I don't feel single table tourneys are that profitable

I feel that compared to Ring Games and Multi table tourneys Single Tables are not very profitable. My argument for this is mostly because of the blind structure. It seems that after a few people have left the tourney, each players M is so low that all-in bet's are extremely common and necessary. I've been playing Single tables alot lately, but I mostly think of them as practice for final tables.

[Exitonly]

If you mean in terms of ROI, return on investment, then yes SnG's aren't that hot, but you can finish on in 30-40 minutes, and you can play up to 10 at a time. So the hourly rate can be quite nice.

[Hendricks433]

Also less variance than Cash Tables? I believe so anyway which is also nice.

[wiggs73]

[ QUOTE ]
all-in bet's are extremely common and necessary

[/ QUOTE ]

Good advice for all you beginners out there.

[Mr_J]

[ QUOTE ]
If you mean in terms of ROI, return on investment, then yes SnG's aren't that hot, but you can finish on in 30-40 minutes, and you can play up to 20 at a time. So the hourly rate can be quite nice.

[/ QUOTE ]

Edit to say something to OP:
Wow, we've all been wasting our time!!! Thanks for pointing out that sngs don't pay well, I never realized!!!

[microbet]

[ QUOTE ]
If you mean in terms of ROI, return on investment, then yes SnG's aren't that hot, but you can finish on in 30-40 minutes, and you can play up to 10 at a time. So the hourly rate can be quite nice.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been through this a few times and it always comes around to them all being about the same for similar skill levels and similar bankrolls (risk of ruins). The one thing that seems to favor cash games is they seem to generate a lot more rakeback.

edit: I really haven't thought that much about MTTs, mainly just STTs vs cash.

[lacky]

your right in a sense. ring cash games, particularly shorthanded games are more profitable. The reason though is more due to the fact that you can seek out spacific weak opponents to exploit weaknesses that you already know about. you can often take advantage of the weaknesses meny times in a single session, because they dont have to leave when they bust. Table selection is much more deficult in sng's.

Steve

[microbet]

Yeah, I'll never forget the night I stacked the same guy three times in less than an hour.

But, when you talk about BR and BBs/hr or whatever for 'good' or 'average' players it works out to be pretty much the same.

I guess if you rely especially on table selection you will want to play cash games.

[bawcerelli]

i hate the monotony of ring games. it's just cards. tournaments have situations.

[Bonafone]

Sng's are very profitable. But...

Are there other forms of poker where you can meke more? Yes.

Can everyone make more playing other games? NO

I play the $55's and $109's and make decent money compared to some here. But I don't even think I can beat nl 100. So obvously this is where I play for now, because I enjoy making money. For some it may be different. Sng's are that profitable though.

[Big Limpin']

ultimately, water will always find its own level

[SonnyJay]

[ QUOTE ]
each players M is so low that all-in bet's are extremely common and necessary

[/ QUOTE ]

The fact that not that many people recognize this (or don't recognize how/when to use it) is a big part of why they're profitable. I don't get the correlation that because people have to push all in it's not profitable.

-SonnyJay

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]
My argument for this is mostly because of the blind structure. It seems that after a few people have left the tourney, each players M is so low that all-in bet's are extremely common and necessary.

[/ QUOTE ]

The essence of poker is making correct decisions. If pushing all your chips in the pot is the correct decision, then pushing all your chips in the pot at the right time will be profitable.

If you don't know when to push all your chips in the pot, or you feel that such a move is too risky, then SnGs will not be profitable for you. This is not a result of the blind structure, it is a result of not making or not implementing the correct decision.

[beeyjay]

this is priceless. thanks for the laugh. yes i have an ego problem (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=3739107&page=1&view=c ollapsed&sb=5&o=14&fpart=5#Post3743724) .

[KingDan]

Tournaments are more fun.

More chances to 'gamble' with big blinds. Plus sucking out is a lot of fun.

[valenzuela]

I prefer MTTS over SNGs, the rush you get when theyre like 30 dudes left!!! its something from another planet!!!
Of course SNGs > MTTs, but I think that you learn much more from a MTTs than from a SNG.

[adanthar]

Nah, MTT's are more profitable than SNG's long term*.

*to the top .5-1% (figure pulled out of my ass) of people playing them, and accounting for future evolution of the games/burnout involved in playing SNG's for a long time.

[microbet]

In theory I think MTTs should probably be higher ROI because at higher buyins you probably have a higher ratio of inexperienced players. This is just a guess on my part and I don't know think it is anything about the games. I just think currently there are more fish either winning a feeder tournament or willing to take a chance on a big payoff MTT than a higher buyin STT.

Is it even really possible to know how profitable MTTs are though? Can one ever hit the long run?

[valenzuela]

like I said, I make (more? )money playing SNGs but I simply love MTTs, even if they are more profitable the long run is way too much.
On the other side, MTT are much easier to beat on higher buy-ins. I think I can handle my own on those typical 250K guaranteed, on the other side I dont see myself doing much on a 215 sng.

[lacky]

In terms of ROI there is no question. A good MTTer can maintain a 100%+ ROI. In terms of $$/hour it's much closer. Playing sng's I can 8 table, playing mtt's I try to stay around 4. They also take much longer. Bottom line is what I've said before. A good player with well rounded skills can make money in whatever game they are in, and the rate of earning works out to close enough in the long run that your ussually best off playing whatever interests you at the time. The goal is to keep the game fresh and fun, and make some money doing it.

Steve

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
In terms of ROI there is no question. A good MTTer can maintain a 100%+ ROI. In terms of $$/hour it's much closer. Playing sng's I can 8 table, playing mtt's I try to stay around 4. They also take much longer. Bottom line is what I've said before. A good player with well rounded skills can make money in whatever game they are in, and the rate of earning works out to close enough in the long run that your ussually best off playing whatever interests you at the time. The goal is to keep the game fresh and fun, and make some money doing it.

Steve

[/ QUOTE ]

i just wanted to point out to anyone who's stupidly been not paying much attention that in terms of just having your head centered on your shoulders well, lacky and lorinda are doing a great job lately.

c