Playing in sets gives you a higher ROI? What about $/ht?

[suited_ace]

I was thinking that by having fewer tables opened late in the game, you're probably being able to pay more attention, thus giving you more EV, but is it enough that it actually produces the same or a higher $/hr?

What do you think?

[vabogee]

the problem with this poll is that you can't tell from the results which answers matched each other. Did polltaker X think sets gave him a higher ROI, but lower hourly rate, or were both higher? i'm confused just talking about it.

[pergesu]

I don't know about ROI, but playing continuously gives you way more $$/hr

[curtains]

I voted higher ROI, but lower $/hour

[ QUOTE ]

I voted higher ROI, but lower $/hour

[/ QUOTE ]

Explain.

[The Yugoslavian]

[ QUOTE ]

I voted higher ROI, but lower $/hour

[/ QUOTE ]

However there are other intangibles not really mentioned that one can choose to take into account (and many set players do take into account).

Yugoslav

[ QUOTE ]

I voted higher ROI, but lower $/hour

[/ QUOTE ]

[ebaudry]

"I don't know about ROI, but playing continuously gives you way more $$/hr"

And you would say that this comes from getting in about 10games/hour 8-tabling continuously vs. about 8.5 ish tables/hr playing in sets on 8 tables?

And that these added ~1.5 tables/hr add more $ than is lost through decreased decision making late, lowered stamina, needing to pee, increased distractions, and so on?

Do I have that about right?

[the_joker]

Sort of slightly off the topic, but I'd thought I'd share my new method of multi-tabling if anyone cares... I used to try playing in sets of three, but it just got too hairy at times. So now I basically don't see the need to say I 8 table continuous, or 6 table in sets, or whatever. I just first start up 5 tables, when it gets too easy, I fire up some more.

[fnord_too]

I voted higher for both, but that is really just my feel right now. One thing it certainly gives you is clearly defined bathroom/snack/get the hell away from the computer breaks. I do replace tables that I get bounced from early in the set, but that maybe adds 10% to the STT's I play.

(Another thing is I usually scan for tripple draw games when I finish a set, since I would really rather be playing that right now, but all too often there are just none going.)

[Ixnert]

I definitely find that my $$/hr is higher playing continuously, even though I'm sure my $$/tournament isn't quite as high. In part, this is because early play just isn't all that time-consuming, so whether I have just 3 late tables open or 3 late tables plus a few level 1 or 2 tables just doesn't make that much of a difference. (I wouldn't say no difference, though.)

I'd also say the difference in tournaments per hour is larger than some posters are suggesting. My average (800 chip) tournament time is about 35 minutes; this has been consistent over 20s and 30s. (10s were shorter, but I haven't played any of those since I started going continuous.) So 6 tabling, I play about 10.25 per hour. In most sets, I would have at least one table that went 50 minutes, which would average out to 7.2 per hour. 3+ extra tournaments an hour is a LOT of extra $$/hour to make up; I'd have to think I was giving up almost a third of my ROI to come out ahead (purely monetarily) in sets.

By all means, take a break every couple hours; almost everyone needs it. But unless you actually need a break every 40-50 minutes, realize that you're giving up money playing in sets. (Which may be worth it to you -- the lower stress may be preferable to the extra few bucks an hour, and there's nothing wrong with that...)

[Nicholasp27]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I voted higher ROI, but lower $/hour

[/ QUOTE ]

Explain.

[/ QUOTE ]


i voted that way as well...
the reason is, you'll have less tables open when on the bubble, which should translate to slightly higher roi

however, if u play continuously, then u get in more tourneys/hour, which means more $/hour

let's take an extreme example:

4-tabling in sets you can get 20% roi in 22s
4-tabling continously gets you 15% roi in the 22s

so it's $4.40/tournament vs $3.3/tournament

well, if you can fit in one set per hour, then that's 17.60/hour

however, if you 4-table continuously, u average 6/hour, which is $19.30/hour


remember, 10% or more of your tourney finishes are likely 8-10...those are tournaments that usually end in the first 2 rounds for you, which means you can't start another in its place for another 30+mins

also, while the average tourney may be 45mins, your longest in any given set could be an hour if you go to level 7/8 with a prolonged bubble...

[Nicholasp27]

how can you get higher $/hour doing sets (without replacement) rather than continously?

your roi would have to be around 8+% higher in sets than continous to make playing in sets better for $/hour than continous

[Nick B.]

I think it is higher both. if you have a set of 8, hopefully you will have around 5 at bubble time when you really need to pay attention, and then HU you get a huge advantage.

What moron voted for lower ROI?

[Nicholasp27]

so that explains why roi is higher...but what is the argument for $/hour being higher?

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
so that explains why roi is higher...but what is the argument for $/hour being higher?

[/ QUOTE ]

while i'm still waking up, i'd assume the argument would be that ROI is higher by enough to compensate for the fewer games.

citanul

[Nicholasp27]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
so that explains why roi is higher...but what is the argument for $/hour being higher?

[/ QUOTE ]

while i'm still waking up, i'd assume the argument would be that ROI is higher by enough to compensate for the fewer games.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

well it'd have to be 1.5x higher for it to compensate for the fewer games/hour...is anybody arguing that your roi is 1.5x higher when u play sets vs continous?

[jgunnip]

I said same ROI/lower hourly rate. When I'm playing continuously I rarely have more that two tables in the later levels. So basically while the other tables are at levels 1-3 almost all my attention is on the later tourneys effectively acting like I'm only playing one or two tourneys anyway. So I don't believe my ROI is any higher as a result of not playing in sets. I don't have the statistical date to back it up but it is just my hunch.