Not signed in (Sign In)
Welcome Guest!
Want to take part in these discussions? If you have an account, sign in now.
If you don't have an account, apply for one now.

Sit & Go Tournament Poker: profitability on full tilt versus other sites

Bottom of Page

1 to 29 of 29

  1.  
    •  
      CommentAuthoreehhh awww
    • CommentTimeSep 27th 2006
     

    I play on several poker sites including pokerstars, party poker, and VCpoker.

    I find that my profitability is by far the lowest on full tilt poker. I am normally playing higher limits on the other sites, but have played the $5 SNGs profitably on all other sites. Im thinking maybe this has something to do with structure but i am not sure. Anyone got any thoughts on this?

    A major problem that i have is that i seem to keep bubbling. Normally my bubble play is my best attribute, but i seem to keep getting unlucky on the bubble on a regular basis.

    So im wondering, am i just going through an extended bad patch on full tilt, or are the games truly less profitable?

    Im thinking the blind structure is definitely disadvantageous to good players in the early stages at least.Last edited by eehhh awww on Wed Sep 27, 2006 8:53 am; edited 1 time in total

    •  
      CommentAuthorGunShy5
    • CommentTimeSep 27th 2006
     

    Either you work for the site or something...because I've found that this site has really no difference from other online sites. Best hand by far when you call, you're out drawn regardless of what you're playing. If you have the worst hand, you're in a good spot. It's just an observation. It's not that big a deal other than you have to remember to play legit hands when playing live cards, as online poker sites encourage you to play crap hands.

  3. 728x890_us
    •  
      CommentAuthorbadfish88
    • CommentTimeSep 27th 2006
     

    Can anyone with experience at multiple sites suggest a site with soft sitngos? In a brief period, I've experienced a fair return on my investments. But if there's a bigger pond with more fish, I may choose to swim there once in a while.

    --Badfish out. 8)

    •  
      CommentAuthorGypsydc
    • CommentTimeSep 27th 2006
     

    I think this depends on your skill level as a player in addition to what I said in my previous post in this thread. The people who do the most complaining, even though they have some experience under their belt, are still not at the level of play that they need to be in order to turn a profit.

    That may be tough for some to swallow, but if you want to play winning poker you most certainly can't go on fooling yourself. I have played on other sites (although now I only play on FTP and will keep it that way) and don't find much different. I pretty much stick to SNGs and dabble in cash games now and then and I do turn a profit, however small it may be. I play the low stakes games and $5 or $10 SNGs as that is what my BR allows. Just work on your game and any site can be profitable as there are many many fish in the sea.

    •  
      CommentAuthoriwinez
    • CommentTimeSep 27th 2006
     

    I was a pretty big winner at Pacific Poker (enough where they GAVE me money to keep me playing), but I had to leave and venture elsewhere in search of a new site, because they closed down for US players.

    I've only been at this site for 5 days or so, and I've already made more money per games played at FTP than at Pacific, and 888.com paid out a greater % of players. You got yourself a new player.

  7.  

    Every site has a somewhat different pool of players with somewhat different playing styles. This means that for some folks one site will be less profitable than another.

    Allegedly FT has the highest percentage of good players and therefore the toughest competition. I'm not sure that is true at the $5 level, but if it is then there is no way you are going to be as profitable at FT.

    •  
      CommentAuthorDoogie05
    • CommentTimeSep 27th 2006
     

    I am curious what people mean when they compare their profitability among different sites. From reading posts on various poker forums, it seems that in order to make a meaningful evaluation of your SNG performance, you want to have at least 100 games at a particular level and site. Are you guys talking about having an ROI of > 40% on other sites and drastically lower ROI on FTP? What kind of numbers are you talking about?

    I find the SNG play more reasonable on FTP. I'd say the skill level at the $11 SNG on FTP is about the same or better than what I find at the $22 SNG on Party. It's a pretty stress free and mechanical way to build your bankroll.

    •  
      CommentAuthorPaprika
    • CommentTimeSep 29th 2006
     

    I had my best records on PP. Although seems that every site has the 30-30-30% thing going. At most S&G tables, 30% stink, another 30% are fair and about 30%(maybe a bit less) are good. Not exact but pretty close. I do better here than PS. I'll have to check out Doyles Room.

