How many SNG's did you play to get +ROI

As a casual player 3-6 tourney's a night I finally rolled past the 500 SNG mark. I am not going to bother with ITM's in such a small sample but did wonder how long did it take you to get positive ROI and what was the most significant thing you did to increase to positive (ie book, coach, SNGPT). Did you start cold or have significant poker background. 99% of my SNG's have been at the 55 and 109 level. Can I assume an accelarated learning curve? I already know my weakness and it has been the hardest hurdle to climb and thats the bubble (what a surprise). I also assume this was the major hurdle for most others as well.

[xLukex]

I dunno, I think the bubble is kind of easy for me.

It's the post flop play part that I suck at. I presume this is because I only started playing poker in March...

There is your super helpful response. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I gots nothin'.

[ QUOTE ]
As a casual player 3-6 tourney's a night I finally rolled past the 500 SNG mark. I am not going to bother with ITM's in such a small sample but did wonder how long did it take you to get positive ROI and what was the most significant thing you did to increase to positive (ie book, coach, SNGPT). Did you start cold or have significant poker background. 99% of my SNG's have been at the 55 and 109 level. Can I assume an accelarated learning curve? I already know my weakness and it has been the hardest hurdle to climb and thats the bubble (what a surprise). I also assume this was the major hurdle for most others as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know I would've felt very depressed if I hadn't had a positive ROI by 500 SNG's, although I started at the 11's and just recently moved up to the 22's. I think if you have the bankroll to start at the 55's and 109's, you'll actually be better off in the long run. I'm sure that I'm cementing ideas in my head of ways to get chips from the 800 chip donkeys that will blow up in my face once I move up the ranks.

I don't care if one has the bankroll for the 55's or 109's I feel there is something to learn at these lower limits before you take your game to the higher level. It took me no time at all to earn a positive ROI because I started at these limits with bad players and got better by doing so and then I moved up. You can learn a lot from playing the 11's and certainly the 22's before you jump to the 55's. Eventually you will hit this wall where playing the 11's will no longer improve your game at all, but until this happens one should not move up without proving they can beat these lower levels for a near optimal roi. Many of the best poker players in the world got started playing small stakes poker and there is a misconception by many that they are better players than they are. So give 100-200 11 dollar tourneys a shot and see if there is anything to gain from them. With a positive roi move to the 20's and play 500 of them and then move up to the 33's or 55's with a better knowledge of the game.

[pooh74]

Playing your first 500 SNGs at the 55s and 109s is probably one of the worst ideas I ever heard of. (unless I misread your post). Even if you have extensive poker background at limit or NL ring, you should never jump to its "equivalent" in another area of poker. i.e. playing 109 SNGs and then switching to 5-10 LHE without any limit ring background.

If you're having problems, this is the first place to look. Bubble play is where most of the cash in SNGs is made. Learning it at the 109s isnt worth the money invested when you could learn it much cheaper below.

[ QUOTE ]
Playing your first 500 SNGs at the 55s and 109s is probably one of the worst ideas I ever heard of. (unless I misread your post). Even if you have extensive poker background at limit or NL ring, you should never jump to its "equivalent" in another area of poker. i.e. playing 109 SNGs and then switching to 5-10 LHE without any limit ring background.

If you're having problems, this is the first place to look. Bubble play is where most of the cash in SNGs is made. Learning it at the 109s isnt worth the money invested when you could learn it much cheaper below.

[/ QUOTE ]

bingo

[ QUOTE ]
Playing your first 500 SNGs at the 55s and 109s is probably one of the worst ideas I ever heard of. (unless I misread your post). Even if you have extensive poker background at limit or NL ring, you should never jump to its "equivalent" in another area of poker. i.e. playing 109 SNGs and then switching to 5-10 LHE without any limit ring background.

