Sit-n-go experiment part II

Sit n go experiment Part II



I have completed another 100 $50+5 sit-n-gos playing four at once. 50% first, 30% second, 20% third.



This is a small sample size and not particularly valid. Nonetheless, I will guess at what I have learned.



First: 8 ($2,000)
Second: 17 ($2550)

Third: 11 ($1100)

Fourth: 8

Fifth: 11

Sixth: 20

Seventh: 5

Eighth: 11

Ninth: 8

Tenth: 1



Total invested: $5,500

Return: $5,650



Well, better than last time (where I lost money) but still not really a good investment of time. My lesson is, “You cannot hope to win much in a sit-n-go format playing multiple games.” This has not been the case in playing multiple ring games for me where the win rate at any individual table goes down, but the total win rate goes up. Back to ring game play for me to get that Land Rover (only $30K to go!).



All of this illustrates an interesting fact of online poker for me. I have trouble staying focused on the game. To keep myself focused I play multiple tables. Otherwise, I soon find that I am checking my email etc instead of concentrating. You can get away with it in a full ring game. It is much harder to do in short handed games, tournaments, etc.

Comments

  • I have completed another 100 $50+5 sit-n-gos playing four at once. 50% first, 30% second, 20% third.

    Apparently, my brain has powered down and is in energy conservation mode today.

    I read this as you stating your results. :)

    ScottyZ
  • Haha, I was thinking the same thing!!
  • OK Dave - you've forced my hand. I have been toying with an article on online multiple table play (see my earlier post in the General Forum) and now that you have provided me with my poster boy, I see I will have to get off my butt and write it.

    While my experiments have not been as controlled (and even less statistically significant) as yours, I found I improved my sng finishes from 52% in the money to over 85% in the money - just by going to the "one table" rule. And yes - that means no mutli-tasking with online porn either :rolleyes: . It's quite a sacrifice, but there appears to be a payoff.

    Amy Calistri
  • I have a friend in Vegas (a WSOP bracelet holder and professional player) who is doing something similar. She and her roommate are each playing 100 $100+$10 sit-n-go's. They have a side bet on who wins the most after the 100.

    Last time I saw her she was about half way through she indicated that her win rate was about $50 per. I do not think she was playing multiple tables.
  • A couple points:

    Amy C. While I am sure that your 85% ITM rate is indicative of better results playing a single table, I caution you strongly against counting on any kind of result like that in the future. The very best sngs players are typically getting in the money between 40-50%. ROI is the crucial figure anyways and in my experience the best are getting no more than 40-50% at $55 and below and probably no more than 20-30% at $109 and $215

    In general, while ROI will rise as the number of tables is reduced, if a player can successfully multi-table sngs, $/hr will go up despite reduced ROI in each individual tourney. This will of course end at a critical number of sngs whereby the ROI will be reduced considerably enough per sng to no longer make it more profitable. Most great sng players are multi-tabling 3-6 tables though I have heard of as many as 8

    ROI=Return on investment (ie 50% ROI at 50+5 = avg profit/tourney of $27.5)

    Regards
    Brad S
  • Hey Brad,
    Yes, I realize that 85%+ is a statistical anomaly at this point. And while my results are statistically different for one vs multiple tables, the confidence intervals are rather large due to the small sample size. And in the interest of full disclosure I should also mention that for this time period, I only played $5 or $10 sngs, where the play is relatively soft. And I only played Omaha/8, where I believe the play is softer still.

    All that being said, anecdotally, I feel I play a better, and different, game when playing one vs. multiple tables. While I think I often make similar starting hand selections in the early going, I get a far better and earlier read on my opponents when I play only one table. By the time the field has thinned to 4 or 5 players, I start to play the players more effectively and make adjustments to my game based on them - something I seem to be less effective at when diverting my attention between tables.

    As you say, while the hourly rate theoretically goes up with multiple tables, the ROI is reduced. But these curves will differ according to the player. For me, I believe my drop off on ROI is fairly substantial with multiple table play.

    Of course I could still be haunted by a time back in my early days of online poker when I folded quad aces in stud and went all-in with 37o in hold'em on a temporary screen confusion. Those scars never leave you.

    Thanks,
    Amy
Sign In or Register to comment.