Easiest sit and gos on Poker Stars

[poker wannabe]

i just started playing online and generally play $10 sit and gos NL HE on poker stars, where the competition sucks and the only time i lose is against bullshit calls or bad beats. the $20 is significantly tougher...what are the best games and times...i was doing some investigating, and the $30 SnG after dinner time seemed pretty easy.

any thoughts?

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

the only time i lose is against bullshit calls or bad beats.

So what you're saying is you *never* make mistakes. No bad reads, *always* get your money in with the best of it.

So if you have QQ against AK and your opponent hits his hand, which is that? A bulls**t call or a bad beat? Or vice versa. You push in with AKs and get called by JJ, if you don't improve, where does that fit in?

any thoughts?

Yeah, Mr. 4 posts. You come in with a bulls**t satement like the above, you start with precisely zero credibility.

[CrisBrown]

Hiya Kurn,

[ QUOTE ]
So if you have QQ against AK and your opponent hits his hand, which is that? A bulls**t call or a bad beat? Or vice versa. You push in with AKs and get called by JJ, if you don't improve, where does that fit in?

[/ QUOTE ]

Or what if there's a 3xBB raise and two callers, giving the BB 9:2 pot odds to call with 86o, and the BB catches an 8-6-2 flop to bust wannabe's AKs. Is that also a bovine excrement call?

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, Mr. 4 posts. You come in with a bulls**t satement like the above, you start with precisely zero credibility.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed.

Cris

[Guy McSucker]

I find the $20 level the easiest to beat. The mistakes the players make there coincide with the mistakes my playing style best exploits: they fold too much, at least at the times I play (afternoons/evenings GMT).

At the weekend, $30 is the level for me. The $20 players are looser then.

Understand that at the $10 level your opponents will call more than they should, so you need to adjust your play accordingly. I am bad at this.
Don't blame luck for losing against overly loose players. Change your approach, or find a different game.

Guy.

[AleoMagus]

I, like a lot of people, read the forums on this site for years before I ever decided to make a post. This kind of thread is exactly why.

This person is not asking for your approval, or trying to prove his credibility. Credibility for what? Ability to beat a $10 sng?

Or do you mean credibility for NEVER losing except on bad calls and bad beats? I didn't get a sense that this was an 100% matter-of-fact claim so much as a feeling about the low limit Sngs. My credibility be damned, but I often get that same feeling, however strictly innacurate it must be.

This person was asking a question.

I play almost all my sngs at party and don't have the answer he wants. I'd wager you two might though. I'd also wager that it would have taken less time and energy from both you to just answer him, instead of berating a statement made too flippantly. Even your beratement has an educating value - I see that, but try tact next time if that is your intent.

If it is just a little internet clique that you want... well, good job.

I only have about 20 or 30 posts myself, so excuse me. I'll take any bet you want that there are a few world champs who have even less.

Geez.
Brad S

-As far as Partypoker is concerned, my stats show a higher win rate later in the evening. This is in almost direct correlation with the higher number of players online, so I'd suspect that the same is true of Stars. I'd just pick the times when the most players are playing.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

This person was asking a question.

Then he didn't need to to make such an off the wall comment.

I only have about 20 or 30 posts myself, so excuse me. I'll take any bet you want that there are a few world champs who have even less.

Point taken.

I, like a lot of people, read the forums on this site for years before I ever decided to make a post. This kind of thread is exactly why.

Let's be clear. Neither Cris nor I was berating him for his play, just his attitude. Maybe the replies were too harsh, but poker itself is a lot more harsh than anything any of us will ever have to face on this board.

[CrisBrown]

Hi Brad,

I'm sorry I upset you. That wasn't my intent. Rather, my intent was to show that sometimes a seemingly excremental call -- in terms of a hand comparison -- can be the correct move. A lot of times, a "bad" call isn't as bad as it may appear at first glance.