    •  
      CommentAuthorcrocdd
    • CommentTimeSep 30th 2006
     

    Ditto to what d3238 said just above this post. In the SnG's on PS I have done extremely well over the past 2 years. Everyone must find thier comfort level that they play best at to be profitable on any site. Mine at PS was from $10 up to $20. I seemed to be ITM about 80% of the time at that level. Any lower than that and the Donk's took away the skill I have worked so hard at achieving. Any higher than that and I myself did not feel nearly as comfortable and my ITM perecentage dropped severly to around 50% . At Party Poker I did not fare nearly as well in the $10 to 20 range, I had to step up another level between$30 to $50 to show a profit there and at Pokeroom where I have also played for a long time I found that I could not do well at any level in the SnG's because of the loose style the players have there. Someone goes all in on at least 75% of the hands played in the SnG's there. But I turned a very nice profit in the multi table tourneys. So I agree with what everyone else has said it depends more on your skill level and picking the right game and buy-in size that will ultimately determine your profitability. IMHO you must devise a stratagy and stick to it or it does not matter where you play ultimately you will lose money in the long run. I have been playing at FTP for only 3 days now and am enjoying the higher level of skill I have seen displayed here so far. It has dented my bankroll slightly but I will quickly adapt to the style of play here I think and in the long run my profitbility will become largfer than at any of the other sites I have been playing on.

    •  
      CommentAuthord3238
    • CommentTimeOct 2nd 2006
     

    I usually play the SnG's on PS. I seem to profit more. You just have to have patience because sometimes it takes a while. The higher money you go on PS, it seems people play alot tighter.

    •  
      CommentAuthorHuJwang
    • CommentTimeOct 5th 2006
     

    good advice

    •  
      CommentAuthorjwalk27
    • CommentTimeOct 5th 2006
     

    Sounds like you've done an extensive study... can I see the numbers?

    Just because you see a few suckouts in a row doesn't mean every hand is a suckout. Keep tabs on every hand, not just the ones you choose to notice.

    •  
      CommentAuthorcfh138
    • CommentTimeOct 6th 2006
     

    I think that the players at Full Tilt are above the average.

    A friend(he is playing at PokerRoom) watched a $5 SnG and he said that there is a big difference. The players at FT dont gamble that much. You see less all-in moves, also the players are not so hyperaggressiv.

    If it is profitable, i can`t say. I started playing Sng two weeks ago. I hope that the player are better cuz then i`m doing not so bad(most of the time i`m in the money)!

    •  
      CommentAuthorkenobi
    • CommentTimeOct 10th 2006
     

    The blinds only start 10 chips higher than the 20 you see most everywhere else, and increase at a steady rate unlike other sites where there is usually at least one spot where there is a large increase (sometimes double the previous level). To me the blind structure seems slower than other sites I've played at.

    •  
      CommentAuthorFinnisher
    • CommentTimeOct 10th 2006
     

    I've tried some of the 6 and 11 turbos here at FT. The players are just unbelievably awful. Just amazingly awful. They have no understanding of the push/fold stage of the tourney but yet they haven't got a clue about the ring game stage of it either. I am still in awe of the lack of skills at those levels. I just hope the dealers start to co-operate with me when I get my money in 75-25 on the bubble cos it is just messing with my head atm to lose all important pots on the bubble.

    I'm running at about 20% ITM and maybe -65% ROI for about 60 SnG's so far. Those numbers are hard to achieve even if I tried to lose every tourney I played. I haven't obviously made the proper adjustments from Pokerstars' 6's but this is still pretty brutal, though very short term data.

    Anyway, I'm 100% sure that the avg player here at FT is far far far worse the worst avg players at PS. The play here is just awful (which obv means that it's good for better players). And I hope I can keep my head straight through this swing as there is a lot of profit to be made from these guys.

    PS. Check out my sharkscope stats. I started playing the turbos around 40 tourneys from the start. I find it very amusing but I'm a little afraid FT will soon think I'm laundering money

    •  
      CommentAuthordrowsy
    • CommentTimeOct 10th 2006
     

    I only play at one other site, and do better with SNGs there then I do at Full Tilt. I think it is because the blind structure there is better for my style of play then the one FullTilt uses.

    For SNGs at Absolute the blind levels are 10 minutes each and look like this....

    10/20

    15/30

    25/50

    50/100

    75/150, etc.

    This seems like a more gradual progression then what I remember of Full Tilt's and that leads to games going longer before they become all-in fests. I believe that might be the reason for my relative sucess there.

    •  
      CommentAuthord3238
    • CommentTimeOct 17th 2006
     

    That is the same blind structure of PS.

