BankrollMob Forum

BankrollMob Forum » Poker Forum » Difference between SnG Sharks and Fish is 1$ in buy-in?


does full tilt suck
 

Page 1 of 2Go to page:   1, 2  Next »

Difference between SnG Sharks and Fish is 1$ in buy-in?  0   
I can't explain this to myself...at Full Tilt started grinding 2.25$ shark cool SnGs and got cold shower. I was down approx. 29 buy-ins (65$) after about 110 games. I think even regural donkey on this limit has better ROI than I recorded(-31%). With self confidence crushed, I joined the party at 1.20$ fish biggrin buy-ins. I think my game was ok - tight early stage and controled pushing maniac late stage. This seems to work on lower limit as I'm recording +31% ROI over about 110 games. Now ,counting in rakeback, I'm (approx.) only 10$ down from my original BR. Can it be, that players on 2.25$ shark cool are so much better than 1.20$ fish biggrin players?

Words in graphs:
http://img32.imageshack.us/i/displaygraph2.png/
http://img515.imageshack.us/i/displaygraphv.png/

Somebody please tell me what the hell is going on or I will be forced to call the poker god and tel him to go f**k himself

     
   0   
Call the poker god! And when you get him on the phone tell him to answer my damn calls because I have a few things to say to him. I think I may know what the difference is ======$1.05, otherwise I can't see how the quality of players is any different. Just like in NL2 to NL10, the only difference I've noticed in the players is the amount of the blinds!!!!!!!!!! Shock Shock

     
   0   
Man 110 Sit&goes are a pretty small sample.

You can't take any conclusion from that. It could be only variance or it coulbe be your game. Just keep playing to know Tongue

     
   0   
The results of 100 games are not enough data to say anything halfway decent about a winrate. Come back after 10.000 games.

     
   0   
Posted by shokaku:
The results of 100 games are not enough data to say anything halfway decent about a winrate. Come back after 10.000 games.


He is right Thumbs Up

     
   0   
maybe your problem is not about the buy in amount, but the way you play them.

U seem to be pretty confident and having not difficulties to win at 1.20$, but you describe yourself not confident anymore when playing 2.25$ wich is not very good when you play poker.

Of course there is a difference of skill between those levels, but not that much.
Are you sure you play your same good poker on 2.25$? Maybe you have leaks that you can corrects and maybe you create yourself leaks being afraid when buy-ins are larger.

     
   0   
It is very unlikely you'll encounter any sharks at these levels, and if you do they'll playing 50 of these tables at once and won't have the time to get tricky with you.

And as said, you need a lot more games than this to see if you are even a winning player.

     
   0   
Posted by Plexo:
Man 110 Sit&goes are a pretty small sample.

You can't take any conclusion from that. It could be only variance or it coulbe be your game. Just keep playing to know Tongue


Thumbs Up Agree

------------
Posted by Plexo:
Man 110 Sit&goes are a pretty small sample.

You can't take any conclusion from that. It could be only variance or it coulbe be your game. Just keep playing to know Tongue


Thumbs Up Agree

     
   0   
Full Tilt is now full of so many idiots its barely worth touching..

Personally I only use Full Tilt for freerolls and I wouldnt deposit another cent on that joke of a site..

Well being fair, its not the site that sucks, its the idiots playing it..

( oh and before anyone says I am just a bitter losing player, I have a +45% ROI on there, so thats far from the case..)

     
   0   
Play next 110 games plus 11.110 games and u will see the real statistic Smile
I absolutly agree with shokaku and Plexo.
And good luck! Dollar

     
   0   
Hi!!

You need to play much more than 100 games to see if you play its profitable or not, tell us when you play more than 1500.

Bye and aces for all!!

     
   0   
The donkeys on $1 games are same bad players as $2 games so its not that you crush the $1 and you cant crush the $2 ones. BUT....
You cant say anytin after 2 times 200 games, thats completely nothing, you can say a littl thing after 1,000 games $1 and 1,000 games $2 but better 2,000+ off both stakes.
So your sample size is just too small to say anytin.
Goodluck Thumbs Up

     
   0   
Posted by fcumred:
Full Tilt is now full of so many idiots its barely worth touching..

Personally I only use Full Tilt for freerolls and I wouldnt deposit another cent on that joke of a site..

Well being fair, its not the site that sucks, its the idiots playing it..

( oh and before anyone says I am just a bitter losing player, I have a +45% ROI on there, so thats far from the case..)


You're not the first I've seen state that. FT is the only site that truly baffles me with some of the plays I've faced. There are some really decent players playing NL10/25 as well so if you're not getting fucked by them, the 'luckers' will catch you out.





     
   0   
I not a little difference between 1 and 2 $ sng's, not that big, but you see that players gamble a lil bit more in 1$.
Anyway, doomdy is right : you should beat both limits.
maybe by playing a lil bit more sng's, youll see another ROI coming, a true ROI Blink

     
   0   
I think every Poker room sucks so yes my anserw is yes about that Tongue.
Anyway on lower limits people like to try out their lucky cards with all-in (even if they are lower then normal "good cards" at higher they don't... )

     
   0   
full tilt is the worst room ever one of my firends had to wait 14 days for a bank wire transfer that was only supposed to take 2-4 days

     
   0   
i dont think there are sharks at1.10 or 2.20 games thats just me

     
   0   

Is very difficult to study this type of play,

and although the studies and have very well learned,

in most cases the loser,

though I think is a estasdistica nothing more.

Sleepy

     
   0   
Perhaps you're over-analyzing. Yes, the statistics are useful, but what about 'luck of the draw'?

     
   0   
Posted by fcumred:
Full Tilt is now full of so many idiots its barely worth touching..

Personally I only use Full Tilt for freerolls and I wouldnt deposit another cent on that joke of a site..

Well being fair, its not the site that sucks, its the idiots playing it..

( oh and before anyone says I am just a bitter losing player, I have a +45% ROI on there, so thats far from the case..)


Ok, then you're not a bitter losing player, just an idiot. I only play @ PS and FT and to complain about the players on the site being bad is just silly, I rather play against bad players everytime. It's about money, not about 'fun' (for me).

     
Page 1 of 2Go to page:   1, 2  Next »

BankrollMob Forum » Poker Forum » Difference between SnG Sharks and Fish is 1$ in buy-in?

 
Forum Rules | Support & FAQ

Disclosure: BankrollMob may earn a commission based on the advertisement material on this site. #AD

© 2021 BankrollMob.com - All Rights Reserved CONTACT | ABOUT | PRIVACY & COOKIE POLICY | TERMS & CONDITIONS | NEWSLETTER | AFFILIATES | REPORT SPAM | ADVERTISING