sit-and-go %'s

[empirepoker_plyr 0]

Hello, my name's Bryan. First, I would like to say this is a terrific site and I appreciate the information provided.As for my first post:Would you provide some percentages on how often you place in the cash for online Sit-and-Go tournaments? I'm trying to get a feel for what to expect. Like, is cashing 50% of the time good/bad/normal. I want to start out in the $10+1 Pot-Limit Hold'em games on Empire. If anyone has enough experience with them or with anyone else, please provide some feedback on your numbers. Any numbers on profit per hour on different SnG buy-ins would be great too. Thanks.

[Smasharoo 0]

30% RoI is considered about as well as you can do.20% is doing great.What that means is that if you play, say 1000 sit and gos that each cost 10+1 to enter if you have 2000 in profit you're doing great.

[Matt Miner 0]

sorry but i don't know anything about sit & goes. "30% RoI?" "20% RoI?"

[ahosang 0]

Spot on, I'd say. The figures given by Smasharoo above are what many specialists on other forums say(roughly). The thing with these is that there is not much chance for table selection or anything like that, and you'll find that at the $10 level, you'll get quite a few experts(at this format anyway) playing. If you played bad players all the time(possible at the $1-$5 levels), then it would be something like 30%-%40 if you've really refined your strategy. But playing decent format players all the time will drop it to about 0%-10%. Of course you'll have a mixture of players at the tables usually, hence 20% being a fairly achievable long-term ROI. Remember that luck(or should that be variance?) DOES play greater part due to the format, and you can't isolate your opponents and outplay them as much as you could in ring games.

[Matt Miner 0]

nevermind. figured it out for myself. return on investment.

[ahosang 0]

sorry but i don't know anything about sit & goes. "30% RoI?" "20% RoI?"

ROI= return on investmentSo if you play 1000x($10+$1)=$11,000, and you get back $13, 000, that's a profit of $2000.Now divide profit/outlay: 2000/11000 = 18.18% ROI

[rustynail43 0]

I also play a lot of sng’s due to time limitations, however, I keep score a bit different. My wins seem to always be grouped together as well as my losses. When I am up $100 to $150 I expect my losses to eat away 1/2 to 2/3 before my next batch of wins. I know this is the same percentages as posted, but thinking about it as a stair step helps me a great deal. When you are winning try to extend the winning steak. When you are losing, understand it is just part of the cycle and don’t let it get to you. Reading the other post from this site has really helped me deal with losing and bad beats. They happen, its just part of the game. The only thing I ask myself after a game is if I played well. If you play a lot of sng’s at a particular buy in, keep notes. You will run into a number of players over and over. A note from several months ago that a player is weak will help you in the early rounds. I love these guys that are all in on a pair. If you can double up on them early, it makes it tough for stronger players to catch up.

[empirepoker_plyr 0]

Good stuff.About how many games does each streak last for you? Or is each streak last differently? Curious, have you evertried going down a buy-in level when you feel you're about to start a losing streak or gone up a buy-in level when starting a winning streak? Thanks.

[darksung 0]

I also play mainly sit & go.For some reason though, I just can't seem to be able to pass a certain bankroll level.For instance, I went from 50$ to 100$ 2 weeks ago (playing 5$ buy-ins). But as soon has I get to 120$ or so, I ten to drop back to under 100$ quickly, but each time I fall back, I get to win 1 or 2.So I guess it's fairly tough to consistently make profits playing S & G's. I TRY to play very tight, and not bluff too much, since there are a lot of fishes in there, I think it's the best way to make the money consistently.

[rustynail43 0]

A streak may only be 2 back-to-back wins or it could be 4 games in the money. The amount of time between winning streaks seems to be the greatest variable. I tried moving up and down in limits and found it did not work well. Its hard to believe there is any difference between a $5, $10 or $20 sng, but the difference is great. You will need to adjust your play at each level, so moving up or down is hard to do.I suggest you play at the lowest level and master it. Build a nice sng bankroll for that level then try a higher limit run. If you can’t have a streak in 10 games, move back down. I have also found patience to be really important. Unlike a larger tournament where only the final table pays out much, you almost double your entry fee by just getting in the money. My goal is to first get into the money, then change gears to go for the win. This seems to work well because I get more aggressive as the blinds increase. My tighter play in the early rounds seems to allow me to steal my way to 3rd or 2nd place late in the game.

[Smasharoo 0]

So I guess it's fairly tough to consistently make profits playing S & G'sNah, it's easy. It's just BORING.For me anyway.