    •  
      CommentAuthorbadfish88
    • CommentTimeOct 17th 2006
     

    thanks for the help and i totally agree. just by the way sites are advertised on tv, full tilt seems to aim for a more experienced demographic while pokerstars and partypoker aim at those who don't or barely know how to play. thanks for the help.

    •  
      CommentAuthorSpigwish
    • CommentTimeOct 18th 2006
     

    I play on PStars as well as Full Tilt, and if you are a disciplined player, PS can be profitable. On the average night, there are 3 - 4 times the number of players on PS as there is on Full Tilt.

    •  
      CommentAuthorUFO1947
    • CommentTimeOct 18th 2006
     

    not to mention the payout structure, it is only 10% here, pokerstars they have a 20%. However the winner recieves less.

    •  
      CommentAuthorwims80
    • CommentTimeOct 18th 2006
     

    I think that this blind structure is best for the good player. This is because with a blind structure like there is a stars the games become a crapshoot after a while. At Full Tilt it's less about being lucky and more about doing the right moves IMO

  23.  

    I just switched over here again after a long hiatus (I'd been over at PartyPoker until they booted their US customers).

    I vastly prefer the SNG structure here. I play the $5 buy-ins, and I don't like the idea of getting too tricky in the earlier levels. There are too many donks around (yes, here on FT, too), and trying to bluff a donk is crazily unprofitable.

    Here, I can wait around for a decent hand and actually pick my spots. Pressure from the blinds creeps up, instead of plopping down all at once with a single level change.

    •  
      CommentAuthorbroookeexo
    • CommentTimeOct 19th 2006
     

    I love how you can watch the pro's play all the time on Tilt

    •  
      CommentAuthormuck luck
    • CommentTimeOct 19th 2006
     

    u gotta try doyle's room. I'm not quite sure why the games are so eazy to beat but all i play is sit n go's and i turned 20.00 into 870.00 with no problem's. I didnt just get lucky and win either, in most cases i was paitent and coasted to the final 3 with no problem. Also doyle's room has a sit n go's with extended blinds witch go up every 12 minutes instead of the usaul 10. gl

    •  
      CommentAuthorUFO1947
    • CommentTimeOct 25th 2006
     

    Ditto

    •  
      CommentAuthorhackettpso
    • CommentTimeOct 27th 2006
     

    Another thing to consider is what type of SnG you are playing.

    My ITM for NL holdem on stars is about 53%, but for PLO8 it is 71%.

    I have found that on most sites i play if you have a solid PLO8 or Stud 8 game, there appear to be more fish learning these great games.

    There's gold in them there hills

    •  
      CommentAuthorblkhwk67t
    • CommentTimeOct 27th 2006
     

    Badfish the softest sng's that I have found are on PartyPoker. All I do is play supertight and when I get that big hand I make people pay severly to play. Yesterday, I had won only 3 hands (AA, KK, AKs), on a $6 9 man sng and had half the chips in play. Even when you get all those chips, stay playing supertight until the bubble then you can open up your hand selection and be aggressive against the middle stacks.

    I think pokerstars and partypoker is where you can be the most profitable in sng's. There is alot of players on both sites and alot of those players shouldnt be playing for real money yet. Of course, with this type of player you will see a higher swing on your variance but over time, if you playing well and making good decisions, you should see that these sites are more profitable. I like FT's sng's too but there is fewer to choose from and I really do believe, for the most part, that FT attracts more skilled players with a better understanding of the game.

    •  
      CommentAuthorUncle_Buz
    • CommentTimeOct 27th 2006
     

    My experience is that on Party it is a little easier to get into the money once you get down to the bubble. I have found that on FTP the bubble is generally very tough to crack. Many more Rocks play FTP and the smoother blind structure allows the rocks to play tighter without having to panic.

    On Party the blinds double quicker in the later stages making it necessary to take more chances.

    I've gotten frustrated on FTP because I try to steal blinds late (or on the bubble) and the rocks just wait until they can trap me. If I successfully get away from the trap, I have to steal successfully two more times just to get back even.

    I suppose on FTP I need to be patient, play the players and the situation as much as the cards I'm holding.

  30.  

    I quite like the blind structure on Full Tilt. I find that on PartyPoker, for example, one minute you can have 12 big blinds, and then instantly you level up and have just 6 big blinds. It's ridiculous.

    Though I am wondering the same about Full Tilt's profitability; I would like to know everyone's experiences regarding this matter. I wonder where I could make the most money playing the $5 SNGs.

1 to 29 of 29

  1.  

profitability on full tilt versus other sites