Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Tournament Poker > One-table Tournaments
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #1  
Old 09-18-2005, 02:38 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Low limit ring games more profitable than STTs?

I play limit ring games, at the moment the .50/1.00 partypoker 6max tables. As this is the lowest limit partypoker tables, with the loosest worst players, making 6BB per 100 hands, or $4.50 per hour for one table, is doable for a good player. The generally accepted wisdom is that one needs a 300 big bet bankroll at limit, so a $300 bankroll.

I've read that at the lowest limit STT's, a 30% ROI would be reasonable for a good player, and that a STT might take an hour. Given this, the lowest level STT's at partypoker would make much less than the lowest level limit ring games. $5+1 X 30% = $1.80 per hour. $10+1 X 30% = $3.30 per hour. $22 X 30% = $6.60 per hour, if one could really make 30% on the $22's, and from what I've read most here are not making that much.

Also, 50 buyins is the recommended bankroll, meaning you'd have to have an $1100 bankroll and play the $22's to likely make the same amount one could make at partypoker's lowest limit 6max ring games, .50/1.00.

Add to this the fact that at partypoker and skins, STT's don't count towards bonuses, and it seems like ring games are a lot more profitable at the lowest levels than STT's.

Am I wrong here?

(Of course, 6BB/100 hands is only doable at the very lowest level loosest tables, move up even slightly and you're hoping for 3bb/100 instead, move up higher and you're hoping for 2)
Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.