Online Poker Forum at Full Tilt Poker   FAQ   Search    Register   Profile  Log in to check your private messages  Log in  Online Poker Forum - whats more profitable for you Goto page 1, 2  Next          Online Poker Forum Home -> General Discussion Author Message ftn_chris Message Board Junkie Joined: 18 Mar 2006 Posts: 1181 Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 12:58 am    Post subject: whats more profitable for you so i've been switching between ring games and sitngoes and found an enormous difference in my profits. I found that i consistantly lose ring games, and constitantly win big in sitngoes. How do you guys result between the two, both are good, what changes (if any) do you make when switching between the two? Any suggestions out there for improving game specifically in ring games, or specifically in sitngoes? Back to top BOYNAMEDSUE Moderator Joined: 27 Jun 2005 Posts: 7895 Location: Isle of Tilt Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 1:02 am    Post subject: I'm like you, Chris. I'm gonna read Phil Gordon's little books, and play some more ring games. Back to top risingalan Straight Flush Joined: 15 Aug 2006 Posts: 497 Location: Washington DC Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 1:03 am    Post subject: I am plain awful in ring games... I haven't won any money there. I guess my too-tight mindset for tourneys just does not help there. I do pretty well in tourney and sngs. I would say. Seeing how I'm playing for money on FTP with money won from Freerolls. My suggestion for sng play... Just play smart. Remember not to committ huge amounts of chips preflop with marginal hands. You can fold KQ, A10, KJ, Q10, and even AJ pretty easily (depending on position you are acting on). Those are what I call the danger hands. Be wary of them. Also you have to judge how people are playing. Are they: A) Donks B) Good-Marginal C) A Poker Player Make notes on hands for sure. You never know when you might bump into them, later tourneys or maybe the same tourney (if multi table). There are over 100+ players I have marked as DONKEY!!!!! CALL IF YOU HAVE OK HAND. I even type down the hands that I label them as a donkey player by. Good luck. Back to top ftn_chris Message Board Junkie Joined: 18 Mar 2006 Posts: 1181 Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 1:16 am    Post subject: lol rising, we are freeroll brothers. I agree, thats one of the big things ive learned about sngs, especially very early in them, it should be really easy to get away from those JQ KJ A10 etc. But i also play mostly 11$ turbos, so the big thing to remember is those danger hands become your all in hands 30 minutes later. Just more stuff to keep in mind P.S BNS, the little green book is a good read. Its relatively short, very simple and to the point, and gives great suggestions for every point in the hand. I would definately recomment it Back to top DC11GE Message Board Junkie Joined: 03 Mar 2006 Posts: 2954 Location: Hollywood, CA Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 1:31 am    Post subject: I'm a RG guy myself. As much as I love tourneys, I don't make as much in them. If I make the money, I don't get much farther. I'm also ALOT looser in RG's. If I can build a stack in a tourney, then I'll play a little looser, but RG's I feel very comfortable. I don't feel as "on it" in tourneys. I also seem to lack the bully mentallity in tourneys if I get a stack or not. The best time in a tourney for me is on the way to the final table, well after the bubble bursts. Thats where I seem to be able to do some damage. Other then that, I'm usually hanging on hoping for a double up. Come to think of it, all that I lack in tourneys I seem to have plenty of in RG's. Hmmmm, thats something to think about. It's not the same for PLO or O8 tourneys though. I feel very good in those, just not HE's. Back to top Steamed Rice Message Board Junkie Joined: 18 Apr 2006 Posts: 1433 Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 5:07 am    Post subject: i love ring games rack up those FTP's obv Back to top Gypsydc Moderator Joined: 03 Nov 2005 Posts: 4409 Location: California Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 12:49 pm    Post subject: I play both but what I play depends on a few things. 