Why play SNGs?

[K2 the ArmA]

Why do you play SNGs as opposed to cash games?

[rm082e]

I play both, though I usually get on a run of one or the other. My wife noticed today that I'm back at sngs and asked the same question. I had to sit and think about it for a second, but what I came up with was this:

With sngs, there is a finish line. There will be a finite end to the game and someone will walk away with roughly 4 times what they bought in for (on the 1 table sngs). That's just a fact. In cash games, I often find that I will sit at a table for an hour and walk away with only a little more or less than I came in with. While it may be inacurate to think of it in those terms, that's just how my brain percieves it.

Mostly, I like to play cash games when my cards are running hot and I'm in a great mood, but any other time I like sngs since there is a set structure of gear changing. I have a hard time sitting at a cash game playing the exact same style for more than an hour.

[taipan168]

Because I find them more fun! I haven't played 6-max cash games but I find full ring BORING, it's all fold fold fold fold like level 1 of a SNG. It sounds sick, but I actually enjoy shoving ATC from the SB and being able to throw my stack around when the blinds are sufficiently big to justify it. Plus, as rm082e said, I like the way that you need to change gears from full table/low blinds to 5-6 handed/bigger blinds to bubble, ITM and finally HU.

Also, maybe this is self-reinforcing, but I am poor at playing the turn and river because most of my experience is at SNGs so I natually gravitate towards those games (turbo SNGs) that minimise the amount of turn and river play required.

That said, I do believe for an equivalent buyin (eg. $25NL = $16 turbos) that cash games are more profitable in terms of hours played, but that's a separate discussion that's probably already been done to death.

[MuddyWicket]

You get to beat 8 other people, have a duel heads up then walk away a big winner! I get such a buzz from sng that i just dont get with cash. The escalation of pace and aggression as the game goes on increases the excitement. And my last tourney had 44 hands heads up against the same person - I've never had that in ring.

[|~|ypermegachi]

i'm a much better SnG player over a cash player it's not even funny.

the "problem" with $/hr only comes in when you hit the higher buyins. at low buyins i think SnG is still comparable to NL cash in profitability.

[fdnypoker]

I like knowing I can put up $10 - $33 and play 6-8 people for a decent payout. Take the 2-3 donks out of the mix and you're looking at pretty nice odds to get INM.

That said....with the right bankroll you can probably make a better $/hour in a loose ring game by playing right. I've trippled up in a .50/1.00 NL game for over $100 in 5 hands. Van't do that in SnG's.

Also....with my limited BR I know I'm only going to lose my but in. There's something to be said for comfort level

[|~|ypermegachi]

That said....with the right bankroll you can probably make a better $/hour in a loose ring game by playing right. I've trippled up in a .50/1.00 NL game for over $100 in 5 hands. Van't do that in SnG's.

you also can't go the other way either.

[Fortune 500]

I play very tight in a cash game for a while... then I start loosening up and have it in my head that I need to accumulate every chip. It's a very aggressive nature.

While this is disastrous in the long run in a cash game, it's exactly what I need to do in a SNG.

[dsmrolla06]

Ive made alot more money playing sngs than i have ring. I recently started playing a little 6 max 50NL but i often feel lost with how to play with everyone having deepstacks. I think im making at least as much $/hr playing sngs than someone is playing ring at an equivalent buyin.

[Da GOAT]

i personally used less of my brain playing SNGs. I became a robot, i beleive ive seen so many spots again and again that it was just a case of my BR increasing before i move up. Now at Cash Ive refound a love for the game and love the challenge its giving me.

Whichever stimulates you more is more important

[Black Sheep]

I SNGs just because you invest less money then in NL, the thing is mean is that you can select the buyin and just lose that amount, nothing less or more. At NL you can loose like 5-10 buyins within 10 min.

[Random_Hero]

I prefer a tournament structure to cash games. I find cash games extremely boring. As Tai said, they are just like the first level of a SNG!!

Plus I love shoving my chips in peoples faces time and time again lol.

[baron_greenback]

I honestly can't play cash games. I need structure in my poker, otherwise I turn into a donkey, and sngs and mtts offer that. That migth eb a sad reflection on my personality, but it's the truth.

So many times I've wasted a month's good work at sngs after being influenced by others to go 'where the real money is'

[chipper5711]

I play SNG's a lot more than cash. Why?

1) I can start and finish an SNG in about 60-90 minutes and I normally win more often in SNGs than grinding in a limit cash table.

2) They are a LOT of fun.

3) A great way to practice your final table strategy.

4) A ring session never ends. An SNG has a definite ending. An SNG puts definite limits on how much you can lose and a set amount to shoot for when you win.

I'll grind ring games for a change of pace, but as a habit for me, NLHE 1-table SNGs are the way to be.

[K2 the ArmA]

I think we should be doing SNG experiments way more often.

[taipan168]

I think we should be doing SNG experiments way more often.

