Ring Games or Tounaments?

[InAPipeDream]

What is your preference? I seem to be very inconsistent in my wins (and losses) ring games, and do quite well in tourneys, especially Sit and Go tourneys.

[fnord_too]

Preferred in terms of enjoyment: MTT's
Preferred in terms of Expectation in relation to Variance: STT's
Preferred in terms of ultimate expectation (not necessarily what I can make now, but I will eventually be able to make if I put in enough work on my game): Ring games.

I voted MTT's, since I guessed you were interested in most enjoyable. (Also, historically, they are my most profitable, but they are too logistically burdensome to play enough to reasonably make them my main poker revenue source.)

[InAPipeDream]

True, and MTT's are a bit too long for me, which is my main reason for sticking to smaller SnG's. If I'm in a live face-to-face tourney though, bring on the MTT...I like the better payouts. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[DyessMan89]

[ QUOTE ]
Preferred in terms of enjoyment: MTT's
Preferred in terms of Expectation in relation to Variance: STT's
Preferred in terms of ultimate expectation (not necessarily what I can make now, but I will eventually be able to make if I put in enough work on my game): Ring games.

I voted MTT's, since I guessed you were interested in most enjoyable. (Also, historically, they are my most profitable, but they are too logistically burdensome to play enough to reasonably make them my main poker revenue source.)

[/ QUOTE ]

My thoughts exactly.

[tek]

I prefer large tournaments (which to me is $500 or more although I'll do 200-500) because of the "pot odd's" (payouts to entry fee ratio).

As far as ring games, I would rather spend the evening with my family and spend the day stock trading. Both are +EV over ring games.

[Vex]

I prefer nice buyin, large multi-table tournaments, and I prefer getting there by playing multi-table satellites.

The two games can be polar opposites in many ways. But, multi-table satellites are da bomb, because the payout is flat. Squeaking in is just as good as dominating the field, so survival skills have improved value. I think a skilled player can satellite his way into any tournament for 1/3 the buyin of the big tournament.

Once you're in the big tourney, you play to win -- but even when you just squeak in, a payout that would be small ROI for a direct buyin is much better when you got in on the cheap via satellite.

I can consistently win in ring games. I find i can read players alot better when i know it's actualy money being played for.

I have played a fair amount of tournaments and sit and goes and i'd say i've probably just broken even, or made a slight profit. I usually get knocked out by a blocker in tournaments.

[CCovington]

I believe it is easier to develop a better understanding of poker in general by playing ring games

[hurlyburly]

Totally. I'm conflicted about whether tournaments ruin patience (they seem to for me), and fall back to rings to recenter myself.