[LearnedfromTV]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for not taking that the wrong way Learned. You knew what I meant. It is interesting that you said that your performance in these parallels your normal MTT performance. I beleive that Bestcellar's original reason for starting this contest was because he wanted to play in a ton of these to see if they really are easier than normal MTTs. We don't have even near the sample size to do any data analysis, but we could discuss this stuff in theory possibly.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think these are pretty soft. I don't have enough experience with the large Stars/Party MTT's to compare, but regardless, one being easier is just reflected in the size of your edge, not how you apply it. The trend I see across my tournament results in tournaments of roughly this size is that I make the final table more the half the time I make the final 2 tables and more than a third of the time I make the final 3 tables, which actually says more about my play prior to the final 2-3 tables than anything (reflecting my average stack size in the endgame). To figure out if the same thing happens in my large field results would require a much larger sample size than I have, and would probably require looking at, say 1-50 vs 51-100 and 101-150.

I mentioned once before but will again, I'm doing several variance simulations, first with the 180s and then with larger fields. I plan to post results sometime in the next few weeks.