I agree that 's very valuable. The only problem is that for the person doing the HHs it takes hours and hours to put them together. If there was another way of doing it (whether some fancy script put together a la the tournament trimmer) or some replayer we could use (I know JeffreyGB made some mention of this) we could do it more often.

[K2 the ArmA]

Why don't we just have all participants post their HH in a thread after the SNG finishes then fill up the thread with commentary? We could use GBs tourney trimmer to have people post only hands they played in. I don't think that much information would be lost. It would certainly still be valuable. I would do it almost every day.

[Ghandii]

Great thread, was considering this myself recently. I make more consistant $ playing ring games but I keep going back to the SnG's for pure entertainment and challenge.

[taipan168]

Why don't we just have all participants post their HH in a thread after the SNG finishes then fill up the thread with commentary? We could use GBs tourney trimmer to have people post only hands they played in. I don't think that much information would be lost. It would certainly still be valuable. I would do it almost every day.

I think this becomes too cumbersome for people to review, to have to flip between multiple HHs to see what everybody had. If we want to do this we might as well just review a regular SNG.

One possible alternative to save time is for somebody to pick out the 15-20 key hands in the tourney where something interesting happened (ie. not just a regular preflop raise resulting in all folds). All the participants would then comment on just those hands, what they were thinking at the time, etc.

[K2 the ArmA]

Even without HHs it is still very valuable just to play against other players from FTR and discuss the game afterwards.

[Zee Devee]

Ideally you shouldnt cut out anything. I know one of my biggest problems is I get too distracted while playing and I dont pay attention so I dont really analyze who is playing tight/loose. By going through all the commentaries after each hand I like to know at what point someone considers someone pretty loose and not just on a rush.

[dsaxton]

Variance of SNGs seems to be considerably lower than cash games. They are more geared towards mathematics / chip-dependant strategy than psychology, which means they are more suited to my strengths as a poker player. There is a definite beginning and end, so they aren't quite as addictive and are easier to balance with my non-poker life. They're easier to play on autopilot. There is an unequivocal feeling of "victory" that I get from tournaments that I don't get from cash games.

Those are a few of my reasons.

[DemonDaze]

I think we should be doing SNG experiments way more often.

I agree that 's very valuable. The only problem is that for the person doing the HHs it takes hours and hours to put them together. If there was another way of doing it (whether some fancy script put together a la the tournament trimmer) or some replayer we could use (I know JeffreyGB made some mention of this) we could do it more often.

I can probably knock up an excel spreadsheet to parse the files and create the aggregate. Would just need people to mark the comments with characters not in the files, maybe curly brackets.

[K2 the ArmA]

I think we should be doing SNG experiments way more often.

I agree that 's very valuable. The only problem is that for the person doing the HHs it takes hours and hours to put them together. If there was another way of doing it (whether some fancy script put together a la the tournament trimmer) or some replayer we could use (I know JeffreyGB made some mention of this) we could do it more often.

I can probably knock up an excel spreadsheet to parse the files and create the aggregate. Would just need people to mark the comments with characters not in the files, maybe curly brackets.

That would be sick

[|~|ypermegachi]

I can probably knock up an excel spreadsheet to parse the files and create the aggregate. Would just need people to mark the comments with characters not in the files, maybe curly brackets.

welcome to the forums!! nominate for best 1st post ever!

[cfought32]

The reason I turned to SNGS was two fold:
1. The variance in cash games was starting to hurt. I just found it personally hard to make a $50 decision on one hand when playing NLHE $50. SNG's allow reasonable profit without risking so much money at a time. Admittedly I was play ring mostly to clear bonuses, if you loose your stack a couple of times, there goes your bonus and I don't care for Hold 'Em only No limit.

2. A lot of the ring bonuses have gotten to the point to where they are no longer attractive to me. I find I actually make more money per hour at nano limits than what I would make playing ring games. Just as an example Absolute Poker bonus averages .19 per hour per table at NL $25 (thats right only 19 cents!) I make more than that playing NL .50 +.10 SNGS (no kidding). So instead of playing ring I 4-table the nano stakes SNGs and I make more money and risk a heck of a lot less. Plus the clearing rates for SNGs and MTTs seems to be getting better combining a bonus with a rake back also helps.

[Roco415]

I enjoy sngs so much more and love figuring out what style people are playing....conservative/aggro...and i love to bully and make sick reads and raises on people who i know are bluffing because low limit sng players have very similiar tendencies across the board...

Also, if you multitable, it can be very profitable and if someone puts a horrendous beat on you, it wont really cost you such a huge amount as a cash game suckout would...

[Da GOAT]

cash is sooo much more interesting. Thinking its ''just like level 1 of an SNG'' is very poor thinking.

[dsmrolla06]

I play sngs cause i dont feel so lost all the time in them like i do in cash games... I dont think cash is more interesting just because it seems like the same thing over and over, but to each their own.

[taipan168]

cash is sooo much more interesting. Thinking its ''just like level 1 of an SNG'' is very poor thinking.

I understand your point, but can you elaborate?

