How valuable would a $215 coach really be?

[Mr_J]

"but by learning how to think and adapt to certain situations."

This is why I'd get a coach. Not to tell me what to do, but to explain important concepts & theory so I can think for myself, and grow by myself.

[tigerite]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you know what Gig's brother is up to now?

I'm almost positive he (Iwascastlemn) was sitting on my right in a $22 yesterday. Not that that's really indicative of where he's playing now, but I thought it was a bit strange.

[/ QUOTE ]

SevnFigures was to my left at a $33 the other day.

[/ QUOTE ]

hes doing something similar to me, learning to play super high volume [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] its not that he cant beat the bigger games, because hes a hell of a player, (overagressive at times maybe...), but the idea of zero variance $100/hr is appealing to quite a few people.. though the idea can at times be overshadowed by reality, as it often is. holla

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, he outlasted me, but only because his AK spiked against someone's 88, but meh [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] Plus because I'm on a super cooler lately, didn't feel overawed by him being there though.

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
"but by learning how to think and adapt to certain situations."

This is why I'd get a coach. Not to tell me what to do, but to explain important concepts & theory so I can think for myself, and grow by myself.

[/ QUOTE ]

exactly.

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
so do you believe big buy-in NL cash game players are better than big buy-in NL SNG players? [i.e. 2000NL v.s. $215 SNG]

[/ QUOTE ]

Being good in one doesnt make you bad in another, so in a way the skill sets arent mutually exclusive - J Strasser plays high NL games (1K and 2K as far as im aware) and he is well known as a winning SnG player at all buy ins.

But generally speaking, the skills required to beat 2K NL are much greater in number and difficulty to learn than the high buy in SnG games.

Phill

[/ QUOTE ]

ZeeJustin plays them too.

[chisness]

i agree cash games have a bigger ceiling, of course, since the sngs only go up to $200

someone should perform a mathematical analysis selecting a couple sets of stakes in NL/SNG that have the most similar variance and doing comparisons in terms of hourly rates (taking into account that 5 tabling NL tables is approximately equal to 8 tabling SNGs?) and rakeback

the NL skills are very useful in SNGs but the reverse is not true

all this talk of 16 tabling SNGs is not at all realistic,, there are probably under 10 people in the world doing this and it is NOT EASY,, 12 tabling is reasonable because you only need 3 accounts, a 4 monitor setup has a free monitor for lobbies, IE, AIM, etc., and it's fast paced but not insane

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
i agree cash games have a bigger ceiling, of course, since the sngs only go up to $200

someone should perform a mathematical analysis selecting a couple sets of stakes in NL/SNG that have the most similar variance and doing comparisons in terms of hourly rates (taking into account that 5 tabling NL tables is approximately equal to 8 tabling SNGs?) and rakeback

the NL skills are very useful in SNGs but the reverse is not true

all this talk of 16 tabling SNGs is not at all realistic,, there are probably under 10 people in the world doing this and it is NOT EASY,, 12 tabling is reasonable because you only need 3 accounts, a 4 monitor setup has a free monitor for lobbies, IE, AIM, etc., and it's fast paced but not insane

[/ QUOTE ]

PS has a limit of $1030 and i think Party goes up to $5000 Steps.

[Isura]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i agree cash games have a bigger ceiling, of course, since the sngs only go up to $200

someone should perform a mathematical analysis selecting a couple sets of stakes in NL/SNG that have the most similar variance and doing comparisons in terms of hourly rates (taking into account that 5 tabling NL tables is approximately equal to 8 tabling SNGs?) and rakeback

the NL skills are very useful in SNGs but the reverse is not true

all this talk of 16 tabling SNGs is not at all realistic,, there are probably under 10 people in the world doing this and it is NOT EASY,, 12 tabling is reasonable because you only need 3 accounts, a 4 monitor setup has a free monitor for lobbies, IE, AIM, etc., and it's fast paced but not insane

[/ QUOTE ]

PS has a limit of $1030 and i think Party goes up to $5000 Steps.

[/ QUOTE ]

Game availability becomes an issue at these buyins, as opposed to cash games.

[raptor517]

[ QUOTE ]
all this talk of 16 tabling SNGs is not at all realistic,, there are probably under 10 people in the world doing this and it is NOT EASY

[/ QUOTE ]

im doing 20, and i know at least one other person doing the same, and one is doing 18. of course, this is only useful at the smaller games where godlike pushbotting gets the money. holla

[The4Aces]

Raptor are you playing in sets or continuous? Also what level are you playing?

[raptor517]

[ QUOTE ]
Raptor are you playing in sets or continuous? Also what level are you playing?

[/ QUOTE ]

well, im kinda toying around with both. sets are easy enough, but waste valuable time. continuous isnt that bad, but starting up new tables and closing old ones makes me want to hang myself. i also track everything by hand cuz it will never miss that way, and that slows me down a bit. buuut.. i havent really had a chance to play a significant enough amount to find out where im at. so basically, im playing both continuous and in sets until i find what i like.

as for the level.. im playing the 22s right now. $100/hr is doable 20 tabling, and im pretty sure i can hit that without too much trouble. perfect pushbotting works wonders in those games, and having any clue about how to play a bubble really really hurts them. ill probably hit up the 55s here in a few days if i get a chance to play a lot and make sure i got the 20 tabs down as a science, but for now, im small stakes. if i play 109s or 215s ill do 12 and 8 respectively, as you need to play quite a bit more in the early stages and cant rely on pushbotting. holla