Pwning at a lower limit

[microbet]

[ QUOTE ]

But as Zen said, i'm running cold right now... apparently it applies to my writing, too.

Irieguy

[/ QUOTE ]

Your writing was just fine. It may not have been world champion writing, but it was fine.

[Apathy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


...All that aside, however, this challenge is also in the name of science.
--Z

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. This is a scientific experiment. Also in the name of [2+2]science, we will only post our results if we both go on a sick heater.

If I run better at the $109's or $215's, I will post those results instead. If I lose at SNGs all month, I will post my live results in the Bellagio dailies. If I lose everything, i'll just title something "variance is a bitch," and post my results next month instead.

At the end of the year, Zen and I will co-author a post entitiled "glimpse into the results of SNG world champions" where we post our best 6 months each and say "this is pretty much how we do most of the time." Maybe we'll start a website.

Then 2,000 n0obs and 20 low limit SNG pros will hang themselves because they can't match the results of two Jackoffs on the SNG forum.

Then the experiment will be over.

Irieguy

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a very important post and those who need it the most won't get it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I think those that "need" this post the most aren't the one's that are hanging themselves, and they likely WILL get it, just not care.

[Mr_J]

I guess the bet would be an amount that would cover the lost EV of moving down to the $55s??

[John Hurst]

I would estimate that Irie is about a 2:1 favorite here over a huge number of SNGs. If he hits a 20% ROI then Zen has to have a 33.3% ROI. I think this is too much to overcome. Even over 500 I would wager on Irie.

[Apathy]

[ QUOTE ]
I would estimate that Irie is about a 2:1 favorite here over a huge number of SNGs. If he hits a 20% ROI then Zen has to have a 33.3% ROI. I think this is too much to overcome. Even over 500 I would wager on Irie.

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you mean by that? assuming you don't have any bankroll considerations why would the bet being for 500 or for 2000 SNGs change which side you would bet on?

[stupidsucker]

$/SnG at the 33s is a lot closer to the $/SnG at the 55s then most members of this forum know...Variance will be the only factor imo.

Table/seat selection could put Irie over the top, but 8tabling nulifies a lot of this.

Just my opinions. They never really matter, but I am always right in my mind.


edit: unless rakeback counts then Irie kills this. Otherwise the sample size makes this anyones game imo.

[Mr_J]

"$/SnG at the 33s is a lot closer to the $/SnG at the 55s then most members of this forum know...Variance will be the only factor imo."

Then you say:

unless rakeback counts then Irie kills this.

With rakeback irie kills this ($55s pay better than $33s). No rakeback hurts irie...

So you're saying the $55s basically aren't worthwhile apart from adjusting to the larger number of chips in play, and maybe the slightly better competition?? From my limited experience at the $55s I think the $/hr increase is similiar to the $22s-$33s. Definately worthwhile if you can cope with greater variance.

[stupidsucker]

A step up is almost always worth it if you have the proper bankroll AND the experience to deal with the larger swings at the higher level. All of this provided you are a winning player at the new level... An adjustment period is needed for most players. Some players may find that they play much much better at the 55s then the 33s based on style of play.

rakeback just sweetens the deal A LOT.

[Mr_J]

Exactly what I think.

"rakeback just sweetens the deal A LOT."

Without rakeback I'd need to do alot of work on my game to make the jump to the $55s and $109s worthwhile.

[lacky]

Can I be on your website? I only need to use 33 days.