[Da GOAT]

cash is sooo much more interesting. Thinking its ''just like level 1 of an SNG'' is very poor thinking.

I understand your point, but can you elaborate?

ok at request ill elaborate.

First of all:

SNG players DO NOT understand playing full ring. Most SNG player (notably at lower stakes) say they prefer playing SNGs though i doubt they have much if any cash game experience. Most comments above lack any REAL experiences of both games and they seem to be just relying on standard beliefs and stereotypes of each game to back up their theories. Also have the SNG players REALLY given thought to why they prefer SNGs? They havent really given cash a chance so how could their opinion truely count if they are totally biased in their beliefs.

Ok to get into some meat of the games.

SNG are finite:

This seems to be a major factor in the arguement. A SNG game is finite, there is an end. How much does this matter really?? It cant matter, poker is long term so how can playing thousands of SNGs really be more finite than thousands of cash hands.

Cash is much more flexible:

You can move from a tough table. Leave when you want, so often have i loaded up some SNGs and didnt want to play them after a few minutes. but i gotta sit there another hour or so, now thats BORING.

SNGs give sense of winning/satisfaction:

Cash doesnt? explain.if anything its more frustrating to play SNGs than cash. busting on the bubble is so much more of a mental block than losing some buyins in cash.

Both games have poor players:

But its cash where you can reload and still pick on the weaker players.

Better players at SNGs:

Its debatable but the best player are cash players i think. Most top players play cash. Its a little harder to exploit a weak player in SNG than cash, a poor loose player can end up playing correctly in SNGs while never in Cash. Factors like shorter stacks, changing blinds etc etc etc give you less opportunity to exract value from poor players.

You can lose so much money much faster at cash than SNGs:

Its coz you suck, sorry but unless Lee Jones has flicked the doombox to maximum capacity you do suck

Rant over. In conclusion the choice between games is down to personal preference but please think outside of the stereotypes before you choose.

[swiggidy]

SnGs are a good place to start because of the reasons listed here. Specifically I liked it because I knew I got to play for an hour for $1 (was doing the 45-man). If I made a stupid mistake it cost less than any ring game stupid mistake would cost.

SnGs are fun when you can beat up on stupid weak players by pushing any two. They suck to the point of throwing shit when you push KK and get called by QTo who catches his straight on the river. Or pushing 8To because it's mathematically correct, only to have the BB call with KK.

Also, maybe this is self-reinforcing, but I am poor at playing the turn and river

This is exactly why you should learn cash. My hand reading ability sky-rocketed after playing 6max (which may be better than full ring). SnG decisions are extremely mathematical. This should play to my strength but for some reason it doesn't.

My reason cash > SnG: Bigger edge

[MuddyWicket]

busting on the bubble!

All part of the agony/ecstacy of sng life. You start of with a walk in a gentle breeze then finish in a wild tornado. I hate leaving a tourney with a wimper, would much rather run around the room waving my arms in the air screaming 'who's the daddeh!' or ranting about the (obviously) bad beat.

[Irisheyes]

Deeper stacks = bigger edge vs bad players = bigger profit

Thats all there is to it.

[bode]

As someone who has played a reasonable amount of both cash and SnG's, ill give my input. I played around 1500 sng's from the $3.50 to $27 turbos and ~100k hands of cash games from $10nl to $100nl.

I think for beginners, SnGs are very attractive because of the fact thats been stated more than anything here: fixed amount of loss/profit. When i started this was exactly what attracted me. The amount of money i could lose at any given time was fixed. What i didnt realize at the time was that the amount of money i could WIN was fixed also. The "tournament" game made up for that in my mind because there was that finite point you could reach and "win" the game. Altough i hadn't played any cash games at the time, it just seemed robotic and boring that the game was static and played the exact same whether you played 10 hands or 1000 hands.

After i had been playing for about 6 months i had built up around a $850 roll from $100 and was beating the $16 turbos on Stars for a good profit. Then i went on a huge downswing where i went 2/25 ITM and both finishers were 3rds. Luckily about 1/2 way through my downswing i moved back down to the $6.50's or else my entire BR would have been decimated.

After taking a week or so off to cool down, i decided i would give cash games a try. Wow was i in over my head. Like several of you have stated here, my preflop and flop game was fine but when i got to the turn and river i was completely lost and would spew/not get enough value and ended up a -3ptBB/100 loser over 10k hands at $25nl FR. After this I switched back to SnGs and MTTs for a while before finally committing myself to learning 6max cash games at the beginning of this year.

So far in this quest im running 4ptBB/100 over 70k hands and my game has improved by leaps and bounds. Not only do i have a solit preflop/flop strategy, but my postflop game, hand reading, and ability to maximize value on hands has grown to where i am comfortable at the tables and am making atleast twice, maybe 3 times as much per hour as i was playing SnG's.

So this turned out rally rambley (sp?, is that even a word), but i guess what im getting at is that i think everyone (especially new players) should give both games a try because they both compliment and help develop your overall game.

