4 replies to this topic

[Cappy37]

I dumped $50 into Stars the other day to play around with. I'm not trying to take over the world, just recreational fun. There are two types of poker players in this world: cash game players and tourney guys, and I'm of the latter ilk. I just can't motivate myself in slow moving microlimit cash games, it's not in my makeup. I love the tournament feel and the strategy involved.

That said, I've run absolutely horrid on the $1 Nine player SNGs. It's been a steady combination of the usual card-dead streaks, bad beats, and all other typical contributors to negative variance. I know 90% of the fields in these can't lay down ATC and anyone posting blinds has pot commited themselves to any pre-flop raise <sw>. I've had far and away better luck in the $2.20 6 mans, and have run extremely well in the $1.10s and $2.20 tourneys. The deep tourneys especially seem to put in a comfort zone that helps me excel.

My question is this: Do you guys and gals find the STT Sngs to inherently more of a crapshoot than the 18-45 sngs or 500+ tourneys? Why does it seem easer to hit 5th out of 27th or 160th out of 800? I'm never one to tighten on the bubbles or go crazy trying to amass chips instead of picking spots. I play pretty standard tight aggresive, and can switch gears to LAG based on my read of a table. It just seems to me that if I wanted to punish LAGs and LPs, it'd be far easier to pick them off in ring games than wacked out STTs with escalating blinds. Thoughts? Suggestions? I read the heck out of these strategy forums and really value you peoples' insight.

Thanks in advance.

[litlebullet]

perhaps it's variance, perhaps you're not tightening up enough pre-bubble. I played 200 1.20s on sharkscope and was break-even, or even down 20$ then the next 200 sng's I played on Stars I tightened up a ton by multi-tabling 10 at a time and now I'm back in the positive. I say you should play tighter when I played like 4-6 at a time I'd gamble and "play poker" too much in the early rounds.

[YBravo]

MTT's are about as high variance as you can get. I know some pretty experienced players who say it takes about 1-2k before you know how you are doing.

[rog]

I find I'm way more comfortable in the 45s than the STTs at the low buyin levels. Variance is higher for sure, but not proportionately higher. I think I cash about half as often in the 45s as I do in STTs at this level. I play the 45s on a deeper roll as well, and I rarely feel like my BR is at risk.

[Cappy37]

I find I'm way more comfortable in the 45s than the STTs at the low buyin levels. Variance is higher for sure, but not proportionately higher. I think I cash about half as often in the 45s as I do in STTs at this level. I play the 45s on a deeper roll as well, and I rarely feel like my BR is at risk.

Thanks for the input. I, too, have found better successes in the 18-45s. My new favorite now is the $1-3 Razz MTTs, they have been incredibly soft, to the point that the level in luck involved in razz in the early goings is completely offset by getting your money in unbelievably good time and time again. Makes me wish PS had some decent HORSE and Razz SNGs in the microlimit range.