Quick guide to satellite qualifying for big events

[AZK]

Nice post, definitely some things that we talked about in the other atlantis thread, and some late stage stuff for me. Thanks.

PS ~ Has anyone taken you up on that $1000 bet. I might be interested, I know you're good, but come on, MiniStep 1 -> MiniStep 4 on $30?

[adanthar]

Check out the structure and then look at what you need to do to stay in the system.

[Roman]

ofcourse there is a lot of variance in the DSs, but you guys are being totally unreasonable and dont understand the concept of EV. Not that I want more 2+2ers in these things, but there is plenty of dead money at almost every single table in the DSs including the second tables... I am 0/5 on the final tables and ive blown a lot of money playing them, but they are still +++EV and a good deal despite large variance.

[Exitonly]

i think they're +EV because i think i'll win more than 1-68, but i dont have the bankroll to keep trrying, and the competition is harder than the saturday sat.

[Marwan]

The DS's are kind of deceptive imo.. on paper it looks good, 81 players, and you only have to go through 16 players (8 first + 8 second).. but it's tough in a sense that getting through 2 short tables is really difficult imo, because so much can go wrong.. I don't think the competition is that good until you get to FT, most qualified through the 5.50R's, but to successively win 2 tables is difficult.. of course it really depends, my short table game isn't that good so I would gravitate towards the MTT structure where I can avoid playing 3-5 person tables.

if ur ST play and HU play is really good, then it's probably a good tourney to be in.. I find that a lot of people eliminate themselves and even if you haven't made a move you'll always be within striking distance of chip leader on your table.

[adanthar]

Of course they're +EV. Any tournament with dead money is +EV to even an average player, and there's plenty of dead money to be found in those.

They're just nowhere near as +EV as any other similar stakes sat format that pays more people.

edit: to reconcile this with what I said earlier, what I actually mean is that, when you play these, you have an edge over some guy just plopping down 175, but at the second table, you will, on average, be a dog. The result is that you are +EV overall but with very wild swings at the second table and probably not much to show for it.

[qu2r]

[ QUOTE ]
-As a minor aside, if you are trying to qualify for something *very* cheaply or build a bankroll, the Party Steps (especially miniSteps) are your friend, much more than you would possibly expect*;
[*I am open to a $1000 or more wager that I can make it from a miniStep 1 (5+1) to a miniStep 5 (400+30) playing on $30 or less. I'd make it less than that but I've gotta leave room for aces getting cracked. Of course, this blatantly ignores $/hour.]


[/ QUOTE ]

Can you elaborate on this? I looked at these and felt that using my own scrap-paper accounting, I could do my own "steps" plan with regular SnGs. What's the advantage of using their setup? Is there something in the payout plan that I'm missing? -tx

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]

2)Conversely, sats that pay one seat either reward SNG players over MTT players, are just plain bad value, or both, due to the decreased edge you have over the field and the decreased value of a large stack/proper pushbotting. The Stars regular 33r (which has 400+ players and pays out 1 trip) downright blows.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is the one I got second in. It technically pays out as many seats as the prize pool covers. The rest of the pool is doled out in $650 chunks -- essentially buyins to the direct sat. I think something like 10 people won the $650. Does that change your mind at all?

Oh, and when I played there were only 250 players or so.

[Che]

[ QUOTE ]
when you play these, you have an edge over some guy just plopping down 175, but at the second table, you will, on average, be a dog.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have not played any of the Atlantis DS's (can't go [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]), but I have to disagree with this assessment if it also refers to WSOP DS's. Based on my experience, second tables generally have 1-4 strong players and 4-7 average (or worse) players. I can think of numerous 2+2er's who should be +EV even at the second table of a DS.

Having said this, I do not plan to qualify for next year's WSOP via DS. While I will probably play a handful of DS's, my plan is to play as many TS/QS as possible since these are much, much weaker than the DS's (which are very beatable IMHO).

Small sample bias applies, of course, but I'm pretty confident that what I'm saying is true relative to the WSOP stuff. You may well be right about Atlantis, though. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

Later,
Che

[MrX]

Athandar, nice thread. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

X