[Local_Echo]

i think everyone (especially new players) should give both games a try because they both compliment and help develop your overall game.

I couldn't agree more here. I like SNGs because I enjoy the thrill of the tournament setting, but I think cash games give you more of a chance to develop your game in the later streets.

When I first started, I played cash games and I had some discipline issues because if I'd win a good amount, I'd leave early, and when I was losing, I'd stay longer. SNGs helped deal with that for me, where I can focus on a set of situations within a given length of time. This has, in turn, helped my discipline greatly and I feel confident I can return to cash games and focus more.

[|~|ypermegachi]

ok...i'm gonna be an outlier and just say that i think cash games are only more profitable because there is better game selection for more levels. there are plenty of $1000NL games to choose from, yet for SnGs...well there is none.

but if we're talking comparisons up to $100 SnGs, SnGs are more profitable. here's the math for a shorthanded table (where good cash players should have the most edge)

assuming 90 hands/hr, at a 6ptbb/100 winrate
you make 5.4ptbb/hr.
at $100NL buyin, after an hour you expect to have $100 + ($2 * $5.4) = $110.8

so...basically it's equivalent to a 10.8% ROI for SnG players. i'll leave it to you guys to decide if that's good or not....because IMO, 10% ROI for SnG players suck at low-mid stakes.

edit: fixed some dumb math mistakes, but the 10.8% conclusion is still correct.

[Miffed22001]

in any cash game at any particular time, i can make money.
In any particular hand in an SNG i cannot make money. I give myself a more likely chance.
Therefore i play cash.

The same applies with playing with horrible players. I only need one hand to break a fish, and i can reload at any time and keep waiting to get him. In an SNG i effectivly only get a percentage of his money and that is not guarenteed if i break him. Fish in SNG's are a means to an end, in cash they are an end in themselves.
Therefore cash makes more sense.

Also, SNG's are much more mathmatically based. You push cards, play cards the same all the time etc etc. We even have mathmatical insturments that calculate ranges for us to push etc.
In other words, a bot can play SNG's, whereas you just cannot do the same thing in ring games.
And as a final point, id argue that the worlds best cash players could cream SNG/MTT players and therefore when the money becomes less important than being the best, SNG's are insignificant IMO.

[Random_Hero]

Some very interesting points here. This has definately changed my mind about cash games!! I never really gave cash games much thought until now. I wrongly assumed SNG's were for me and so thats all I will play. However, reading this I think, once I've got my bankroll back, I'll learn how to play SNG's correctly then i'll give 6-max NL cash games my attention for a while.

Cheers folks!! man i love this site...

[GatorJH]

As someone who has played a reasonable amount of both cash and SnG's, ill give my input. I played around 1500 sng's from the $3.50 to $27 turbos and ~100k hands of cash games from $10nl to $100nl.

I think for beginners, SnGs are very attractive because of the fact thats been stated more than anything here: fixed amount of loss/profit. When i started this was exactly what attracted me. The amount of money i could lose at any given time was fixed. What i didnt realize at the time was that the amount of money i could WIN was fixed also. The "tournament" game made up for that in my mind because there was that finite point you could reach and "win" the game. Altough i hadn't played any cash games at the time, it just seemed robotic and boring that the game was static and played the exact same whether you played 10 hands or 1000 hands.

After i had been playing for about 6 months i had built up around a $850 roll from $100 and was beating the $16 turbos on Stars for a good profit. Then i went on a huge downswing where i went 2/25 ITM and both finishers were 3rds. Luckily about 1/2 way through my downswing i moved back down to the $6.50's or else my entire BR would have been decimated.

After taking a week or so off to cool down, i decided i would give cash games a try. Wow was i in over my head. Like several of you have stated here, my preflop and flop game was fine but when i got to the turn and river i was completely lost and would spew/not get enough value and ended up a -3ptBB/100 loser over 10k hands at $25nl FR. After this I switched back to SnGs and MTTs for a while before finally committing myself to learning 6max cash games at the beginning of this year.

So far in this quest im running 4ptBB/100 over 70k hands and my game has improved by leaps and bounds. Not only do i have a solit preflop/flop strategy, but my postflop game, hand reading, and ability to maximize value on hands has grown to where i am comfortable at the tables and am making atleast twice, maybe 3 times as much per hour as i was playing SnG's.

So this turned out rally rambley (sp?, is that even a word), but i guess what im getting at is that i think everyone (especially new players) should give both games a try because they both compliment and help develop your overall game.

GREAT POST!!!!

I too have gone through a recent downswing in SNG's and have begun experimenting with ring games. I noticed (actually DaGOAT noticed through some HH reviews) the same thing that you did in that I am either not maximizing value or spewing chips on the turn and river.

I do believe that a beginner who focuses on SNG's early while reading as many books as possible will lose less money than a baginner who starts in ring games. I also think that once a player gets to the point of "killing" SNG's that venturing over to ring games will only expand their skills which, in turn, could help if they ever went to MTT's.