[chipper305 0]

I also have been playing sit & go tourneys over the last several months, and have found them very profitable, to the point that I've pretty much abandoned ring games, at least for now. A couple of comments:First, about winning streaks. I think that you'll want to start to develop the attitude of expecting to win. What that means, beyond some mushy concept, is to commit yourself to playing only when you're prepared to do what it takes to win 1st place. If I'm not at a table expecting to win 1st when I sit down, then I'll wait to play until I do feel that way. When you expect to win outright, you tend to actually do it more often, and you tend to be a tougher opponent when it gets shorthanded and the other players are tightening up. What it also means is that when you get knocked out of a tournament (even if you finish ITM), you'll want to find the reason(s) why you got knocked out so that it never happens again for that reason. Look over your hand history after the game. When I do this, I find that most of the time, I got knocked out because of a bad read when I should've known better, or because of a hole in my game. Yeah, you'll have your share of times when you get knocked out directly because of a bad beat, but it's much more likely that the real reason you'll get knocked out is because of a hole in your game that jeopardized your chip position unnecessarily. Identify and work on those holes, so that you'll be an even tougher player to beat next time.The other thing is about the quality of your opponents. I'd say it's fine to start out at $5, but I haven't seen much difference in the quality of player between $5 and $10 (at least on Stars). That's not to say that all the players are goofballs (like I've heard they are on Party), but that most of them play reasonably, with a few goofballs who either get knocked out in Level I blinds, or if they do get a big stack early, end up losing their chips with the same reckless play that got them their chips. I think at $20 the quality of play (i.e. people not making dumb moves) is a little better than at $10, and $30 is a little better than $20. But don't think that one level is exponentially tougher than the level below it...you can find yourself at a particularly tough or easy table at any of these levels. So I think that if your bankroll can afford it and you're consistently profitable at a certain level, take an occasional shot at the next level up and see how you do, then go back down to your level for a while, take another shot at the next level, and do it more frequently as you gain confidence at that next level.I'm curious about your choice of game, though...I haven't played much PL Holdem, but I have to wonder about how easy it is to get a game. I don't see many people playing that. I'd also wonder if, because it's not as popular as NL, if it might attract tougher competition. There are a whole lot more bad NL players out there, so I'd imagine that's where the bigger profit is.

[Mandelbrot 0]

So I guess it's fairly tough to consistently make profits playing S & G's

Nah, it's easy. It's just BORING.

The payoff isn't that great for the time invested unless you play like $100+ buy-in SNGs... but of course, the skill level increases a good amount between $10 SNGs and $100 ones.

[Smasharoo 0]

The payoff isn't that great for the time invested unless you play like $100+ buy-in SNGs... but of course, the skill level increases a good amount between $10 SNGs and $100 ones.Nah, you could four table $10 ones and get in 20 a day easy. So if you made 20% as an average RoI you'd pull down, what, $40 or so?You'd be wealthy!!

[User 0]

I'm 2 for 3 in sit and go tourneys at poker stars.com. That's right, my play chip stack grows by the hour; keep a heads up anytime you see User4 playing, 'cause I'm comin' for ya! :shock:

[FalWat 0]

I play almost exclusively S&G's on Pokerstars. Best advice is to begin small, although you find it harder to come into the money in the $5 -$10's because of the "lack of skill" factor, meaning the suck outs with weak hands. But it's a way to start. Try and build it up and don't be afraid to try the next level, even if you have only won a few of them.I mostly play $50 and $100 and come into the money around 47% of the time and first around 35% of the time. But you really have to develop a system to make money and be consistent at these. If you want some advice about how to play (and I can't give you all of my tricks, lol), play fairly tight early and play only positive expectation hands cheaply. It really doesn't pay to play too much early with blinds and bets being so low. The play really begins once the blinds reach the middle levels, say 75-150 on PS. Of course if you get dealt a monster early, play it HARD. It's always better to make a little on a big pair than to lose completely by slow playing (words of Master Doyle) Anyway, that's just a tip to get you started on. Have fun.

[rustynail43 0]

Like Chipper I also request the hand history after my game. I keep 2 folders, wins and losses. I like to review losses right after the game looking for mistakes and I review a couple of wins right before I start play. Reviewing wins in some ways has been more help to me. You get a feel for the texture of a game and can look for those same opportunities.Evaluating losses is also helpful, but I more rely on my thoughts right as I am out. If you say to yourself “We’ll that was stupid” as you get knocked out, your goal is to never repeat it. The in the moneys at a sng are the ones that do less stupid things. Many of the sng’s I play the blinds are up so high by the time we get to the final 4 the winner is the guy hitting cards.

