View Full Version : Single table tourneys = cash cow?
I've been trying to figure out the most profitable way to spend my time
playing poker. Is it fixed limit ring games? No limit shorthanded? Or
tourneys?
It seems like single table no limit tourneys on party have a lot of
potential. If you could consistently (50-75%) place in these, which seems
realistic, you'd rack up a nice hourly rate. What does everything think
about the feasibility of this? Does anyone here use these tourneys to
their advantage?
TC
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
O-PGManager
05-01-2005, 12:40 PM
I like those tables a lot, although I've actually spent more time at true
poker 1 table no limit tourneys than party. The competition is weak and
you can almost always place by playing tight for a while and letting
others knock themselves out. However, the swings are bigger, losing your
20 dollar entry fee can happen a lot faster than it would on .50/1 limit
table. As for hourly win rate in these tournys, I don't have enough data
yet to know for sure but at this rate it looks significantly better than
my corresponding low limit rate.
O-PG
------------------------------------------
Start winning hundreds at Texas Holdem with Power Holdem+
http://www.online-pokerguide.com
> I've been trying to figure out the most profitable way to spend my time
> playing poker. Is it fixed limit ring games? No limit shorthanded? Or
> tourneys?
>
> It seems like single table no limit tourneys on party have a lot of
> potential. If you could consistently (50-75%) place in these, which seems
> realistic, you'd rack up a nice hourly rate. What does everything think
> about the feasibility of this? Does anyone here use these tourneys to
> their advantage?
>
> TC
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
Cadillac_Jones
05-01-2005, 12:40 PM
On 13 Aug 2003 11:50:55 GMT, "TC" <anonymous@fukk.org> wrote:
>I've been trying to figure out the most profitable way to spend my time
>playing poker. Is it fixed limit ring games? No limit shorthanded? Or
>tourneys?
>
>It seems like single table no limit tourneys on party have a lot of
>potential. If you could consistently (50-75%) place in these, which seems
>realistic, you'd rack up a nice hourly rate. What does everything think
>about the feasibility of this? Does anyone here use these tourneys to
>their advantage?
>
I've been playing a lot of NL HE single tourney tables. Expect more
wild swings in bankroll as opposed to ring games.
Tight aggressive approach seems to get you closer to the money
consistently but I've ended up with a lot of 4th and 5th place
finishes when the miracle card cracks my two pair.
"I'm the luckiest man in the world. I have a cigarette
lighter and a wife...and they both work!"
Whiffleboy
05-01-2005, 12:40 PM
I posted this in another similar thread:
The vast majority of what I play on Party are these one table tournies. I
play $10 - $50 buy-ins. My win rate is $22.20/hr. But that only has a
22% confidence rate so my mileage may actually stray far from that in the
long run. I've been doing these for 4 months. It's no-limit and it's a
tournie so I really can't tell if this is a decent win rate.
Whiffleboy
On Aug 12 2003 10:01PM, TC wrote:
> I've been trying to figure out the most profitable way to spend my time
> playing poker. Is it fixed limit ring games? No limit shorthanded? Or
> tourneys?
>
> It seems like single table no limit tourneys on party have a lot of
> potential. If you could consistently (50-75%) place in these, which seems
> realistic, you'd rack up a nice hourly rate. What does everything think
> about the feasibility of this? Does anyone here use these tourneys to
> their advantage?
>
> TC
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
Whiffleboy
05-01-2005, 12:40 PM
On Aug 13 2003 7:33AM, wamplerr wrote:
"What are the %'s 1st-2nd-3rd?"
I'd have to check on that one. I didn't setup a 1st, 2nd or 3rd category
to input my results (StatKing). However, I could/should separate by
buy-in/finish to get a better idea. On the other hand, I'm not too
concerned about missing that data right now.
Overall, I'm in-the-money 69% of the time as of today. Like I said, it's
early in the stats game and I imagine that percentage could drop
significantly. However, it does reflect an 11 tournament losing streak.
Whiffleboy
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
SFGreenDay
05-01-2005, 12:40 PM
> "The vast majority of what I play on Party are these one table tournies.
> I play $10 - $50 buy-ins. My win rate is $22.20/hr. But that only has a
> 22% confidence rate so my mileage may actually stray far from that in
> the long run. I've been doing these for 4 months. It's no-limit and it's
> a
> tournie so I really can't tell if this is a decent win rate."
>
> It would depend on how many were for $10 and how many were for $50. If
> you come in the money 60%, your EV will pretty much be the buy-in, i.e.
> $10 sit-n-go, +$10 EV. That assumes a 20%-20%-20% Win-Place-Show. But
> $22/hr at this level is damn good either way. What are the %'s
> 1st-2nd-3rd?
50%-30%-20%
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
On Aug 13 2003 8:40AM, Whiffleboy wrote:
> However, it does reflect an 11 tournament losing streak.
You're going to lose some of these now matter how well you play. I've had
some when I didn't get what I'd consider a decent starting hand during the
entire tourney. Other times I've gotten AA KK or AK multiple times within
a few hands. There's a lot of luck involved with playing such a short
event.
Rich
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
checkrayz
05-01-2005, 12:40 PM
I've ended up with a lot of 4th and 5th place
finishes
***************************************
Same here. Three fourth places in a row Saturday. I don't have a deep
enough BR to stay w/ these exclusively (at the 10+1 no less lol), but I've
placed enough to keep me interested.
I stick pretty close to Russ's posted strategy for these. I've found it
works quite well. I believe I could do even better, if I can get myself to
make (more and earlier) steal attempts. I think I'm hanging back too long,
getting short-stacked at level 4 too often.
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
Whiffleboy
05-01-2005, 01:31 PM
On Aug 13 2003 1:45PM, Matt wrote:
"Tight aggressive is definatly the way to go. When the blinds are still
10/15, it's worth sticking your head into as many flops as possible."
Not flaming here, but, how could that be considered "tight"????
Whiffleboy
> Cadillac_Jones <d@D.com> wrote in message
>
> > Tight aggressive approach seems to get you closer to the money
> > consistently but I've ended up with a lot of 4th and 5th place
> > finishes when the miracle card cracks my two pair.
>
> I had a stretch where I finished 4th 5 tourneys in a row. I wasn't a
> real happy camper. Can't complain too much, though, as I'm making
> money at it over the long haul.
>
> Tight aggressive is definatly the way to go. When the blinds are still
> 10/15, it's worth sticking your head into as many flops as possible.
> So many fish and maniacs early that if you catch a longshot, you can
> really make it pay off. Call a 7T and you'll rarely win the pot, but
> when one of each flops along with an ace, Maniac 1 and Maniac 2 will
> go all-in with A4 and A6, and you can pretty much go to the can until
> the blinds hit 100+.
>
> Matt
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
"Whiffleboy" <anonymous@attbi.com> wrote in message news:<3f3b1559$0$98773$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>...
> On Aug 13 2003 1:45PM, Matt wrote:
>
> "Tight aggressive is definatly the way to go. When the blinds are still
> 10/15, it's worth sticking your head into as many flops as possible."
>
> Not flaming here, but, how could that be considered "tight"????
Yeah, I didn't word that very well. I play tight post-flop. Early on,
see the dirt-cheap flops, and release if you've got nothing. Once the
blinds start to cost something, then really tighten thing up until the
table has about 5 left, then you can start buying and stealing.
Matt