play those $10 SNGs for some reason and can actually crush them (it's possible to achieve some monstrous ROI there through "expert", well adjusted play), might prefer them on the NL ring. Or maybe they should just move up... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[A_PLUS]

I dont know, they are exciting if you are used to watching paint dry.

I almost cried when I realized I need to clear 1000 hands by tomorrow to clear 100$ in bonus money. Id rather actually be in work.

You are 100% right about looking for action. I would never recomend anything less than 3 tables + TV. The optimal play invloves a lot of folding.

[tjh]

[ QUOTE ]
I think that some of the problem in playing those low buy-in ring games, is that it gets so boring, some people simply start looking for action, overplaying, bluffing, etc, which is very costly of course.

While in SNGs, it's structured in such a way, that you'll get your share of drama whatever you do (bubble play, ITM, HU, etc), so you won't have enough opportunities to outplay yourself like in a boring cash game. Only a thought.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well said.

SNG's offer a limited loss for a reasonable gain.
NL ring your whole stack is at risk. SNG's divide your poker experience up into neat little packages with a nice goal oriented structure. Ring games are part of an endless unchanging reality.

--
tjh

[cain06]

[ QUOTE ]

Well said.

SNG's offer a limited loss for a reasonable gain.
NL ring your whole stack is at risk. SNG's divide your poker experience up into neat little packages with a nice goal oriented structure. Ring games are part of an endless unchanging reality.

--
tjh

[/ QUOTE ]

I have to disagree slightly. There is limited loss in any game given a skilled player. SNG's do give you 30 minutes of fun for $11 bucks, but you can also waste 30 minutes and go out on the bubble.

There is a lot to gain (and limited loss) in any of the games given a skilled player.

[JayKon]

I play the $10's for several reasons.

In order:
- I beat them for a 34% ROI
- It is good practice.
- I like to play against worse oponents (and really don't mind the suckouts).
- I don't care about bonuses since I havn't deposited in I don't know how long.
- I have a good day job and plan to stay there another 20 years.
- I use the profit to buy better computer equipment and take my wife out to dinner.
- I have delusions of getting good enough at NLHE to win the WSOP.

That said, I'll probably move to the $22's sometime, but you'll probably never see me above the $55's. When I multi-table, it's only two games and I only play 1-2 hours a day (if that much) during the week.

[A_PLUS]

FWIW, if you really are looking to add skills to play top NLHE tournaments , you shlould mix some NL ring games into your play.Not the 25$s, but something.

[jon462]

[ QUOTE ]
I think that some of the problem in playing those low buy-in ring games, is that it gets so boring, some people simply start looking for action, overplaying, bluffing, etc, which is very costly of course.

While in SNGs, it's structured in such a way, that you'll get your share of drama whatever you do (bubble play, ITM, HU, etc), so you won't have enough opportunities to outplay yourself like in a boring cash game. Only a thought. Otherwise you might be correct about the better $/H in NL if compared to low buy-in SNGs, but I think that strong players who choose to play those $10 SNGs for some reason and can actually crush them (it's possible to achieve some monstrous ROI there through "expert", well adjusted play), might prefer them on the NL ring. Or maybe they should just move up... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

well said.. I crush my silly little home game but when i get on the ring game tables on PP skins I always end up thinking im Doyle Brunson playing a bunch of rocks, when really I am an average player playing loose call-stations, and start making all sorts of silly moves.. lol, however in sngs it is much easier for me to be the good little rock I need to early on because I know when the blinds get big I can be the laggish thief I want to be at heart and it is +EV /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[JayKon]

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, if you really are looking to add skills to play top NLHE tournaments , you shlould mix some NL ring games into your play.Not the 25$s, but something.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe next year, for now, I just like to play.

[Jbrochu]

[ QUOTE ]
I have delusions of getting good enough at NLHE to win the WSOP.

[/ QUOTE ]

Party Sng'S are great practice for live single table satellites, but I would suggest also playing some of your sets at Stars to get more post-flop practice.

[45suited]

[ QUOTE ]
Dont you think you will make more $/hr 4-tabling 25 max NL, especially on weekends? I can understand if you want to move up to 20$s and are learning SNGs, but I cant imagine from a strict money making perspective a <20% ROI being better than a even a mediocre player could make at the 25$ tables.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that the 25 NL is soft as a teddy bear. I've been running really hot on them and making very nice money. But I'd be afraid to 4 table them because, to me at least, alot of the play (even while mostly nut-peddling) can be very read dependent. Four tabling $11 SNGs is easy. SNGs are more conducive to multi-tabling, at least for me, since I'm relatively new to ring games.

[Newt_Buggs]

for what its worth if I had a choice between 4 tabeling $11s for $15/hour and 4 tabeling $25 NL for $20/hr I would definitly choose the $11s.

[tigerite]

Absolutely, but you have done a cardinal sin here, you know.

You forgot: Do you see why? /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[nate_king1]

[ QUOTE ]
for what its worth if I had a choice between 4 tabeling $11s for $15/hour and 4 tabeling $25 NL for $20/hr I would definitly choose the $11s.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why

[MegaBet]

[ QUOTE ]
Dont you think you will make more $/hr 4-tabling 25 max NL.....Boring as hell...

[/ QUOTE ]

Bingo.