Re: Starting stack size question: Is it generally agreed that....
 

[ QUOTE ]
all other things being equal

[/ QUOTE ]

One thing you may have overlooked - if "all other things" were equal, you'd be facing the same array of donk-to-winning skill levels within each structure. Even if the comparison of two structures led you to conclude that one would be more advantageous to a winning (well rounded) player, you cannot assume that this player would rise to a higher rung in the 'compared to' structure.

Re: Starting stack size question: Is it generally agreed that....
 

[ QUOTE ]
But - it seems that if you take this to an extreme, like everyone starts with 3 x BB, the rake may swallow any small skill edge a player has such that hourly rate would be lower.

[/ QUOTE ]

Personally, I think this would be a very profitable venture. Certainly one with high per-tourney variance...but the average SnG player out there simply doesn't recognize his own chip stack as being merely a multiple of the BB. Now, I do think that intuitively there would be some players who would begin to recognize that a starting-with-3xBB tourney would require a lot of upfront aggression...but I think many would still pick poor spots to exhibit that aggression. In short, I think if I played exclusively in 3xBB SnG's, my ROI would certainly decrease, but my hourly rate would likely increase (because avg. time/tourney would probably be reduced to something in the 10-15 minute range and the tourney would start at the point of our greatest mathematical advantage over non-thinking players).

Re: Starting stack size question: Is it generally agreed that....
 

This may be true, however another offset would be the complete lack of reads on the players you would have, due to it being an all-in fest before you've even got chance to decide what type of player they are.

Re: Starting stack size question: Is it generally agreed that....
 

Yeah, good point. I guess I'm thinking about this from the perspective of the 22's, which is what I primarily play. 8-tabling that level, sure - when I get a good read on a player's calling range and can adjust it, that's fantastic. However, I have to say the majority of the time (and I'm sure to keep winning as you move up this must change), as it relates to pushbotting, my concerns are in the following order:
1) Position
2) My Hand
3) Any specific reads I have on the calling range of the player (and if I have none, I start out with the Aggressive range on SnGPT's and adjust it looser as the tourney goes on and they start to pick up on what I'm doing -- if it's a player who clearly recognizes me, I start their calling range at Loose and adjust it towards Maniac as the bubble progresses).

My feeling is that this strategy would work quite well from a $/hour perspective at a similar level in a 3xBB starting stack structure. Do you feel differently?

Re: Starting stack size question: Is it generally agreed that....
 

i like to start with a smaller amount of chips.
i think its an advantage.

its very easy to play incorrectly when you start with t800. Which is good for the few who understand how to place top 3 on a regular basis.