|
|
#11
10-22-2005, 07:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: I don\'t feel single table tourneys are that profitable
ultimately, water will always find its own level
|
|
#12
10-22-2005, 11:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I don\'t feel single table tourneys are that profitable
[ QUOTE ]
each players M is so low that all-in bet's are extremely common and necessary [/ QUOTE ] The fact that not that many people recognize this (or don't recognize how/when to use it) is a big part of why they're profitable. I don't get the correlation that because people have to push all in it's not profitable. -SonnyJay
|
|
#13
10-22-2005, 01:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I don\'t feel single table tourneys are that profitable
[ QUOTE ]
My argument for this is mostly because of the blind structure. It seems that after a few people have left the tourney, each players M is so low that all-in bet's are extremely common and necessary. [/ QUOTE ] The essence of poker is making correct decisions. If pushing all your chips in the pot is the correct decision, then pushing all your chips in the pot at the right time will be profitable. If you don't know when to push all your chips in the pot, or you feel that such a move is too risky, then SnGs will not be profitable for you. This is not a result of the blind structure, it is a result of not making or not implementing the correct decision.
|
|
#14
10-22-2005, 01:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I don\'t feel single table tourneys are that profitable
this is priceless. thanks for the laugh. yes i have an ego problem .
|
|
#16
10-22-2005, 03:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I don\'t feel single table tourneys are that profitable
I prefer MTTS over SNGs, the rush you get when theyre like 30 dudes left!!! its something from another planet!!!
Of course SNGs > MTTs, but I think that you learn much more from a MTTs than from a SNG.
|
|
#17
10-22-2005, 03:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I don\'t feel single table tourneys are that profitable
Nah, MTT's are more profitable than SNG's long term*.
*to the top .5-1% (figure pulled out of my ass) of people playing them, and accounting for future evolution of the games/burnout involved in playing SNG's for a long time.
|
|
#18
10-22-2005, 03:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I don\'t feel single table tourneys are that profitable
In theory I think MTTs should probably be higher ROI because at higher buyins you probably have a higher ratio of inexperienced players. This is just a guess on my part and I don't know think it is anything about the games. I just think currently there are more fish either winning a feeder tournament or willing to take a chance on a big payoff MTT than a higher buyin STT.
Is it even really possible to know how profitable MTTs are though? Can one ever hit the long run?
|
|
#19
10-22-2005, 03:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I don\'t feel single table tourneys are that profitable
like I said, I make (more? )money playing SNGs but I simply love MTTs, even if they are more profitable the long run is way too much.
On the other side, MTT are much easier to beat on higher buy-ins. I think I can handle my own on those typical 250K guaranteed, on the other side I dont see myself doing much on a 215 sng.
|
|
#20
10-22-2005, 03:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I don\'t feel single table tourneys are that profitable
In terms of ROI there is no question. A good MTTer can maintain a 100%+ ROI. In terms of $$/hour it's much closer. Playing sng's I can 8 table, playing mtt's I try to stay around 4. They also take much longer. Bottom line is what I've said before. A good player with well rounded skills can make money in whatever game they are in, and the rate of earning works out to close enough in the long run that your ussually best off playing whatever interests you at the time. The goal is to keep the game fresh and fun, and make some money doing it.
Steve
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
