are TURBOS a CRAPSHOOT

[chrismystero]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I dont know what to say... i dont exaggerate when i say about 80% of the time i end up making top 10 in a 45 man and cash about 1 in every 4 or 5. but i do play out of my bankroll and cant stick to tournies and lose lots at cash. lol. i play low stakes though so its not much a problem. im just wondering if u think its better to play the longer structure rather than the 5 min turbos... especially if im just playing tight and waitin for a hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can promise you. With 100% certainty, without a shadow of a doubt, that you do not finish in the top 10 of 45 man MTT's 80% of the time.

You really should write down some sessions, see how far off this number is(I suspect...quite a bit) and then re-evaluate whether you think your playing these properly.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sample size, ftw

[mappedout]

They're not necessarily a crapshoot but you can say there is certainly more variance associated with them. You will have to play more of these over the long run than you will/should in "regular" tournies to equal the same amount of deep finishes... theoretically anyways.

[Foucault]

YES

[Ontario_Tory]

I used to avoid Tubros as a rule - I felt the exact same way as the OP. "If you think you're better than average, play a deeper stack tourney and you'll have more opportunity to exploit your edge".

This is true, to a degree, but two things made me change my mind about the Turbos:

1) Even if my ROI is 5% higher in non-turbos, since I can play 50% more Turbos, I can get a higher profit from the lower ROI.

2) I realized that my opponents are over-compensating for the speed of the turbo, making many more mistakes as compared to the regular speed tourneys. I can exploit this to my advantage.

What I've found is that while I have more bubbles / early exits from the Turbos, I have more wins than 4th and 5th place finishes in them. It's truly a "build a big stack or head home" scenario on the bubble, and once I have that big stack, I can exploit the smaller stacks into making mistakes. (and those mistakes are more frequent than the regular speed tourneys).

So I like 'em.

OT

ps - plus, having a baby, I can afford the hour to play a turbo 45... I can't afford the 2+ for a regular speed one...

[jonnyd]

hourly rate ftw!

[rhymenocerus]

Double up then use your full time bank every hand. works like a charm

[Double Ice]

[ QUOTE ]

I can promise you. With 100% certainty, without a shadow of a doubt, that you do not finish in the top 10 of 45 man MTT's 80% of the time.

You really should write down some sessions, see how far off this number is(I suspect...quite a bit) and then re-evaluate whether you think your playing these properly.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have a decent record at 45 man MTTs. To be honest to OP, I think you are not shoving in late position enough. Alot of players think that certain games are "high variance" to make themselves feel better about dumping off money in said games. I can tell you solidly that I believe that 45 man MTTs have the lowest variance, in part because your edges are so big playing against casual players, that any variance is quickly negated. I honestly believe it is worse than 3.5 standard deviations from the mean to be losing after 2 weeks of playing $60/45s (for me.) So, in short, and with all honesty, if you feel like its a crapshoot, it probably means you suck (at the format), or you have not played enough (I think about 500 games is sufficent to have a very good idea how strong you are in those.) Playing 45 man MTTs, I have never seen worse play in my entire life, and I have played nano-cash at PartyPoker.

It is true that he is probably making the top 2 tables atleast 45% the time though. I think if I just tried to make the top 2 tables, I could do this probably better than 55% - but I have no stats to back that up. Under normal playing conditions (playing for maximum +$EV) there is not much change in my strategy, and I probably rate to be at the top two tables atleast 45 and probably closer to 50%, though.

AWice

[checkmate36]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
in MTTs i play very tight early and then can usually make the top 10 or top 15

[/ QUOTE ]

This may help you

[/ QUOTE ]

Winner!!

[Ontario_Tory]

[ QUOTE ]


It is true that he is probably making the top 2 tables atleast 45% the time though. I think if I just tried to make the top 2 tables, I could do this probably better than 55% - but I have no stats to back that up. Under normal playing conditions (playing for maximum +$EV) there is not much change in my strategy, and I probably rate to be at the top two tables atleast 45 and probably closer to 50%, though.

AWice

[/ QUOTE ]

At the lower levels - $6 and $3 / 45's - I believe you could simply fold into the top two tables. Don't know what the $60/45's would be like.

(why you'd do this, I can't say. But outlasting 27 people is not difficult in this format - the play is so bad, people bust out very quickly at the beginning.)

Not that it means much, but I've played 77 $3/45's so far this month. I've busted:

10 times with 5 tables left (13%)
15 times with 4 tables left (19%)
19 times with 3 tables left (25%)
13 times with 2 tables left (17%)
20 times at the final table (26%)


So without it being my goal, I've finished at the top 2 tables 43% of the time.

OT

[pokerg1]

turbo is more luck