Playing SNG tables a good idea?

[dcoles11]

being that SNG tables are 10 or 9 people at most sites and 3rd place only pays alittlt under 2-1($50SNG pays $90 for 3rd) on your money and you are a 1-3(3 out of 9 get paid) chance of placing in the tournament, is it even a good idea to play them?

[AleoMagus]

we all seem to think so

Regards
Brad S

[AleoMagus]

I've been working on my brevity in an effort to make pooh-bah by 2006. I think I'm getting the hang of it.

Notice how I even made this second thought a new post instead of just editing or adding it to the first.

Regards
Brad S

[AleoMagus]

... But anyways

Yes, the numbers that you gave would seem to indicate that the 'average' player whose finish distribution was exactly in accordance with the odds over the long run would lose money

This is true, and is because of the fact that the site is charging a fee

Good players, however, can overcome this by finishing disproportionately in the top three spots, thereby netting themselves a profit. This is definitely possible, and many of the players on this forum have been making money at SNG poker over thousands of tourneys now.

Regards
Brad S

[niwotyalpi]

[ QUOTE ]
being that SNG tables are 10 or 9 people at most sites and 3rd place only pays alittlt under 2-1($50SNG pays $90 for 3rd) on your money and you are a 1-3(3 out of 9 get paid) chance of placing in the tournament, is it even a good idea to play them?


[/ QUOTE ]


Well with the roughly 30 % chance of placing idea, you are way off. A good sit n' go player has a much better than 30 % chance of placing in each sit n' go. I think you will find that many people on this site have ITM's at 40 % or higher. I only have relevant stats for 30/3's at Party, but for 500+ 30/3 sit n' go's my ITM was 48.2 %. And I am by no means the best sit n go player on this site.

Bottom line. YES. sit n' go's can be very profitable if you become great at them. Just ask guys like Giga, ZeeJustin, and many others on here.

[SuitedSixes]

[ QUOTE ]
I've been working on my brevity in an effort to make pooh-bah by 2006. I think I'm getting the hang of it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Head over to Other Other Topics, that's a sure fire way to get your post count up.

Just thought I'd help you out for a change . . . and increase my count by one.

[KenProspero]

I guess if we follow the original poster's logic, we would never play in ANY raked game. Obviously, with the house taking it's slice, there is a -EV for the table as a whole.

And yet, people seem to make money at SnGs as well as at raked games. It's just a matter of finding a game where you're better than average by enough to compensate for the entry fee.

[binions]

Online SNGs are one of the most consistently beatable games in all of poker, if

A) you know how to play them (there's an art to it)
B) you have the proper bankroll

One of the reasons SNGs are profitable is the rake structure. Consider a winning 50+5 player. Single tabling, he wins $15-20 an hour, and pays $5 per hour rake.

In order to win that much per hour in an online ring game, you need to play at least $5-10, which at $3 rake x 60 hands/hour divided by 10 seats or $18/hour rake.

[AleoMagus]

Not to mention the fact that the average winning SNG player has a much smaller variance. This also implies that for the same profit, a smaller bankroll is needed.

Regards
Brad S

[KingOtter]

I've played in 74 SnG's, and my ROI currently is 41%. And I went through a really bad spell where it was down to 14%... but it was still profitable.

That's taking into account the entry fee, and the base amount.

I've not calculated my ITM yet, though. Since I was doing it on Pacific I couldn't use PT, but now I'm on Paradise playing $5+1 limit.

KO