[dsmrolla06]

Ive started playing some 6max 25 and 50NL, and have been at like -1bb/100 over about 20k hands. This is mostly the reason i play sngs... Im not going to argue which one is theoretically more profitable or who has the best players on average, but sngs or more profitable for me and i feel like i have a much larger edge in sngs against other players than i do in cash games. Im still trying to learn cash games and i feel like im starting to get better and am better than most of the people i play with. Maybe im just on a cash game downswing...

[Sheetah]

I vote CASH

#

Variance of SNGs seems to be considerably lower than cash games.

Are you sure about this? The way I see it it's the opposite. For ex. - medium stakes, cash player whines (2+2 forum) about 30BI downswing - most will tell him that 10 or maybe 20 downswing is possible but 30 is too much and he should reevaluate his game. Same thing - medium stakes SNG player whines about 30BI downswing - many will tell him that it is possible and not unheard of and that "SNGs are swingier than cash" (so I've been told).

#

ok at request ill elaborate ...

Props to Da GOAT - some very good points there.

#

Deeper stacks = bigger edge vs bad players = bigger profit

Thats all there is to it.

Exactly. Let's say that you play SNG with donks and you are twice as better than any single one of them and your edge over them is 67%. Most of the time you fold crappy hands, as usuall and when you finally get to stack him with 2nd best hand there simply aren't enough chips to really capitalise on this prime oportunity. And even worse, when it (as always) comes to 15BB- stacks you have no better option then to start pushbotting and the problem with this that when it comes to range vs range, your edge now drops to like 55%. You have just decreased your true edge significantly. And lower edge means swings will be bigger and you will tilt more often. And bigger swings means BR requirements go up. Think about that.

#
And when it comes to improvement as a player - cash rules and it's not even close. It's so common that good cash players do well in SNGs and at the same time good SNGs players have problrems with cash and usually get pwned on turn and river (like tai said).

###
Cash > SNG with only one exception: heads up. If you are HU addict (I am) then you should stick to SNGs bellow nl200 level cause the rake is too big and hard to overcome. That also means that nl$200 HU regs make much more $ than HU SNG $200 regs.

[silu73]

I used to play exclusively SNG’s. They had a definite timeline and they were great to boost a small bankroll. However, I think I have outgrown SNG’s. I believe that I can play a whole SNG without making a mistake and still not cash. It’s all on autopilot and my actions are almost identical in certain situations as I do not come across the same player as often as I do in cash games.

Now I play almost exclusively 6-max cash games. Besides a decent pre-flop strategy I suddenly need to make decisions on the flop, turn & river. I have to think on my feet and choose my actions according to reads, stack sizes, position, table image, card reading ability and to an extent my own two cards.

I still enjoy SNG’s and I do play them from time to time, especially when I’m drunk. But without disrespect to SNG or MTT player I believe that I can easier exploit a small edge in cash games and that it requires a deeper understanding of the game.

[Da GOAT]

Random hero has the idea i wanted to get across:

-Dont just put yourself in a single category, DO try to grasp different things in poker. Whether yo decide SNG or Cash KNOW that you are truely better off at one than just assuming.

Silu-nz and some others have talked about turn and river play almost absent from SNGs. Id also like to add another factor which you can rarely implement in SNGs, its playing the flop or turn while having to plan the following streets. This really made cash very interesting to me, im no longer autopilot.

dsmrolla brings up a point whether he meant it or not. SNG players cannot just start playing cash and profit. The 2 games DO NOT match. I had 2 BE months at cash at first and found it tough but in no way impossible. you will adjust tho.

Oh and this just popped into my head, Ive discussed this with tai abit when we were messing with $27 turbos. Since the $60s are SO tough and your edge is then tiny alot of good SNG players linger at $27s and multitable. Do you really want to be the guy botting 20+ SNG tables (again if you want money you do this).

And i cant remember who mentioned it above but i guess id agree that a beginning SNG player will obv lose less than a beginning cash player. You also limit the amount you win but i guess its not a bad route to go. Especially since beginning player dont really know exactly what they want from poker, they just wanna play.

[K2 the ArmA]

I'm glad this discussion took fire, I may give 6max a try in a bit here. Who wants to be my mentor?

[dsmrolla06]

I think just as a sng player needs to adjust to cash games, its similar for cash game players to adjust to sngs. Cash game players will play well in the first few blind levels, but its a huge adjustment when it comes down to bubble play and bullying a table and when the blinds get large relative to stack sizes. Im not saying any of you cash game players would be bad at playing sngs, especially not the ones that have been playing for awhile, but if you started out playing cash and moved to sngs i think alot of new players would not be aggressive enough with a low m.

[GatorJH]

Random hero has the idea i wanted to get across:

Silu-nz and some others have talked about turn and river play almost absent from SNGs.

dsmrolla brings up a point

Oh and this just popped into my head, Ive discussed this with tai

And i cant remember who mentioned it above but i guess id agree that a beginning SNG player will obv lose less than a beginning cash player.

