[Mr_J]

I agree you can slaughter the lower limits. Player are so bad it's very entertaining. If I was sure I could make 66% of what I make at full sngs then I'd switch to HU. Profit is more important than job satisfaction right now so maybe I'll just look at it again when I can afford to bum around.

"particularly if you can average 30 mins a tourney."

???? Ok most of mine were $10s but an average of 12-15mins seems pretty realistic (I averaged less). Haven't had anything go past level 2, and the only way I think it could is if you got shortstacked early or were up against a good player.

"I've yet to have a Head's Up tourney turn into a Party-style all-in fest"

After picking up 500 or so of their chips I've reguarly had opponents then moving all in on me preflop.

"Given that it should be a lot less likely for you to drop a bunch of buy-ins, you probably don't need as big a bankroll as for 10-player SNG's."

For sure. Placing 60%+ of the time has much less variance than placing 40%. 20 is probally enough at lower limits.

"Variance: I keep going back and forth on whether variance should be better or worse"

Much better because it's much lower. You also don't need as large a sample size to draw the same sort of conclusions as at full.

"So it'd be difficult to get the kind of hourly rate as would be found at $200 full table SNG's."

I'd think about HU cash games if the mid-higher buyins aren't doing it ($105+).

"The big downside is that specialising in Head's Up tournaments is going to help your overall poker game even less than regular SNGs. Or is it?"

Much more.

"and if anything Head's Up tourney's may be more formulaic"

No.