[Mandelbrot 0]

I mostly play $50 and $100 and come into the money around 47% of the time and first around 35% of the time.

That's pretty good at those levels.

[FalWat 0]

Quote: I mostly play $50 and $100 and come into the money around 47% of the time and first around 35% of the time. That's pretty good at those levels.Thanks. But that can always change...let's hope it doesn't.

[Mister Hand 0]

I mostly play $50 and $100 and come into the money around 47% of the time and first around 35% of the time.

Assuming your second and third place finishes are evenly split, that comes to an 88% ROI. In a recent discussion on the 2+2 boards on how the best no limit tourney players in the world would do at the SNGs, I don't think anyone thought their ROI would be higher than 40%.88% is just not sustainable in the long run, so I'm guessing you either have played a relatively small number of SNGs, or you're overestimating your win rates.

[FalWat 0]

I mostly play $50 and $100 and come into the money around 47% of the time and first around 35% of the time.

Assuming your second and third place finishes are evenly split, that comes to an 88% ROI. In a recent discussion on the 2+2 boards on how the best no limit tourney players in the world would do at the SNGs, I don't think anyone thought their ROI would be higher than 40%.88% is just not sustainable in the long run, so I'm guessing you either have played a relatively small number of SNGs, or you're overestimating your win rates.

Nope, that's how I've been doing over a long span. I expect it to come down at some point but not too drastically.

[maxone22 0]

I knew there were some SNG fans out there. Nice to run into you guys! My game of choice as well. I started at the 5 & 10's about a year ago. I can still remember trying to squeeze in that first win! If this forum were open when that happened I probably would've posted it in 3 differant threads. (hopefully when I win my first multi I won't do that to you guys). My stats were similiar to one already posted: 47% win with 25% 1st. (Whats up with the 47%)? If it can't be 1st, its those seconds that get you ahead. I view 3rd as a rebuy with a small loss. Somedays though, you gotta take what you can get.Before I moved to 20's, I had decisive control over the 10's. In any $10 tourney I felt I could lose up to 2/3 my stack early and still come back if need be. Streaks - Prior to December my streaks were only 3 or 4 either way. Nothing too noteworthy. In December I hit my worst losing ever. 13 in a row. This streak also came shortly after my decision to move to the 30's. Correlation? I really don't think so. Of the 13, I would make 8 of those plays again. Even on 9-1 odds, somebody has to be the 1. I did say 8 of the 13 I would do again. Yes, there were some bad plays involved as well. Live and learn. What I can say about that is, as you move up in levels, they become less forgiving on mistakes. I would like to also point out that on that bad streak, my bankroll wasn't happy - but it was never in jeopardy either. Still isn't. I point this out for two reasons; At any level you can't be worried about the money.Second reason is to indicate there is more than just a little success before a decision to move up.Now that I know there are a few SNG players out there, look forward to seeing and hearing from you guys again.

[goldenbanana 0]

I also have switched to mainly playing SNGs lately. I find that it is easier money. You may not win as quickly but the bankroll fluctuations are much less. I have recently moved up from the small tables to playing $20 and $30 tables on stars and have done very well. If youre doing well on the small tables, dont be afraid to try moving up. Youll see that there are less completely clueless people but there are still plenty of people who arent very good. I usually play the two table tournies because the payouts are higher and I find it pretty easy to cruise to the final table.Ive also found that my win rates are lower on the turbo tourneys. I think the aggressive structure takes some of the edge away from the skilled.

[jayboogie 0]

the play is so bad in S&G's that you need to expect to lose a lot of them quite often, because many times your Aces and Kings won't hold up. It makes me sick when I get knocked out of a tournament with AA by 89 offsuit. It's unbelievable how bad players are at these tournaments.

[Randy Reed 0]

Yes some of the play is awful, for example...I just played a $10/18 person @pokerstars. It was fairly early but I had already went up to a little over $4000 in chips when I got AA. There was a middle limper ($50) and SB raised to $150 so I raised to a $1000. I didn't want the raiser to chase anything and felt the limper would fold but if he called that was fine as he was a poor player. Sure enough he called. The flop came 3 rags so I raised him his last $400 all-in and he obligingly called with K-6 offsuit, hadn't heven paired the board? Sure enough, turn K river 6. What can you do? Sad thing was everyone else got the money from him before I could get it back.So yes, there are bad players but alot of good ones. It's just important to change gears at the proper times.