1. How much time I have 2. If I'm not doing well in SNGs I'll try RGs and vice-versa 3. I'll also change games and NL to L and vice-versa 4. Sometimes I throw in a bunch of HU and HU shootouts 5. Sometimes I'll get on a MTT kick For me, MTTs have been the most profitable. Between RGs & SNGs it's tough to say because I'll switch out of what I'm playing if I'm getting cold cards or losing focus, etc. Back to top CbrCmmndr Two Pair Joined: 04 Apr 2006 Posts: 55 Location: New York, NY Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 1:40 pm    Post subject: Re: whats more profitable for you ftn_chris wrote: so i've been switching between ring games and sitngoes and found an enormous difference in my profits. I found that i consistantly lose ring games, and constitantly win big in sitngoes. How do you guys result between the two, both are good, what changes (if any) do you make when switching between the two? Any suggestions out there for improving game specifically in ring games, or specifically in sitngoes? I feel hesitant about giving advice since I'm not a particularly successful player (better players are gorging on my carcass at the 1/2 high games), but here goes. In general, tournaments (and effects are magnified when in a SNG, e.g. you're playing only final table poker) are good at beating into your head the downside of losing chips. Let's pretend you have 10 big bets (or if you prefer, big blinds) and are given a medium strength hand. In a heads-up situation, you're likely going to be risking somewhere around 4 bets in a limit game, more in a pot-limit or no-limit setting. Let's also pretend that you've estimated your edge to be about 55% against 45% for your opponent (to keep it simple, let's say these numbers also include the times you can get your opponent to fold). Do you commit to your hand? In a ring game situation, the answer is sure - let's push the edge because frankly, that's what we've been waiting for + even try to get more $ into the pot. For a tournament, though, you've got to weigh whether ending up with 14 big bets 55% of the time outweighs ending up with 6 big bets 45% of the time. If you're shortstacked, the difference between 14 and 10 big bets might not be that large (e.g. there are 2 other "bosses" sitting to your left), whereas the difference between 10 and 6 is enormous (you will be forced to double up an extra time, geometrically reducing your "tournament winning" chances, whatever that is). Hence, the correct decision I'm thinking is to not commit. If you're a late-stage big stack here, though, then heck 14 big bets just might allow you to take over the tournament, whereas the downside is you'd be back to even. The correct choice here would then be to commit, especially if you think you have an edge against your surviving opponents and that moving back to "go" isn't a catastrophe. While logarithmic utility isn't perfect for describing poker, the basic gist is that small edges usually aren't worth the risk (unless you're close to the brass ring), and having zero chips at the end of a hand result in negative infinite utility - you're done. So at times, the actual game itself becomes irrelevant, and more nuanced plays aren't seen - precisely because none of the parties involved feel like playing hide-and-go-seek over a bet gained/lost here or there. I think that a large fraction of successful SNG players understand this intuitively, and can almost play the games blind. The ring games, though, get rid of the above notion that a +1 bet hand doesn't balance a -1 bet hand. Since they're now equivalent, all of the weird headgames that erupt (flop for holdem, turn for omaha, 5th street for the stud games) are commonplace. These games require a bit more experience, since now people aren't afraid to follow what can become profitable draws. Overall, the ring games become a science of being a bet ahead (perhaps more) of your opponent if you pretended that your roles were reversed (they had the AQ out of position versus your AK for example). Moreover, it takes a long long time to construct a good strategy against a variety of opponents, since the betting patterns are now far more complex. Even worse, your opponents won't exactly be stationary targets. The only advice I have for you is to start with a game which matches your style. If you like large pots, ferocious multi-player action, and find perverse enjoyment in the "wtf" moments, then I recommend the split-pot games. If you like to play tight headgames where you're trying to win more bets than your opponents would on your winning hands, then the high-only games are probably for you. If you like to take lots of naps, then give razz a shot. Back to top lesdoodis Royal Flush Joined: 15 Aug 2006 Posts: 647 Location: Round Rock, TX Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 1:43 pm    Post subject: You know, I always thought I was better at SnG's and MTT's, but every time I go sit down in a RNG I end up doubling my buy-in. I usually don't play anything more than the .10/.25 and buy-in for half the max but I seem to do pretty well and usually leave with at least twice as much as I sat down with(most of the time). Especially in PLO which I love but need vast improvement on. For some reason though I still play mainly SnG's and MTT's. Maybe I should spend a week purely with RNG games and see what happens. Back to top -AmznGrace- Pair Joined: 01 Nov 2006 Posts: 49 Location: The Low Country Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 1:47 pm    Post subject: Chris, very rarely do I do well in ring games, but I do fairly well at the SnGs. I hardly play the ring games now, because I just lose and what is odd is that I try to play the same way no matter what the format. Not sure why. Maybe I should take the time to read a few books myself and "edumacate" myself on the game. Cheers, G Back to top Skip2Maloo Straight Joined: 06 Aug 2006 Posts: 109 Location: Location. Location. Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:29 pm    Post subject: I'm far more profitable at the ring games than at tourneys / SnG's / MTT's (just look at my SharkScope, it's embarrassing ). I love the tourney format and prefer to play them, but I don't get playable hands often enough and the blinds usually become a factor for me. By "playable" I don't mean just huge pockets or AK / AQ either, I mean any logically playable cards... for me maybe only one in 10 or 12 hands. That's just how my luck is. But in the ring games with their consistent blind levels, I can easily sit there for as long as it takes to hit the hand I can win with (or bluff with), and that's why I've cashed out far more than SharkScope says I've lost. I wish it were the other way around, but it is what it is. Back to top ftn_chris Message Board Junkie Joined: 18 Mar 2006 Posts: 1181 Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:47 am    Post subject: -AmznGrace- wrote: Chris, very rarely do I do well in ring games, but I do fairly well at the SnGs. I hardly play the ring games now, because I just lose and what is odd is that I try to play the same way no matter what the format. Not sure why. Maybe I should take the time to read a few books myself and "edumacate" myself on the game. Cheers, G lol, so yesterday i probably played 10 sngs, placed in 9 of them. Turned the 150 into 300. I got chippy and sat down at some ring games, back to 150 , so im just creating a custom tab and erasing all ring games to i dont get tempted. I think the one huge difference ive noticed is that in tournies theres no real fear of busting. You can change your play depending on how close you are to the bubble (in a 9man say), and that way you can start tight, loosen up and steal when its down to 5, and change your style much more freely. If you get caught or lose a coinflip deep, oh well you lost a buyin. But, in a ring game, if you do those same moves and bust, you just lost what you put at the entire table (often much more than a sng buyin). I think more aggressive players would fancy sng (final table) formats more, because they would be able to play more hands and not have to wait for AA KK QQ AK in order to make some plays Back to top bigwheell Royal Flush Joined: 27 Apr 2006 Posts: 830 Location: North Dakota Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:22 am    Post subject: Chris... You are playing waaaaay over your bankroll if you are going from 300 down to 150 at the ring games...I am asuming that 300 was your whole bankroll. Search the forum about bankroll management, you are going to have a bad run of cards, lose your roll and you will be stuck freerolling again... With 150 bucks, sit down at the $5 sit and go's until you have at least 30 buy in's for the next level, roughly $330 to start playing at the $10 games... Just some friendly don't go broke advice from a player who has been there... Back to top spitfire13245 Pair Joined: 30 Apr 2006 Posts: 22 Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:24 pm    Post subject: 1k here and still playins 10's with the occasional 20, the never go broke method Back to top Muskogee Mike Message Board Junkie Joined: 21 Jul 2006 Posts: 1366 Location: Arkansas Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:50 pm    Post subject: In live games, I have been able to dominate cash games and tournaments. Online, I have been pretty successful w/ $5, 6-handed SNGs, but have been crushed at the Ring games. I currently have an a ROI of 50% and over a $200 profit at the SNGs. It would be much higher if you could just look at the 6-handed games. However, I've lost nearly as much at the ring games as I have made at the SNGs. I'm not totally sure what the reason for that is. As for Gordon's books, I am currently reading the blue one. Good stuff. LGB was very good too. Back to top Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First         Online Poker Forum Home -> General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page 1, 2  Next Page 1 of 2 Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

		Terms & Conditions | Privacy Agreement

	Full Tilt Poker is licensed by the Kahnawake Gaming Commission. © Copyright 2004 - 2005 FullTiltPoker.com., All Rights Reserved