|
|
#31
11-07-2005, 09:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Party Super Musings
[ QUOTE ]
Most NL cash game players can win easily at tournaments, while the opposite is not true. [/ QUOTE ] Maybe my wording wasnt clear, but this is exactly what I meant. 
|
|
#32
11-07-2005, 09:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Party Super Musings
Winning 1 out of 200 supers to me is awful. I've played in a very small sample size of about 30 of them but have already cashed 7 times. I can't imagine playing 199 supers without even getting cracked just inside the bubble. And 200 supers, does anyone realize how many that is? If I played 200 supers I would hope for 5-6 final tables at least. Can't wait till I get ripped on for this one.
-Ace
|
|
#33
11-07-2005, 09:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Party Super Musings
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Most NL cash game players can win easily at tournaments, while the opposite is not true. [/ QUOTE ] Maybe my wording wasnt clear, but this is exactly what I meant. [/ QUOTE ] Your wording was clear. I was just agreeing with you.
|
|
#34
11-07-2005, 09:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Party Super Musings
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] A lot of players can win in the cash games and don't realize what a major leak MTT play is for them. [/ QUOTE ] Hmmmm, I have always thought it was the other way around. [/ QUOTE ] Unless he is talking LHE cash game players losing at MTT's, you are right. Most NL cash game players can win easily at tournaments, while the opposite is not true. [/ QUOTE ] I was speaking of LHE players, as that is what the majority of cash game players are. Obviously a good NL cash game player should be able to employ many of the same tactics in a NL tournament.
|
|
#35
11-07-2005, 10:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Party Super Musings
I play the single-table satellites to the major-tourney sat's (PPM cruise, Aussie Millions, etc) as well as those for the super's sometimes.
I find the field AND pay-out structure to be advantageous to regular SNG's. Smallish sample-size in both....but it's natural to feel like you are doing better in a certain format and then to stick with that format. If I thought it was more profitable to win the amount of the entry-fee via the regular SNG's then I would go that route instead. I was playing a lot of the Stars sats for T$ and W$ for a time and didn't have much interest playing in the Sunday $215 tourney or whatever. The fields were weak enough that I found them still to be profitable even if I wanted to sell my T$ or W$ for cash. I used them for various major-tourney satellites though. and have since run extremely cold in them (AA keeps getting beat...arrgh).
|
|
#36
11-07-2005, 10:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Party Super Musings
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] A lot of players can win in the cash games and don't realize what a major leak MTT play is for them. [/ QUOTE ] Hmmmm, I have always thought it was the other way around. [/ QUOTE ] Unless he is talking LHE cash game players losing at MTT's, you are right. Most NL cash game players can win easily at tournaments, while the opposite is not true. [/ QUOTE ] I was speaking of LHE players, as that is what the majority of cash game players are. Obviously a good NL cash game player should be able to employ many of the same tactics in a NL tournament. [/ QUOTE ] That doesn't sound correct to me. I thought NL was more popular these days. What data are you basing your statement on?
|
|
#37
11-07-2005, 10:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Party Super Musings
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] A lot of players can win in the cash games and don't realize what a major leak MTT play is for them. [/ QUOTE ] Hmmmm, I have always thought it was the other way around. [/ QUOTE ] Unless he is talking LHE cash game players losing at MTT's, you are right. Most NL cash game players can win easily at tournaments, while the opposite is not true. [/ QUOTE ] I was speaking of LHE players, as that is what the majority of cash game players are. Obviously a good NL cash game player should be able to employ many of the same tactics in a NL tournament. [/ QUOTE ] That doesn't sound correct to me. I thought NL was more popular these days. What data are you basing your statement on? [/ QUOTE ] That seems to be more of a historical statement.
|
|
#38
11-07-2005, 10:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Party Super Musings
Shane, this is my problem with MTTs. I mean, cashes don't even matter if you don't finish in the top 3. I mean, sure, you can't simply rely on one #1 finish, but all those cashes mean [censored]. It's just so stupid. Whatever.
|
|
#39
11-07-2005, 10:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Party Super Musings
You know, I'm caught red-handed. I have never been to a casino where there aren't at least twice as many limit games spread as NL. And I can observe obviously how many limit games are going on at a given time on any internet site, but that only led to my assumption that there are less NL games going on.
You very well may be correct that NL is played more, as a quick survey of the # of tables going on currently at Party surprised me.
|
|
#40
11-07-2005, 10:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Party Super Musings
This is true in just about every 1000 person tournament, I dont really see anything profound in this realization. Obviously if you play 200 touranments you're going to have a lot more cashes than just one win, although one win in 200 is probably an unrealistic expectation. But if you can expect to make 4 FT with each finish the same probablility, that alone will make you a profitable player. Scatter in 20 other cashes along the way and you'll make a pretty solid profit in this single tournament.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
