Probebly obvious to many of you - rake

[JoeSchmo]

[ QUOTE ]
You'll get ITM less in a 10 man. Your ROI should stay the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

[drzen]

Are you comparing Party with Stars? If you are, Party is way softer.

[Webster]

Well - SOME of us are banned from Party! So no - I was just taking all of my results, converting them to all $1.1 for SNGs and then putting in the winning percents.

For instance

Winning a 9 seat SNG you get 4.5 units compared to 5 units in a 10 man. Even though you win 50% of the purse you are winning less.

As I said - probably obvious but rarely thought about. All 50%s are not equal.

[ukjw]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you comparing Party with Stars? If you are, Party is way softer.

[/ QUOTE ]

is party still that much softer these days?

[Pokerfarian]

[ QUOTE ]
Thats what I was thinking - the extra player would not have a $10 equity in the beginning, more like $6 with the other $4 spread out over the other 9 players.

But I wonder if the bottom line changes with the greater playing time involved.

BoDog SNGs take forever and that is why I was staying away but if there is that much of an increase in ROI . . . . .

[/ QUOTE ]
Where did you get the idea that the random "extra 10th player" would have less equity than the other random 8 players?? And please don't say "because he's likely to be a fish".

[lacky]

[ QUOTE ]
I was messing with some of my spread sheets and looking at the difference between 9 seat tables and 10 seat tables.

Playing around I discovered that if I had the same results (1st, 2nd, 3rd) but on 10 man tables my ROI would get a 13% bump.


[/ QUOTE ]

just think of the money you can make if you had the same results (1st, 2nd, 3rd) but on $1050 tables!!!!

[Webster]

[ QUOTE ]
because he's likely to be a fish

[/ QUOTE ]

Odds are he IS a fish! How can you not see that.

Most players are fish - 80%. If not fish they are multi-table players which are basically play like predictable good playing fish.

OK - not fish but most multi-table players play a less EV game then they would otherwise (not cutting down multi-table players, just stating the obvious).

[jgunnip]

WHERE ARE THESE SNGS WITH 80% FISH WHO HAS A TIME MACHINE ALL UR ROIS R BELONG 2 USSSSS!!!!! WHY HASNT TEH FAQ BEEN UPDATED YET COME ON MODS~!!!!!!

[Webster]

Well - if they are not full of fish I must be world class them LOL.

Not like it was in 2001 but not so bad. Do you really think the tables are hard?

[wiggs73]

All,

Seems to me the obvious conclusion is that we should be playing 180 man SNGs. Just think - that's another 171 fish contributing to the prize pool. So if we just finished 1-3 the same (which we would since it's just more fish playing), our profit would really increase!