What are realistic SnG expectations?

ROI RUINERROI RUINER Red Chipper Posts: 107 ✭✭
I’m trying to find my poker niche. I do pretty well in MTTs but hate the long grind and variance. One bad move can kill hours of good play.

I’m bad at cash. I don’t want to admit it but I am. I pick the worst spots to make moves and my bb/100 suffers.

I started playing SnGs on ACR. I’ve played 13. I’ve cashed 6, 1 3rd, 2 2nds, and 3 1sts.

I have the attention span to make it for 90 minutes without doing something stupid. If I am dealt a bad beat or cooler I’m not as tilted as in an MTT because I didn’t invest 4+ hours of my life for it to happen.

I think I’m good at these.

I know this is a small sample size but I also know I have a feel for them as well. I’m playing low stakes so I know the competition isn’t the best but I’ll get better as I move up I’m sure. Hopefully I can keep up.

Answers

  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,271 -
    The problem with them pre Black Friday was that as you moved up in limits you'd rapidly hit a point where basically everyone knew what they were doing. Essentially you play the first few levels ludicrously tight, then transition to push-fold. If you don't get bored and there are few specialists around it's not difficult to get good at them and turn a low-variance profit. I just have no idea what the ACR competition is like.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • jeffncjeffnc Red Chipper Posts: 4,713 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Smaller playing population and even smaller population that sucks. Playing small stakes helps but only a little. You would probably be best at 4 tabling turbo SNGs. In the old days it could get a little hectic because there were so many SNGs going that you literally could start 4 or more at basically exactly the same time, meaning all your tough decisions came at once on 4 tables at the ends of the tournaments. But if you stagger them a few minutes off, then you can keep a steady stream of them going, each at a different stage of the game.
  • ROI RUINERROI RUINER Red Chipper Posts: 107 ✭✭
    jeffnc wrote: »
    You would probably be best at 4 tabling turbo SNGs.

    I been playing the non turbos. Only thing that concerns me is people getting in lighter because of the turbo factor and having a higher rate of variance.
  • jeffncjeffnc Red Chipper Posts: 4,713 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 6
    There isn't any difference other than time frame. So in standard SNGs there is simply a longer time where you have to play really tight. It's not so much the length of the SNG, it's the number of decisions you have to make. You bump this up by playing more SNGs, not playing longer structures. The more tables you play the more you reduce your variance (in terms of time) as well. If you want longer structures, play deep stack 4 day long live tournaments!
  • ROI RUINERROI RUINER Red Chipper Posts: 107 ✭✭
    I’ll check out some turbos. Makes sense. I definitely prefer playing the later stages.
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,271 -
    Turbos is the way to go. One reason I don't play them on WSOP.com despite weak competition is the structures are too slow.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • jeffncjeffnc Red Chipper Posts: 4,713 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Then there are the hyper turbos for the severely ADD :)
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,271 -
    jeffnc wrote: »
    Then there are the hyper turbos for the severely ADD :)

    Yeah they have to have micro-rake because they're so shallow generating any edge is hard.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • ROI RUINERROI RUINER Red Chipper Posts: 107 ✭✭
    jeffnc wrote: »
    Then there are the hyper turbos for the severely ADD :)

    I played those a lot on WSOP. Pretty fun and not hard as long as you aren't card dead. People love stacking off in those.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file