If you're having problems, this is the first place to look. Bubble play is where most of the cash in SNGs is made. Learning it at the 109s isnt worth the money invested when you could learn it much cheaper below.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. If your net worth is in the hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars, and you are serious about becoming a solid SNGer, AND you don't mind "paying" a few grand to shave some time off the learning cycle, jumping in at mid or higher limits can prove fruitful. You are exposed to a somewhat higher level of play learn a lot more by observing other players. Playing the $5+1s will actually make you stupider. I'm not saying it can't be profitable.... just that you aren't learning as much per hour.

If you are in your early twenties and have much more time than cash, sure, you save money by learning small stakes and progressing organically.

If you are in your 30s or 40s, playing lots of low limit SNGs is -$EV. If someone has the money, they might rather "pay" $20/hr for the first month to learn the $55s than "make" $4/hr at the $6s and not improve their game that much.

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Playing your first 500 SNGs at the 55s and 109s is probably one of the worst ideas I ever heard of. (unless I misread your post). Even if you have extensive poker background at limit or NL ring, you should never jump to its "equivalent" in another area of poker. i.e. playing 109 SNGs and then switching to 5-10 LHE without any limit ring background.

If you're having problems, this is the first place to look. Bubble play is where most of the cash in SNGs is made. Learning it at the 109s isnt worth the money invested when you could learn it much cheaper below.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. If your net worth is in the hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars, and you are serious about becoming a solid SNGer, AND you don't mind "paying" a few grand to shave some time off the learning cycle, jumping in at mid or higher limits can prove fruitful. You are exposed to a somewhat higher level of play learn a lot more by observing other players. Playing the $5+1s will actually make you stupider. I'm not saying it can't be profitable.... just that you aren't learning as much per hour.

If you are in your early twenties and have much more time than cash, sure, you save money by learning small stakes and progressing organically.

If you are in your 30s or 40s, playing lots of low limit SNGs is -$EV. If someone has the money, they might rather "pay" $20/hr for the first month to learn the $55s than "make" $4/hr at the $6s and not improve their game that much.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is silly...I am in my 30s and started out playing the 5s.

Note: I was not advocating playing the 5s per se.

[roundest]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Playing your first 500 SNGs at the 55s and 109s is probably one of the worst ideas I ever heard of. (unless I misread your post). Even if you have extensive poker background at limit or NL ring, you should never jump to its "equivalent" in another area of poker. i.e. playing 109 SNGs and then switching to 5-10 LHE without any limit ring background.

If you're having problems, this is the first place to look. Bubble play is where most of the cash in SNGs is made. Learning it at the 109s isnt worth the money invested when you could learn it much cheaper below.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. If your net worth is in the hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars, and you are serious about becoming a solid SNGer, AND you don't mind "paying" a few grand to shave some time off the learning cycle, jumping in at mid or higher limits can prove fruitful. You are exposed to a somewhat higher level of play learn a lot more by observing other players. Playing the $5+1s will actually make you stupider. I'm not saying it can't be profitable.... just that you aren't learning as much per hour.

If you are in your early twenties and have much more time than cash, sure, you save money by learning small stakes and progressing organically.

If you are in your 30s or 40s, playing lots of low limit SNGs is -$EV. If someone has the money, they might rather "pay" $20/hr for the first month to learn the $55s than "make" $4/hr at the $6s and not improve their game that much.

[/ QUOTE ]

Playing the lower limits for a month or two is not going to somehow make you a worse player. You need to build a solid foundation somewhere.

Using your logic, some wealthy noob could jump into the 4k/8k at the Bellagio for the next 3-4 months and magically be transformed into a better player than 99% of the people here because he somehow learned that much more by playing at that level.

How about trying "different" instead of "silly".

If you wanted to start a small business, would you open up a lemonade stand and wait until you amassed $500 in profits before you "moved up" to a hog-dog stand etc. until you worked your way up to a car dealership?

If you wanted to learn tennis, would you start by "mastering" playing other nonplayers, or would you hire a tennis pro? Either way you get better, but one way is more expensive and faster.