I'm hurt

[Miffed22001]

I think just as a sng player needs to adjust to cash games, its similar for cash game players to adjust to sngs. Cash game players will play well in the first few blind levels, but its a huge adjustment when it comes down to bubble play and bullying a table and when the blinds get large relative to stack sizes. Im not saying any of you cash game players would be bad at playing sngs, especially not the ones that have been playing for awhile, but if you started out playing cash and moved to sngs i think alot of new players would not be aggressive enough with a low m.

i dont quite agree. There is little adjustemtn to be made by a cash player in an SNG especially at bubble time. Cards play themselves as do ranges versus stack sizes and calling pushes etc. The game plays itself, you can almost play perfect bubble ranges versus your opponents.
In a cash game the same just does not apply. There is really no implied threat in an SNG especially late, whereas in a cash game a good player is going to threaten an SNG player every single hand if he wants per the dynamics of the game.

[Da GOAT]

Random hero has the idea i wanted to get across:

Silu-nz and some others have talked about turn and river play almost absent from SNGs.

dsmrolla brings up a point

Oh and this just popped into my head, Ive discussed this with tai

And i cant remember who mentioned it above but i guess id agree that a beginning SNG player will obv lose less than a beginning cash player.

I'm hurt

lol i did look to reference whoever posted it but couldnt find the paragraph fast enough. sorry man. love u

[gingerwizard]

Havn't posted for a while but this discussion is just too good. I switched from SNGs to cash about 2 months ago and ive never been happier. I won't reiterate what the cash players have already said but I would like to add something:

I think for many if not most poker players, the dream is to enter that massive payout Mtt, and for just a few dollars take down thousands! Can a good SNG player (one who can't play cash) do this? No. Yes SNGs are good practise and invaluable experience for when you are:

a) Short stacked
b) Nearing the end of the final table,

But getting there and playing deepstacked is all about turn/river play. That is where the excitement of poker truly is. You can't bluff in an SNG. (aside from pushing when mathematically correct). You can't put together complicated moves. It's robotic, and safe. Deep stacked poker is complex and exciting and nothing, not even winning an SNG, can compare to the feeling of victory you get from reading an opponents hand correctly and duly stacking him.

I was up in scotland for the UK student poker championships last weekend. 25/50 first level, 10000 starting stacks, 45 minute levels. Best tourny ive played in. I woulda been lost without the cash game experience ive had.

[XTR1000]

i build my roll playing sng´s until i had the money to play 25nl. playing sng´s bored me in some way, letting mainly the blindlevel determine my style of play. when i switched to cash, i felt like i have more room to vary my game, lagging it up when i´m in good mood/running hot et vice versa.
I have more control when i´m selecting seats/tables, i remember how ugly a sng can develop with a lagtard to your left.
last but not least, i was frequently getting upset, when some donk pulled a stupid move on me kicking me out and i had no chance to take "revenge" in a monetary meaning, playing cash i hit rebuy and it´ll be easy to get my stack back and his.

[cfought32]

great discussion we have going here. Let's keep the comments coming. I have tried both SNGs and cash (15k hands of NL$25). I agree the games are very different and that one should ideally learn both. For building a bankroll from scratch I would recommend SNGs. If you are sufficiently bankrolled go for cash!

[dsmrolla06]

I think for many if not most poker players, the dream is to enter that massive payout Mtt, and for just a few dollars take down thousands! Can a good SNG player (one who can't play cash) do this? No. Yes SNGs are good practise and invaluable experience for when you are:

a) Short stacked
b) Nearing the end of the final table,

I have to disagree here. The majority of the time your in an MTT your not going to be deepstacked like you are in cash games. The only exception is just after the first hour of a rebuy tourney, or if you accumulate a huge stack early on. Being deepstacked in a tournament is still only 20-30 m and isnt close to the stack sizes in cash games. In the middle stages of a tournament its still going to mostly be preflop and flop play, because either you or your opponent will be all in by that point.

[Fortune 500]

I've played more than enough at both games to grasp the differences. I'm a winner at both types, but I think that cash games require more skill, naturally. Deeper stacks are trickier to play, whereas decisions at a SNG get damn near automatic after a while.

That said, there's a thrill I personally get in the "constantly on the edge of elimination" nature of a SNG that cash games just can't duplicate. It's not a financial reason, it's not a strategy reason... it's just what I enjoy more.

That said, I'll continue to play both, as well as splashing around at Limit, 7 stud, and Omaha... they're all different forms of poker, and I think you can sharpen different skills with all of them. I'm contemplating a move to cash for financial reasons, but my heart will likely always reside with SNGs.

[Tiresman]

I'm probably the odd one here in that I play mainly $6.50 18 and 45 man SNG Turbos and 1/2 LIMIT both 6Max and FR. I very seldom play NL cash.

I never get over the thrill of winning a SNG. I've only played about 230 since getting my account on Stars, but I have a ROI of 37%. Wild swings though, I need to be more consistent.

