This site uses cookies to improve your browsing experience. By continuing to browse the website, you accept such cookies. For more details and to change your settings, see our Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy. Close

6-Max SnG

    • Meemawuk
      Meemawuk
      Bronze
      Joined: 27.05.2009 Posts: 758
      I'm currently playing the $2+0.40 jackpot sitngos on Titan and am fairly disgusted with the amount of rake that I'm required to pay relative to the buy-in. I'd like to say the 20% of the buy-in as rake is simply to contribute towards the jackpot, but the regular $2 sitngos are the same, and the $5 only rake $0.50. Anyway, back to my point.

      The Jackpot micro tournys are 12 players 2 tables of 6 where top 4 get paid. 1st: $12, 2nd: $6, 3rd: $3.40 and 4th $2.40. I currently run an ROI of around 20% despite the rake, and I'm wondering how much people would think I'd need to start playing $5 6-max tournaments?

      Do the same rules of BRM apply for 6-max as to FR? My concern is that in the regular 6-max tourny's, only the top 2 places are paid, so variance might result in a significant 'non-winning' spell (even though I recognise that top 4 being paid of 12 and top 2 of 6 is mathematically the same).
  • 10 replies
    • conall88
      conall88
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.01.2009 Posts: 1,715
      stop playing them they aint worth your time. as number of players decrease, rake has a more significant impact on the game.

      imo a 30% deeper bankroll for 6 max in comparison to full ring seems tolerable.

      the actual bankroll size you need is normally based on:

      -size of potential swings
      - size of your edge
      -whether you are withdrawing.

      etc

      if I have an ROI of 10% over a couple of thousand games, Id be happy to play with 60 buyins.

      if it was 5% id opt for 130 buyins.

      this is off the cuff, so dont take the numbers for what they are. theres a nice section on BRM in the other section ( strategy section with articles)

      http://www.pokerstrategy.com/strategy/others/26/1/

      http://www.pokerstrategy.com/strategy/sng/1072/1/
    • Meemawuk
      Meemawuk
      Bronze
      Joined: 27.05.2009 Posts: 758
      By stop playing them do you mean micro/low stakes sit n gos entirely, 6-max entirely, or just the jackpots?

      Rake seems to be a problem generally for micro/low stake sit n gos. It's easy to understand why so many people elect to play micro cash tables instead.
    • andreibalint
      andreibalint
      Bronze
      Joined: 11.04.2009 Posts: 872
      Screw jackpot sng's! Do the math. On the long term you get ripped off.

      Strangely enough i had smaller swings in 6max rather then FR. I think my biggest drawdown was like 30-40BI or so.

      I think playing them with 50BI bankroll is not exagerated, but the more the better. At 100BI bankroll you should be reaaaaaally confortable playing them and like 75BB is great.
    • cgoldie
      cgoldie
      Bronze
      Joined: 03.08.2010 Posts: 73
      I think paying more than 10% rake even with rakeback for sngs just isnt worth it long run. Even at the micros you should be looking to pay 10% max, otherwise the variance will most likely tilt you.

      On the buy in side I think 50 buy ins could be an issue for a lot of players. The variance is hefty and a bad swing of 20+ could tilt you pretty bad. I'm currently experimenting with $1+10 super turbos, I'd like to play higher but my bankroll won't cut it. I think if i had 50 or less buy ins I could tilt on a bad day easily. After 2 days I've played 72 $1+10 and it only feels like I've played 10, a downswing without 100+ BI would tilt most.
    • Meemawuk
      Meemawuk
      Bronze
      Joined: 27.05.2009 Posts: 758
      Originally posted by andreibalint
      Screw jackpot sng's! Do the math. On the long term you get ripped off.
      I fail to see how this is the case when the rake for the Standard $2 SnG's is also 40c. Not playing the Jackpots when the investment is the same surely must be -EV.

      Anyway, I'm currently playing on IPoker and the rake for all of the Micro-stake SnG's (except Heads-up) is 20%. The next best option is to play the $5+0.50 SnG's.
    • conall88
      conall88
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.01.2009 Posts: 1,715
      dont play sngs with 20% rake. its not worth your time when you have a choice in the matter.

      think of it this way.

      For example someone making an average of $2 per game at the $10+1 level would have an ROI of 18.2% ($2/$11 = 18.2%)

      if this were to be $10+2 ( 20% rake)
      his ROI would be 16% ($2/$12= 16%)

      for you this could mean:

      ($2+20 sng earning $0.22 per game)

      $0.22/$2.20=10%

      $0.22/$2.40=9.1%


      so what its just under 1%!

      for every hundred games you play, thats a buyin!

      so what?

      poker players play hundreds/ thousands of games!
    • Meemawuk
      Meemawuk
      Bronze
      Joined: 27.05.2009 Posts: 758
      I'm aware of the math. I'm just suggesting that there is little alternative in terms of SnG's at microstakes. Thanks for your input anyway.
    • jbpatzer
      jbpatzer
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.11.2009 Posts: 6,955
      FT $1.10 or $2.15 super turbos ftw! :f_biggrin:
    • Meemawuk
      Meemawuk
      Bronze
      Joined: 27.05.2009 Posts: 758
      Yup. Just another thing to add to the list of why IPoker Sucks!
    • nibbana
      nibbana
      Bronze
      Joined: 04.12.2009 Posts: 1,186
      Originally posted by jbpatzer
      FT $1.10 or $2.15 super turbos ftw! :f_biggrin:
      Basic Boris actually made $10/hour playing $2.15. Hero IMVHOHTMO