Why SNGs have MORE variance than ring games

[A_PLUS]

Completely jumping over the last 10 posts, which I dont really care to get involved with.

I was always confused as to why people thought SNGs were lower variance than ring games (at low limits). If you are an adequte poker player, you can achieve 5-8xBB/100 win rate at 25 or 50 max on party.

From my experience (I dont have my PT stats in front of me). 4-tabling low stakes NL ring, is much lower variance than being an adequate (<15% ROI) low limit SNG player. I also think that it is probably higher $/Hr as well, but that of course depends on your skills.

[Jason Strasser]

Hehe, I think my long term ROI in 1ks will even out to about 10%, and I'm pretty sure thats worth my time.

I have been posting a bit, just not in these parts... Except for a few of Unarmed's posts here and there. Ill be at duke in about 2 weeks, if you want to meet up and get drunk or play 1-1 uncapped NL and get stacked off for 300bb, PM me [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

-Jason

[45suited]

For people on the 11s and 22s who can only muster a 5-10% ROI, I think that there is another reason why they might want to consider ring games.

The 11s and 22s are so easily crushable (20% or more) that if you are at 5-10%, there must be large holes in your game. If some of these guys would play 25 NL for a while, their understanding of poker in general and post flop play in particular would improve greatly. This could only help their SNG game in the long run.

[The Don]

[ QUOTE ]
For people on the 11s and 22s who can only muster a 5-10% ROI, I think that there is another reason why they might want to consider ring games.

The 11s and 22s are so easily crushable (20% or more) that if you are at 5-10%, there must be large holes in your game. If some of these guys would play 25 NL for a while, their understanding of poker in general and post flop play in particular would improve greatly. This could only help their SNG game in the long run.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think nutpeddling 25NL will help many. The optimal strategy for those games is to advertise insanely for the first couple of orbits then wait for big hands. This won't work in SNGs because you can't rebuy. Play starts being more realistic at NL100 and is fairly genuine at NL200. No tricky LAGs but everyone is typically a solid player.

[Matt R.]

Okay, I'm in a hurry and I just skimmed your post, so this may be in there somewhere. Apologies if so.

What if we assume exactly equal hourly expectations for limit ring, NL ring, and SNG's (and multis just for fun). Can we estimate what the highest/lowest variance games will be in this case? I think this should be possible, but I'm not sure.

I'd try to figure this out myself, but I have to run (and I think there are some posters on here that would be able to figure this out in much less time than I could). I'm interested in what the lowest variance form of online poker *can* be if you become equally good at all forms.

[The Don]

[ QUOTE ]
Hehe, I think my long term ROI in 1ks will even out to about 10%, and I'm pretty sure thats worth my time.

I have been posting a bit, just not in these parts... Except for a few of Unarmed's posts here and there. Ill be at duke in about 2 weeks, if you want to meet up and get drunk AND play 1-1 uncapped NL and get stacked off for 300bb, PM me [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]


-Jason

[/ QUOTE ]

Minor correction necessary.

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
The optimal strategy for those games is to advertise insanely for the first couple of orbits then wait for big hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

This just simply can't be true. The players down there are really really really bad and unobservant. So why waste the money on advertizing that they're not going to pay any attention to anyway, when you could just skip to "nutpeddle?"

citanul

[A_PLUS]

[ QUOTE ]
For people on the 11s and 22s who can only muster a 5-10% ROI, I think that there is another reason why they might want to consider ring games.

The 11s and 22s are so easily crushable (20% or more) that if you are at 5-10%, there must be large holes in your game. If some of these guys would play 25 NL for a while, their understanding of poker in general and post flop play in particular would improve greatly. This could only help their SNG game in the long run.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure that is true. Winning at 800 chips SNGs, has very little to do with 100xBB NL play. I am a MUCH better small stakes NL / MTT player than I am at SNGs. It is mostly b/c post flop play is almost non-existent at the 20s. The optimal cash game post flop play is almost always wrong in a 800 chip SNG. I have only recently started taking SNGs seriously, but I am yet to crush the 20s for >20% ROI.

Party low limit SNGs are a unique animal. They require skill, but those skills are pretty independent from other forms of poker.

[AleoMagus]

If we were really after the game with the lowest overall variance in relation to profit, I suspect it would be a split pot ring game like O8, or maybe Stud8

Regards
Brad S

[A_PLUS]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The optimal strategy for those games is to advertise insanely for the first couple of orbits then wait for big hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

This just simply can't be true. The players down there are really really really bad and unobservant. So why waste the money on advertizing that they're not going to pay any attention to anyway, when you could just skip to "nutpeddle?"

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

Even nutpeddling is less than optimal. Profitable yes, but you are leaving a good bit of money on the table by doing it.

You are at table, with people that are trying to put all of their chips into the pot with TPGK. There are a lot of hands that are ++++++EV other than AQ+