(low content) surprised most posts are from Party?!?

[kurto]

I play a mix of cash games and tournys. I play most of my cash games on Party and ALL my tournys on Pokerstars. They start you with $1500 in chips and, If I had to guess, I'd say the levels on Stars last a little longer.

I was browsing this section and was shocked to find most of the SNG posts were from Party. Am I missing something? Are the players so much worse at Party to overcome the structure Party has for SNGs?

[lorinda]

Win $2 per SNG lasting 40 mins or $3 per SNG lasting 80 mins is basically the $10 equation.

Edit: Note these numbers are just ballpark numbers, they will change massively from player to player.

Lori

[bjb23]

from the FAQ:


"Why play at one site instead of another?

This depends really on why you are playing the games, amongst other things. If you are playing for fun, you might not care about maximizing your hourly rate. If you are playing purely for money, you might not care about anything else at all. The two largest SNG sites are Partypoker and Pokerstars at the moment. Partypoker’s benefits include that they have the largest player pools, the most frequently starting games, and the games have a fixed number of hands per blind level, assuring a quick game. Pokerstars’ benefits include a widely preferred interface, timed levels, nine player tables, as well as the offering of turbo SNGs. Most SNG players wind up choosing Partypoker, as the games are the softest, and the fastest."

[Jbrochu]

[ QUOTE ]
Win $2 per SNG lasting 40 mins or $3 per SNG lasting 80 mins is basically the $10 equation.

[/ QUOTE ]

What Lori said, plus I suspect that it may be easier to multi-table Party since you play less hands post-flop on Party due to the small starting stacks as well as reaching the push/fold stage sooner.

I'm with the OP on this one. I feel I can come back very easily from early chip defacits without having to rely on push/fold. Also, the PS structure allows more opportunity to outplay people after the flop.

I know I am not maximizing my hourly rate, but since I have a day job and a family, I am restricted to 1-3 SnGs a night.

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]
I play most of my cash games on Party and ALL my tournys on Pokerstars. They start you with $1500 in chips and, If I had to guess, I'd say the levels on Stars last a little longer.



[/ QUOTE ]

That statement implies that $1500 is objectively better than $800, and that longer levels are better than shorter. You may prefer them, but that doesn't mean they are better for you (like vegetables). Also, others may prefer $800 stacks and short levels.

[ QUOTE ]
Are the players so much worse at Party to overcome the structure Party has for SNGs?

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, you are implying that the Party structure is objectively "worse". It is obviously better for some purposes. The structural differences (and the players) are such that Party and Stars SnGs are essentially two different games, with two different winning strategies. Your motives for playing may affect your choice. Those here who play at Party generally do so because money is their primary motivation. The games at Party are shorter (more potential $/hour) and easier to auto-play (if you know the proper strategy).

[fnord_too]

I like faster s&g's. VOLUME VOLUME VOLUME (that and they are really friggin boring)

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I play most of my cash games on Party and ALL my tournys on Pokerstars. They start you with $1500 in chips and, If I had to guess, I'd say the levels on Stars last a little longer.



[/ QUOTE ]

That statement implies that $1500 is objectively better than $800, and that longer levels are better than shorter. You may prefer them, but that doesn't mean they are better for you (like vegetables). Also, others may prefer $800 stacks and short levels.

[ QUOTE ]
Are the players so much worse at Party to overcome the structure Party has for SNGs?

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, you are implying that the Party structure is objectively "worse". It is obviously better for some purposes. The structural differences (and the players) are such that Party and Stars SnGs are essentially two different games, with two different winning strategies. Your motives for playing may affect your choice. Those here who play at Party generally do so because money is their primary motivation. The games at Party are shorter (more potential $/hour) and easier to auto-play (if you know the proper strategy).

[/ QUOTE ]

good post. To reiterate, most EV is gained from an SNG when the blind to stack ratio is ripe. This process is more facilitated by PP than PS. I have never played a hand at PP, but for the record, PS standard SNGs are long and boring and actually require some actual "play" (or just waiting a hell of a lot longer).

[Nicholasp27]

i play party because i am restricted to only a little time each night

i can play 6/hour 4-tabling at party poker...so 10/night is easy to get in without taking up the whole evening

that's about $12k/year if playing 22s@13% roi

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]
I have never played a hand at PP, but for the record, PS standard SNGs are long and boring and actually require some actual "play" (or just waiting a hell of a lot longer).

[/ QUOTE ]

Relatively speaking, Party Sngs are much more preflop, while Stars involve a lot more postflop play, especially as the table gets short. Correct Party strategy is to play tight early. Correct late play is pretty much push or fold.

[kurto]

[ QUOTE ]
That statement implies that $1500 is objectively better than $800, and that longer levels are better than shorter. You may prefer them, but that doesn't mean they are better for you (like vegetables).

[/ QUOTE ]

The more chips you have and the longer the levels, the stronger advantage a good player has. The shorter the levels and the smaller the chipstacks, the more luck becomes a factor. (see just about any book on tourny play)

[ QUOTE ]
Also, others may prefer $800 stacks and short levels.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's actually what I'm curious about. I'm wondering why someone would prefer it that way. (For me, I know with bigger stacks, I have more of an opportunity to outplay my opponents, more opportunity to play more speculative hands in the early rounds and more of an opportunity to have a larger big stack in proportion to my opponents.) Personally, for me, I find the cash games more consistantly profitable. So I play SNGs because I want to play a tourny. And in that respect, I'm not looking to make it go too fast.

[ QUOTE ]
The games at Party are shorter (more potential $/hour) and easier to auto-play (if you know the proper strategy).

[/ QUOTE ]

That I can understand. Though Its not clear to me how they are easier. It would seem to me that you would have more pressure to play more marginal hands sooner, and therefore, the game becomes more a crapshoot, no?

[MegaBet]

[ QUOTE ]
Are the players so much worse at Party to overcome the structure Party has for SNGs?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

[Ogre]

[ QUOTE ]
Are the players so much worse at Party to overcome the structure Party has for SNGs?

[/ QUOTE ]

not only are the players worse but you can play more sngs/hr