1 Table vs 2 Table SnG

[Prickly Pete]

I'm not statistics expert either, but I'd think they'd be the same over the long run. For instance, taking skill out of it as you suggested, everyone is the same. In a 2-table $30+3, you will get 1 first, 1 2nd, 1 3rd & 1 4th in 18 tries. Which means you will break even and lose only the $3 fees each game. This is the same as playing a 1 table SNG. It's also the same as multitables, you can expect to break even (losing only the fees) over the very long haul.

I think it's more a matter of which format suits you best. I like to play the 1 & 2 table SNGs regularly. And the multis only occasionally. Those I consider gambling for me. And if I hit big, that's just gravy.

[Copernicus]

My experience is similar to Guy's...my in the money percentage for the 4 seats out of 18 two tabler isnt much different from the 3 seats out of 9 one tabler. I have played a lot of both, and it doesnt seem to be an aberration, but I'm not positive why thats happening, though I do have a theory.

It may be related to the length of the games and the total number of TCs. As you get closer to the money (say 6 players left in either game) a two tabler has an average stack twice as high as the one tabler, however it doesnt take twice as long to get there, because two tables run simultaneously until its down to 9 players. Thus the ratio of stacks to blinds is usually higher in the two tabler, making the very tight "survive at all costs" players like me less vulnerable to bad beats. It also gives you more leverage to bully the short stacks that eventually show up (even if its a little later due to the greater number of TCs).

Getting to the 6 player level would seem to be less likely in the two tabler to offset the above effect. The fact that it isnt much less likely in reality may be the style issue.

Guy, are you also a super-tight, aggressive, avoid big hands without the nuts style player?

It may be almost as easy to get close to the money because there just arent very many of that style player around, and I think its clearly a superior strategy...ie the number of opponents doubles, but the number of players using winning strategies doesnt.

Thats why I fear that the money machine these SnGs have represented may not be long lived. More and more of the newbies (and I'm not exactly a SnG old timer) will adapt similar strategies, and the games will become more of a crap shoot then the current duck hunt. Hopefully the boring, robotic nature of the strategy will be enough to keep too many from getting there.

[DaNoob]

Thanks for all the feedback all. I'm going to try an experiment this month and compare the 2 table results to those of the 1 tables I've played over the last few months. I'll post the results later.

Thanks again.

[Guy McSucker]

Guy, are you also a super-tight, aggressive, avoid big hands without the nuts style player?

Yes, except when I'm bluffing.

I am pretty tight, yes, especially early on in these tournies. I take a few more liberties when it's five or six handed though, and I try to steal the blinds whenever it looks possible.

Guy.

[Scottnyce]

I'm pretty new at SNG's which sites have this 2 table format?

[eMarkM]

nm

[Copernicus]

Ive only played 2 tablers at PokerStars