ROI single table tourneys - review, comment, compare

[Gus]

Just a few thoughts about tournament ROI vs ring games... I'm sure there is nothing new in what I'm going to say but here you go...

The conventional wisdom seems to indicate that a good SNG player finishes in the money 50 percent of the time. Let's assume he will then finish first, second or third randomely (when 3 handed, the importance of luck seems to increase). This gives you an average win of 5.66$ for a 10+1 tournament. Let's call it 6$ (say you finish 1st a bit more often than third).

A 10 handed tournament typically takes 1 hour. Since a winning player is supoosed to make 1 BB an hour in a ring game, playing 10+1 tournaments should be the same as playing 3/6 ring games.

However the competition seems to be much weaker in 10+1 tournament than in 3/6 ring (I would probably compare it to 0.5/1.0 ring game or so). Playing 30+3 tournament should be the same as playing 10/20 or there about: here again I think the competition seems much tougher in a 10/20 than in a 30+3 tournament.

For example, I'll be happily playing 30+3 tournament, but I will not sit down in a 10/20 game since I think I do not have the skill needed to beat that game... Therefore I myself brings the skill level of the tournament down compared to the ring games.

This should bring us to either of the 3 conclucions:

(1)... Tournament are more profitable, and more easily beaten if your skill are equal in both ring and tournament

(2)... 50% in the money for a winning tournament player is actually too much.

(3)... a winning ring game player should make more than 1 BB/hour

and finally, if we assume the following:

. you make 1 BB an hour in ring game
. playing 0.5/1.0 ring requires the same skill as playing 10+1 tournament

then to average the same profit, you should make it in the money only 36 percent of the time

any thoughts? or is this just another of my useless posts?