| Posted by: Sente at October 6, 2004, 10:58 am | | Topic: small stakes limit vs. small buy-in no limit Forum: Bonus Whores | That reminds me of when Pacific first created SNG tourneys, they were actually 5 person and paid 3. 60% money finishes for your average player.
I haven't played at Pacific in quite some time so it's likely that they've made changes so players/payouts. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: hofdaddy at October 6, 2004, 10:35 am | | Topic: small stakes limit vs. small buy-in no limit Forum: Bonus Whores | Pacific has alot of 6 man SnG's. That probably helps the ol' win %!
_________________
I hate poker. I hate life. I hate you
-hofdaddy's trinity
give a woman an inch and she takes a foot. Give her a foot and she'll moan like a whore | | Static Link |
| Posted by: jek187 at October 5, 2004, 8:52 pm | | Topic: small stakes limit vs. small buy-in no limit Forum: Bonus Whores | | Don't know the size of the max bet off the top of my head, but you can pick any player you want. The sng would have to be 10 handed, pay 3, and some sort of failsafes would have to be put in place to so that I could be assured it was honest. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: largeeyes at October 5, 2004, 8:17 pm | | Topic: small stakes limit vs. small buy-in no limit Forum: Bonus Whores | jek187 wrote: I would lay 100-1 odds that nobody can finish in the money 90% of the time over the course, of, say, 100 sngs.
It is impossible.
Really? What's the max bet and can I pick the player?
_________________
A home is not a home without a gnome. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: CHRISTOPHER at October 5, 2004, 5:46 pm | | Topic: small stakes limit vs. small buy-in no limit Forum: Bonus Whores | I've played 4 SNG's so far, and I finished 3rd twice and second once. And I'm not all that great of a poker player. Beginner's luck? Maybe.
But I don't necessarily doubt what whackadoo claims.
It's silly for people to say that this is "impossible", as a blanket statement. Completely depends on the game, the buyin level, the quality of competition, and the particular rules of the tournament.
Seriously, I would NOT doubt that this is possible at Pacific Poker. There are a LOT of mongoloids floating around that place. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: whackadoo at October 5, 2004, 6:23 am | | Topic: small stakes limit vs. small buy-in no limit Forum: Bonus Whores | you may choose not to believe me and that is fine. It's your choice. I'll just be driving around in my 1977 Corvette that was paid for with poker profits (all profits not just SNG wins).
In the past two months I haven't played in any SNG tourneys. Just been busy playing multi table tourneys. I need to get back into them again. Money is sweet....and EASY. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: SmackMBUp at October 4, 2004, 8:26 am | | Topic: small stakes limit vs. small buy-in no limit Forum: Bonus Whores | whackadoo wrote: I have a 90% money finish rate in SNG tourneys.
...
Pacific has the softest SNG tourneys ever. I have a 95% money finish rate here.
Sorry to be saying this: That cannot ever be true. You play full table SNG and finish 90% in the money?
I've been playing very many SNG this year and read that some of the very best SNG players can finish in the money around 60%. Please take a look at your stats and evaluate again. 90% is just impossible. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: whackadoo at October 3, 2004, 8:57 am | | Topic: small stakes limit vs. small buy-in no limit Forum: Bonus Whores | I have a 90% money finish rate in SNG tourneys. I never play in side pot games unless I am clearing a bonus. Otherwise I am always in a MTT or SNG.
SNG tourneys are much softer than ring games. Once the money is out of your account the only way to get it back is to play well. Some people shy away from ring games because they can lose their whole bankroll. Where they only lose the entry and admin fee when they lose at a SNG tourney.
Poker Stars, Ultimate Bet, Intertops and Bugsy's Club have the toughest SNG tourneys.
Party/Empire, Absolute and Paradise rooms have decent tourneys. SOme will be soft others won't.
Pacific has the softest SNG tourneys ever. I have a 95% money finish rate here. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: Grinder at October 3, 2004, 8:08 am | | Topic: small stakes limit vs. small buy-in no limit Forum: Bonus Whores | Quote: no-limit was supposed to be the more difficult of the two games
hmmmmmm!
apples to oranges I'd say.
I'd like to see your win rate. With a bonus playing at the $2 level I'm averaging almost $34 an hour at limit poker from July on.
How do I come up with this absurd number?
2-3 tables = $20 in bonus per hour
2 BB per hour at 2-3 tables in 2/4 or 1/2 averages = $14 per hour
Tournaments FOR me - are a diversion for fun but the hour it takes is not really worth my time.
BUT - I'm only playing 15 hours a week at the moment which would be 15 tournaments. SO - if you are good at tournament - go for it. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: beamer908 at October 2, 2004, 11:59 pm | | Topic: small stakes limit vs. small buy-in no limit Forum: Bonus Whores | While I've gotten better in the last few months, there's still no comparison with my ability to win money consistently playing single table tournaments ($5 or $10 buy-in) and the unsteadiness of the limit games (1/2 and 2/4). I thought no-limit was supposed to be the more difficult of the two games. I still believe it is. It's hard to justify plaing 1/2 and 2/4 when I can finish 3rd or better in a mini-tourney almost every single time.
Are these tournaments typically much easier? Has anyone else had a similar experience? | | Static Link |
|