Tournies or Cash Games?

[Werddown]

I've been bouncing back and forth from playing tournament poker (SnGs mostly) and low limit cash games.

I wanted opinions on which form has the most potential for consistent profit, and which form offers the better balance of fish / sharks... or if its completely even.

Are the fish more likely to jump right into cash games and try to win money, or play low buy-in to tournies for a small investment so they can play more hands?

It seems I run into worse players when I'm playing ring... Though I still run into a fair share of them on tournies as well.

It seems I run into bigger swings playing ring (obviously when I'm risking more of my bankroll at a given time, the swings are going to be larger when I lose the buyin)

I know there are good arguments on both sides, and I am just struggling to find which form of poker I want to specialize in.

Opinions?

[Pelion]

I think ring probably has the least varience especially if you are talking about MTT SNGs because you dont have to beat a whole table before you can get yer mits on any cash. You can get unlucky with a couple of 60/40s in tournaments when the blinds are high and bubble out with nothing after playing near enough perfectly.
In the end i think alot of it comes down to what type of player you are. If you are better at SNGs play SNGs and if you are better at ring play ring.
Player quality in the 2 is probably more to do with what site/stakes you are playing on than anything else.

[gengar]

Early on in my online poker life, I went through the same thing you're going through now. Usually, I changed whenever I had a bad streak of luck in one or the other. In terms of profitability, it just depends on the player quality you get. I used to do nothing but 4table $10 ST SnGs on PP, and $100 ST SnG were actually really hot for a week or two, but now I do nothing but 2/4 and 3/6 Bad Beat.

My opinion is that ring definitely has less variance, because it's easier to bounce back. A single bad beat isn't going to kill you like it might in a tournament or SnG. Also, a long bad luck streak may cost you more money in a ring game, but a long bad luck streak in SnGs will take a lot longer to make back - especially when you are at ST SnGs.

Fish are definitely more evident in ring games as well. For the exact same reason that you say rings are streakier, fish and less-skilled players play limit; they like the concept of big money. Reckless players love moderate limits too, because there is more chance of the quick buck. Essentially, they don't play poker so much as gamble poker. They hope for the lucky longshot nuts or two that will net them a lot of cash. This is particularly evident on weekend nights at PP, when you will often see desperate players at 5/10 SH who call out ace high or something similarly ridiculous and lose $200-300 in a cycle or two.

For me, personally, cash games often grind even when I'm making a lot of money. I suppose that may be because I'm a spoiled bitch, in that I play poker for enjoyment rather than to make money. I still pay very close attention to bankroll and I wouldn't play if I didn't make money, but I wouldn't play if I didn't like it either. (After all, I wouldn't play BJ/craps in casnos either, if I was just in it for profit.) SnGs and tourneys are what I enjoy doing, so I always make sure I have time for the latter even if they're more volatile. If you're out for the money, I still think limit is the way to go, but don't take it to the point where you don't have fun with it anymore.

[The_Bankroll]

I agree, LHE ring games are the way to go to make the most money. I do think that SNGs and especially MTTs are a lot more fun for me though, so I still enjoy doing those from time to time. I think if you want to be a really skilled player though, so should try to be at least proficient at both in the low levels