|
|
#11
09-13-2007, 05:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Bankroll Suggestions for High Buyin MTTS
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] explain how the 1k sats require more of a bankroll than the WCOOP sats are waay lower variance than big MTTs (not even near enough to adjust for the skill difference I'd say that 50k is definitely enough for the 1k sats to the WSOP ME [/ QUOTE ] Because you don't get any money out of 1K sats, only seats to events for which you are underrolled unless your bankroll is around 500K? [/ QUOTE ] What? You get W dollars after the first win... Are you suggesting that you need a 500k bankroll to play in the 33Rs to the WSOP? 
|
|
#12
09-13-2007, 05:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Bankroll Suggestions for High Buyin MTTS
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] explain how the 1k sats require more of a bankroll than the WCOOP sats are waay lower variance than big MTTs (not even near enough to adjust for the skill difference I'd say that 50k is definitely enough for the 1k sats to the WSOP ME [/ QUOTE ] Because you don't get any money out of 1K sats, only seats to events for which you are underrolled unless your bankroll is around 500K? [/ QUOTE ] What? You get W dollars after the first win... Are you suggesting that you need a 500k bankroll to play in the 33Rs to the WSOP? [/ QUOTE ] No, you don't even need 500K to play 1K sats. As you yourself pointed out you only get W dollars after the first win. So you have to commit something in the order of 11K into an event for which you are way underrolled first. And then there is only a limited number of qualifiers to the same event after that. This obviously has to greatly increase bankroll reqs for the sats, even after you allow for their own lower variance. This is all intuitive conjecture with no math behind, so you of course are allowed to disagree.
|
|
#13
09-13-2007, 05:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Bankroll Suggestions for High Buyin MTTS
[ QUOTE ]
What? You get W dollars after the first win... Are you suggesting that you need a 500k bankroll to play in the 33Rs to the WSOP? [/ QUOTE ] Of course not. But you have to balance the two aspects of the prize for your first win: 1. entry in an event that you would need a large 6 figure br to play 2. the right to play more of the relatively soft, relatively low variance satellites for a cash equivalent (which is worth 90c on the dollar unless used in other tournaments that require a higher br than the satellite itself would). Play 30 $650s to an $11k, your expectation is probably to win like 3. So you dedicate $20k to winning a very high variance seat plus your $ back (the neutral variance case). Win only two and you're -10k unless you cash in the big event. ps if you wanted to make the point that satellites are lower variance, the 33r wasn't the best example.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
