Re: Limit SNGs
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If there is bad (sub-optimal) play, then it's trivial to show how the game is beatable. One just has to find the right adjustments to take full advantage. Unfortunately, I doubt it's really worth anyone's time to really devote a significant amount of time to figuring out what these adjustments are...
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think this statement is true. Just because there's suboptimal play doesn't mean the game is beatable. The reason for this, of course, is that even though you might have an edge, the edge you get might not be enough to compensate for the entry fees you have to pay. For instance, if you put a bunch of world class pros at a $5/10 table, my guess is that none of them would be able to show a profit because I doubt any of them would be able to gain more than a 5% advantage over the competition. I'm not saying that it is the case with limit SNGs, but it's something to consider.
I also mentioned that a higher standard deviation in limit would lead to a lower overall winrate due to the nature of SNGs and the fact that this would more or less flatten your results. However, after reading this post and contemplating this idea further, I'm not sure this is the case. It might be true that your placement is more or less a function of the percentage edge you have on the competition and be completely (or mostly) independent of SD. You will have to win more at showdown, which could decrease the percentage of times you win, but you are also getting 3:1 or 4:1 on a lot of these bets, which could lead to a higher ITM.
I'm not sure how to go about proving this in either direction, and I'm not sure which one is correct. Does anybody have any ideas on this? Might be a good question for the Probability forum...
[/ QUOTE ]
Dude, if you've played *any* limit STTs and think there isn't enough bad play to make playing them and beating the rake profitable....then you should quit poker....I'm surprised you even made this argument knowing that I already know it....(if you want me to admit that I needed to mention rake there to be completely accurate...then fine, I admit it - I was *assuming* that much was self-evident).
As for SD, comparing limit ring and nl ring to STT limit and STT NL is most likely flawed. The SD for limit HE STTs and NL STTs (or ther other STT variants) will be very close. This is due to the payout structure of STTs more than how correct or incorrect strategy applies to them (and is taken advantage of). Yes, there will most likely be SD differences between NLHE STTs and LHE STTs, but I'd guess it will be negligible in the scheme of things...
Yes, where you're going with your ideas about ITM and ROI in limit make sense....I wouldn't be surprised if a higher ITM is acheivable in the limit STTs.
Yugoslav
|