What do you guys look for? |
|
Posted Sat Feb 10, 2007 2:21 pm GMT by jimmer
When choosing a torny, what do you guys look for as positives and negitives?
Obviously, I'm assuming the entry fee is the key concern, however do you look at prize money/entry fee ratio's or amount of players etc.
The reason I ask the question is I planned to enter a $10 freezeout torny last night. However, I logged on about 5 minutes before and there was only 60 players. The payout was to the top 10. 10th got $22.50, 1st got $450.
I decided not to enter.
I just feel i would of prefered more players (say 180 min) with a payout to the top 15-20.
So the question is; Are there tornys which you plan to play, but then pullout of (for whatever reason), or tornys which you probably weren't going to play, but then decide too (for whatever reasons). Either way, what are your key +/- factors?
Did you know that participating in a poker forum can help you improve your own game? Be it by sharing experiences or simply asking for help, participation in a forum helps you focus and keep 'on topic' which will help you improve your game. You can learn from other players feedback and from their experiences. Why the THP poker forums? We offer one of the best managed texas holdem poker forums available, and the community within is far more friendly than those typicaly found on other sites. We've made a 'lurkers edition' of the poker forum available here on Holdem Poker Online, but we encourage all visitors to register and join in on the conversations on TexasHoldem-Poker.com
Posted Sat Feb 10, 2007 2:27 pm GMT by Ensano
| jimmer wrote: | ... there was only 60 players. The payout was to the top 10. 10th got $22.50, 1st got $450.
I decided not to enter.?!!!?? |
what? for me this would be an ideal tourney to enter... small field with still a significant enough 1st prize to win...
60 people with top 10 being paid... that's 1 in 6 getting paid...
normally only 1 in 10 get paid...
Posted Sat Feb 10, 2007 7:44 pm GMT by jimmer
| Ensano wrote: | what? for me this would be an ideal tourney to enter... small field with still a significant enough 1st prize to win...
60 people with top 10 being paid... that's 1 in 6 getting paid...
normally only 1 in 10 get paid... |
I just find that with the amount of time it will take to get into the money, you're better off playing for a bit longer, with more players for more prize money. $ for $ you're payoff per hour is better.
Working it the other way, if you have too many players, it just becomes a crap-shoot.
I dunno, maybe it's all in my mind. It's just that some tornys feel better than others.
Posted Sat Feb 10, 2007 8:34 pm GMT by Ensano
smaller tourneys are better to play... think of it... tourney payout is always top heavy (top 3)... would you rather have to beat 50 people or beat 1000 people?
it's obviously harder to beat 1000 but you have to think of the payout it would give you..
that's what I usually look at payout:player ratio...
there's not point in paying 10$ then playing 1000 people to win 100$...
in your case you had to play 50 people to win 500$... that's not that bad... or hard to do...
Posted Mon Feb 12, 2007 9:45 am GMT by MasterShake
TJ Cloutier says that he looks for tournaments where the first prize is around 50x the buy in or more. He's also playing for the top three spots because that's where the money is.
Posted Mon Feb 12, 2007 10:42 am GMT by shorn7
I look for overlay tourny's where the guaranteed amount is more than the player's pool.
Posted Mon Feb 12, 2007 10:51 am GMT by Skribbles
The more entrants the better. You will only ever have 9 other people at your table... the rest of the field is no concern to you until they sit down with you.
|
|
