Re: My thoughts on sats
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When I play poker, I generally think about hourly wage and variance. I will only play satellites over SNGs (my personal form of cash games), if I think my hourly wage is higher in satellites. Furthermore, I will only play satellites if am at least close to buying in directly. IMHO, if you aren't willing to buy in directly, you shouldn't really be playing satellites unless there's a seriously lack of game selection available.
FWIW, I consider Stars satellites, especially the 600+40's to be very profitable w/ relatively low variance.
[/ QUOTE ]
i agree with this generally but its probably worth qualifying it to say that this is true only for the professional player. for the recreational player, while its not wise in terms of bankroll management, sometimes the "thrill" of playing in a bigger tournament (depending on the player, this could be the WSOP or the PP Mill. Guaranteed) makes up for the bad money management.
And of course, we're how you guys make all your money [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, I was considering whether or not that I should edit my previous post and say this only applies to players that rely on poker for income, but I figured that much is implied in a post like that.
|