I usually switch what I'm playing when I have several bad sessions at one game, and then come back when I run cold at whatever I switched to.

I like them both and because they are so different it keeps you from getting easily bored.

[Chopper]

wow, quite the thread.

i play better in cash games, traditionally because i make fewer mistakes. the blinds arent going anywhere; therefore, neither am i.

i play SNGs when i'm feeling like opening a can of whoopass and LAGging it up a bit. lets me "blow off some steam" from the patience required at cash. also, fun to "change gears" in a SNG.

in cash, hard to know when to change gears because nobody is forced to play back at you.

[deacon_bluez]

For me:

SNG's, it's a matter of playing a game, which is a battle of wits with a definable winning goal. Winning for winning's sake. The money (at least at the low limit I play, $5.50) is usually secondary to winning within a framework. Similar to a game like backgammon or chess, you win to beat the other player(s).

Cash, I play to steal other peoples' money. It sounds crass, but it is just as fun to me as SNGs because of its unique strategy (which can involve choosing and switching tables, deciding when to stay or leave, evaluating new players as they enter the table, etc.) and I play cash with my bankroll in mind.

Also, cash is better when you don't know how much time you have to play. Nothing worse than a family crisis in the middle of a SNG.

I enjoy playing both.

[|~|ypermegachi]

just because i was a little bored and had to procrastinate from studying, i calculated the following:

the following are "equivalent" for the amount of money made per hour per table.

$5/10 LHE at 2BB/100.
$200 NLHE at 6ptbb/100.
$100 SnG at 15% ROI.

i'm assuming 80 hands per hour for LHE and NLHE, and 1 SnG for simplicity. for the purposes of this calculation, that's not really important as you will see.

it roughly comes out to:
LHE: $16/hr
NLHE: $19/hr
SnG: $15/hr

anyways, it's quite obvious that SnGs "peak" in profitability in terms of $/hr VERY quickly.

i'm looking at stars right now (3:30PM EST) and there are 7 tables running at $100 buyin and another 7 non-turbo for around 15. comparing to NLHE, there are 15 tables with >5 players for SH, and another 10 full tables, totaling ~25 tables. for LHE there are 15 shorthanded tables at 5/10 shorthanded...there appears to be no full ring at this limit.

as you well know...$100 SnGs are already considered "high stakes" with "really good players" with "10% ROI is killing the game." (i will ignore the $5k HU SnGs...there are under 10 games for SnGs >$200). compare that to $200NL and 5/10 limit....those stakes are only medium (and on the low end at that). add to the fact that you can multitable (more choice) much easier in cash games and we have a conclusion that they are vastly superior over SnGs in terms of $/hr.

so what ends up happening to the best SnG players?
a) they move to NL cash (limit is dead)
b) they play a lot of MTTs for the big cash, and supplement the losses with a positive stream from SnGs.

[K2 the ArmA]

just because i was a little bored and had to procrastinate from studying, i calculated the following:

the following are "equivalent" for the amount of money made per hour per table.

$5/10 LHE at 2BB/100.
$200 NLHE at 6ptbb/100.
$100 SnG at 15% ROI.

i'm assuming 80 hands per hour for LHE and NLHE, and 1 SnG for simplicity. for the purposes of this calculation, that's not really important as you will see.

it roughly comes out to:
LHE: $16/hr
NLHE: $19/hr
SnG: $15/hr

anyways, it's quite obvious that SnGs "peak" in profitability in terms of $/hr VERY quickly.

i'm looking at stars right now (3:30PM EST) and there are 7 tables running at $100 buyin and another 7 non-turbo for around 15. comparing to NLHE, there are 15 tables with >5 players for SH, and another 10 full tables, totaling ~25 tables. for LHE there are 15 shorthanded tables at 5/10 shorthanded...there appears to be no full ring at this limit.

as you well know...$100 SnGs are already considered "high stakes" with "really good players" with "10% ROI is killing the game." (i will ignore the $5k HU SnGs...there are under 10 games for SnGs >$200). compare that to $200NL and 5/10 limit....those stakes are only medium (and on the low end at that). add to the fact that you can multitable (more choice) much easier in cash games and we have a conclusion that they are vastly superior over SnGs in terms of $/hr.

so what ends up happening to the best SnG players?
a) they move to NL cash (limit is dead)
b) they play a lot of MTTs for the big cash, and supplement the losses with a positive stream from SnGs.

This is my favorite post so far.

[FlyingSaucy]

I play sngs because you can make money without needing to know how to play poker.

Seriously though, 6 max has taught me so much about post flop skills. (Not to say I'm anywhere even close to being a 6 max pimp.)
Anyone who wants to improve their sng game should be mixing in a few k hands of 6 max here and there. My ROI went up noticably since mixing 6 max into my routine. It used to sit around 18 or so, now it's up to 24.

[Jack Sawyer]

I play SnG's because I intend to become the most feared tournament player in history. Its in my "World Domination" plan/ blueprint.

