# SSS or Sit n Gos?

• Bronze
Joined: 07.05.2008
**sighs**

I'll just stick to Sit n Go's, SSS just doesn't work for me for some reason. Seemed as though I was running even for a couple thousand hands and then BOOM! Bad beat after bad beat after bad beat. I'm not doubting the system of SSS, it's just that in my case, it's taking forvever for the odds to even themselves out. Before I know it, I'll be broke.

I'm not flaming or venting, in fact, I'm happy. I finally know that SSS is something that maybe one day I'll come back to. I fare much, MUCH better in the \$1.00 Sit n Go's at Full Tilt, lol. That's how I built my bankroll up to \$100 anyway, so I guess I'll stick with those. Gotta go now, I'll probably recoup my losses in a couple weeks or so, so no harm done. Take a look!

• 9 replies
• Bronze
Joined: 03.10.2007
that sux. i can't see if you're not following the SSS properly (it seems the stats are about right, if not too tight..?) but yeah.... it's a small sample and variance is a bitch.

sng is fun ^^; if you're doing well in those, for sure... keep playing them! .
• Bronze
Joined: 07.05.2008
I did the mathematics behind it and if I were to play every hand on the SHC regardless of raises or position, my VP\$IP would be 8.4%. But that doesn't take into account that about 1/2 the hands can't be played unless you're in late position. And even then, some of the hands must be folded due to raises in front of you.

Probabilities of being dealt certain cards:

AA = 0.45%
KK = 0.45%
QQ = 0.45%
JJ = 0.45%
TT = 0.45%
99 = 0.45%
88 = 0.45%
77 = 0.45%
AK = 1.2%
AQ = 1.2%
AJ = 1.2%
+ KQ = 1.2%
8.4%

(could someone verify this? I could be wrong here..)

I've heard from many people that SSS doesn't seem work on Full Tilt because of the ridiculous rake, the 9 handed (instead of 10 handed) tables, and the overall tighter opponents. I dunno... TehChipDonk said he broke even after a month of 12-tabling, so I guess it is possible at FTP.

But yeah, I LOVE Sit n Gos. I'm just gonna be grinding for a while to win back, --er excuse me, earn back my \$80.

(Does anyone think I'll get rakeback? Just curious..)
• Bronze
Joined: 25.04.2008
i think that the rake at the micro levels at full tilt is just ridicolous
0.05\$ for every 0.5\$ in the pot compared to the more normal 0.05\$ for every 1\$ in the pot that pokerstars offers.
that means that i would have paid less than 50% of the rake had i played at pokerstars...
• Bronze
Joined: 06.03.2008
Yes many people have stated not to play SSS on the low limits, at full tilt. But at low limits I think SnG's are pretty easy money, and if I had my time again, I would start with SnG's for sure.

GL
• Black
Joined: 03.03.2008
Originally posted by camicio
i think that the rake at the micro levels at full tilt is just ridicolous
0.05\$ for every 0.5\$ in the pot compared to the more normal 0.05\$ for every 1\$ in the pot that pokerstars offers.
that means that i would have paid less than 50% of the rake had i played at pokerstars...
this

build up a roll with SNGs, then if you wanna give SS another shot, move up a limit and try there
• Bronze
Joined: 15.11.2007
yeah on nl10 FTP I'm at best a breakeven player, but no way a wining player..maybe this does have smth to do with the high rake, and 9 people full ring..
• Bronze
Joined: 25.04.2008
heh i'll try rebuilding my bankroll multitabling sit and go's, lol
it sucks because i played so many hands multitabling thinking that at least i would have seen if i was profitable or not, but it seems i didn't even prove that
lol, im down to 25\$ and i was at around 100\$ (with the 50\$ bonus, so even then i was just breakeven) but i would be over 100\$ with a 5% rak

should have taken some risks and moved up in limits at 100\$ rather than pay all the rake

however, the low limits sit and go's have a 10% rake or more at fulltilt too
• Black
Joined: 20.02.2008
the \$1 sngs have 25c rake. still more profitable than NL10 though, i think.

@OP: i'd be interested in how much rake pokertracker says you paid.
• Bronze
Joined: 25.04.2008
around 130\$
i multitabled around 17000 hands