Cris

[CrisBrown]

Hi wannabe,

I really can't say what are the "easiest" SNGs at Stars. I think it depends on your playing style and bankroll. Yes, there tends to be a lot of loose play in the $11 and $22 SNGs, and if you can adjust your play accordingly, they are very beatable. The $33 SNGs are a transition level; you'll see a lot of the same fish from the $11 and $22 levels, but also stronger players who can't get a $55 or $109 to fill. (I find myself playing a lot of $33s for that reason.) At the $55 and $109 buy-ins, the play is much tighter, but at times to the point of weak-tight, so aggressive play at the right spots can pick up enough pots to keep you around even if you're catching trash cards. And there are still enough fish to make it profitable. At the $215 SNGs, though, there just isn't enough dead money (for me) to make it profitable. Why play 15 other strong players to split two dead buy-ins?

Cris

[ohkanada]

I finally got tired of the $11/$22 and started playing the $33/$55 tables. I was shocked at the bad play of my 1st 2 $55 tables.

Ken Poklitar

[VinnyTheFish]

[ QUOTE ]
... $10 sit and gos NL HE on poker stars, where the competition sucks ...

[/ QUOTE ]

I am a $5 SNG player. I also venture into the $10’s. I play 94% of my time at the $5/$10 SNG level!

I have now come to the realization that I suck. Thank you opening my eyes!

Here's what you should do ... track your next 1000 tournaments (at what ever level). Let me know how you placing % … 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th or worse. Money in, net profit/loss. That will answer your own question without insulting anyone.

Next … why would you move up a level when, in your opinion, “the competition sucks.” If I am you, then I sit at those suck tables like it’s my job.

Vinny


P.S. Looking for to playing against you! Do you have the same name at PS as you do here?

[Stagemusic]

Excellent post Vinny. I play there sometimes too although I have moved up to the 22 and 33's lately. Maybe the gentleman (?) would like to join us on our next 2+2 venture. Most of us are low to middle limit players with Cris thrown in for fun /images/graemlins/grin.gif That way he would be able to judge just how he would do at that limit.

To the orginal poster. One thing to understand. The limit that a particular player plays does not truly indicate his or her ability. There are many factors that influence level selection. My suggestion to you would be to set aside a 10 buy in bankroll for the $33 SNG's at Stars. Play until that bankroll is gone. If it is gone, go back to $10's and wait. If the money doesn't go away and particularly if it increases, stay there. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

set aside a 10 buy in bankroll

I think that's a bit short. 15 sounds better.

[ThaSaltCracka]

Brad I have to agree with Kurn, the attitude is what most people don;t like. I pretty much play $5-$10 tourneys and I definetly don't think I suck, thats just where I can reasonably afford to play. also his insinuation that he only loses because of bad beats and bull [censored] calls is a ridiculous statement. Most people lose at times because of this, but you don't really cry about it though. That is what people do in the lower limit tourneys.

BTW Brad, why not try posting more often. I have done my share of posts and I have noticed for the most part people reply with insightful comments when a question is asked, regardless of how ridiculous it is. I think the only way you will experience rudeness is if you come off sounding arrogant and conceited.

[CrisBrown]

Hiya Stagemusic,

[ QUOTE ]
The limit that a particular player plays does not truly indicate his or her ability. There are many factors that influence level selection.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed 100%. If you look at poker as a second job, then it makes sense to play at the level that gives you the highest hourly return. As I said in another post, that's as much a matter of playing style as skill level. If you play poker for fun -- and there is NOTHING wrong with that! -- then it makes sense to play at a level you enjoy and can afford ... whatever that may be.

Cris

[DrPhysic]

Dear Mr. wannabe,

I know where there is a real nice friendly evening poker game where you could come

demonstrate some of these fine skills you describe.

You could meet our Klingon, see what Brown can do for you, (it's kind of like getting run

over by a Diesel truck), meet Al Capone (Jr), get to play with a real ElSapo, a ghettorat,

and one that claims to be lucky because he's the 7thSon.

