[pfkaok]

[ QUOTE ]

Does this mean that I'm self-delusional about the timw that I sometimes spend/waste in pursuit of the occasional major land-based tourney?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well. When I said that to play the $250 sats for $2500 events you'd need close to the BR that you'd need for the $2500 events themselves, that is assuming you're playing those as a major source of your income. and because the variance in those things along is very big you'd need a huge BR to handle the swings. sure, its only $250 each investment, but only its only 2% or so that the $250 is turned into something. and MUCH, MUCH less that its turned into a BIG score.

when you're just "taking a shot" in a few of them, its different, but I think not as much different as most might think. So, in the case of somebody taking a shot to try and get in a 10k event, they won't need close to a $1 mil roll. but they should have just about enough that they'd feel OK taking a shot by buying directly into the 10k event. So, if you felt like you could take a shot at a 10k event with a 125-150k roll, then it'd probably be fine to play the sats with a 75-100k roll. Of course these numbers are pretty arbitrary, but i do think that in terms of risk of ruin, and bankroll growth, you need a much bigger roll for these sats than most people would think.

In the end, it just really comes down to how much EV you have in the sats, but you have to take into account that the variance is quite high if you plan on playing the bigger event rather than selling your seat. If, however, you're planning on getting cash instead, then some sats can have an enormous EV in relation to variance. but most big events don't even allow you to sell your first seat.