You could meet BugsBunny, the DarkKnight, a Grinning Budda, a real card playing Praying

Mantis, and our own Jedi (he promises not to use the power while playing poker).

You could try some SKOAL while visiting Bozeman, and probably not get arrested by the fat

sherriff. There's one player you could help us with, we don't know who he is but he's not Mitch. And I've only seen him Bluff1 nce in a while.

We even have a player that CLAIMS to be a fish, and one from Napa that's a wino.

If you get in over your head, we even have a haven for you. But it's really an easy game,

after all Boris plays way abv par and only gets aces over 8s once in a while.

If you'd like to join our little game, see my post on this forum: "2+2 SNG $10+1 NLHE on

STARS 9:30PM EST (Wednesday Jan 28)"

We'd be glad to halve you.

Doc

My apologies to william, thomastem, and heyrocker: I didn't want to scare him.

[William]

[ QUOTE ]
the $30 SnG after dinner time seemed pretty easy.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I have often wondered about my bad results in those ones. Probably because the belly is full, I keep dosing away, sleep for 2 or 3 rounds every here and there and that annoying bip keeps disturbing my after-dinner nap. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Nice nick btw, even though Wannabe is quite a common (and secret) name in this forum /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Keep up the good work, and keep struggling for those 72$(61 profit) while you wait for the golden after-dinner tourney /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Stagemusic]

15 would give him a longer learning curve for sure.

[Stagemusic]

Hi Cris,

Good pockets to you.

[ QUOTE ]
If you look at poker as a second job, then it makes sense to play at the level that gives you the highest hourly return. As I said in another post, that's as much a matter of playing style as skill level. If you play poker for fun -- and there is NOTHING wrong with that! -- then it makes sense to play at a level you enjoy and can afford ... whatever that may be.


[/ QUOTE ]

For most of us, Poker will NEVER be anything but a hobby. A very lucrative hobby indeed but still, just a hobby. 99.9% of the people that play poker are break even or overall losing players (for our more literal posters...don't quote me on the %, it was just an illustration) who like to play for a chance to stick their hand 6" or so up the Golden Gooses *** and grab an egg or two. It took me 6 months and MANY (mostly small) deposits to make my first cash out of any site. Luckily, I have a good job and could afford to play by making a deposit or two a month. Well, I just consider that my tuition, sort of like starting a new hobby like golf. You have to buy the equipment and pay the green fees to really learn the game. Well, wonder upon wonders, I DID improve. I haven't made a deposit in a few months and have cashed out numerous times since then. Now Poker is more than a game that I love to play. It has become a source for a decent secondary income. I still love to play thank God. I think that if it became a job I would miss the fun.

I guess the point of all this rambling is that we all play poker for different, although mostly similar, reasons. Fun, excitement, the rush, money, ego, whatever motivates us. These same reasons exist on every table from a .50/1 to a 100/200 game. The differences are only in the degree.

/images/graemlins/spade.gif /images/graemlins/diamond.gif /images/graemlins/heart.gif /images/graemlins/club.gif

[triplc]

Very funny post, Doc...made my morning.

[Stagemusic]

sigh. No respect. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[ThaSaltCracka]

[DrPhysic]

Thank You,

If there is no room for a little humor, I'm on the wrong forum.

Doc

[DrPhysic]

Did I neglect to mention Ulysses entering the game to the sound of Stagemusic?

I'm sorry.

Doc

[Rick Diesel]

I second Cris's thoughts. I prefer to play the $55 SNGs on Stars, but many times find myself in $33 SNGs because I can't get a $55 to fill up. I have also had some success in the $109 SNGs, but think that at my current skill level (not as high as Cris, thats for sure) that the 109s are not profitable enough for me. Although it is nice to hit a more lucrative payday in the larger tournies, it is nice to get some of the almost guaranteed smaller prize in the smaller tournies.

Rick Diesel

[colgin]