Cash games, until I can put > $100,000 on the table without flinching, will be off-limits for me.

[Chopper]

I play SnG's because I intend to become the most feared tournament player in history. Its in my "World Domination" plan/ blueprint.

Cash games, until I can put > $100,000 on the table without flinching, will be off-limits for me.

good luck with that.

[Bozanic]

Hmmmm.... I play both SnG's & ring games. Uusally I'll start my session at a ring game, try to make a few bucks & then go play a SnG with it!...LOL.
To me, they're 2 completely different games. I usually need better cards to win in a ring game. Whereas in a SnG, your stack plays a much bigger role, as does the pressure of the rising blinds. I can win hands with middlin or marginal cards in a SnG as players are forced to play less than premium cards as the blinds increase & their stacks dwindle. There is no such pressure in a ring game. Different games.
When the cards are falling good for me, ring games! When they're not, SnG's! But I will admit one thing, I've lost some big bucks in ring games that just never happens in a SnG!....LOL. On the other hand, I've also won bigger bucks in a ring game!

[Jack Sawyer]

Hmmmm.... I play both SnG's & ring games. Uusally I'll start my session at a ring game, try to make a few bucks & then go play a SnG with it!...LOL.
To me, they're 2 completely different games. I usually need better cards to win in a ring game. Whereas in a SnG, your stack plays a much bigger role, as does the pressure of the rising blinds. I can win hands with middlin or marginal cards in a SnG as players are forced to play less than premium cards as the blinds increase & their stacks dwindle. There is no such pressure in a ring game. Different games.
When the cards are falling good for me, ring games! When they're not, SnG's! But I will admit one thing, I've lost some big bucks in ring games that just never happens in a SnG!....LOL. On the other hand, I've also won bigger bucks in a ring game!

I think you're right. Playing both freshens things up, and keeps your mind sharp. I'll start playing ring too, even if I can't put up 100,000 on the table just yet...

[Wikkiwikki]

For me SNG's mimic tournaments better than cash games. And, since there is huge money in tournaments thats where I want to improve my game. I feel SNG's develop you more as a player too, because there is more to worry about and learn. In cash games you can sit and play tight good solid poker and do fine as long as your getting your money in good your a winning player, which is great.
But, in a SNG or Tournament you need to develop even more skills, like dealing with the artificial constraints of increasing blinds and stack sizes ( in a cash game you just rebuy) but in a tournament you cant. So, short stack play is an important skill to learn, as well as dealing with people that are short, or on the bubble etc. None of this happens in a cash game.

Sometimes your in situations where you would like to steal but because the BB is short in a tournament you know he'll push all-in so you cant.. for example. So you learn to steal from medium stacks instead of small or large. (small might push and large can afford to call)

Now, there is nothing wrong with cash games and lot's of $ to be made there to, but I feel there is more to learn in a SNG.

[Da GOAT]

For me SNG's mimic tournaments better than cash games. And, since there is huge money in tournaments thats where I want to improve my game. I feel SNG's develop you more as a player too, because there is more to worry about and learn. In cash games you can sit and play tight good solid poker and do fine as long as your getting your money in good your a winning player, which is great.
But, in a SNG or Tournament you need to develop even more skills, like dealing with the artificial constraints of increasing blinds and stack sizes ( in a cash game you just rebuy) but in a tournament you cant. So, short stack play is an important skill to learn, as well as dealing with people that are short, or on the bubble etc. None of this happens in a cash game.

Sometimes your in situations where you would like to steal but because the BB is short in a tournament you know he'll push all-in so you cant.. for example. So you learn to steal from medium stacks instead of small or large. (small might push and large can afford to call)

Now, there is nothing wrong with cash games and lot's of $ to be made there to, but I feel there is more to learn in a SNG.

can i ask how much effort you put into cash?

[gingerwizard]

2 things:

1.) No way is cash a simpler game than a single table tournament. The blinds may be fixed but there is so much going on on all streets that the limited difficulty in managing rising blinds pales in comparison!

2.) OMG DaGOAT. Up to 7k already???!!!! How many months since you switched now 2? 3? Thats some going dude!

[Da GOAT]

2.) OMG DaGOAT. Up to 7k already???!!!! How many months since you switched now 2? 3? Thats some going dude!

Nov and Dec i played both games but was in limbo about poker future. Took cash seriously since Mid Jan-Feb.

[Zee Devee]

2.) OMG DaGOAT. Up to 7k already???!!!! How many months since you switched now 2? 3? Thats some going dude!

Nov and Dec i played both games but was in limbo about poker future. Took cash seriously since Mid Jan-Feb.

Wow. Way to go . How many SnG's did you pllay before you decided to switch?


And I pllay SnG's because right now I like the timing of it, I never know wne to leave the table in a cash game unless my money is gone. I feel that I am better at SnG's and right now Im working on building my bankroll, so I will stick to that.

[Wikkiwikki]

I make more playing cash games then SNG's. At least it's more consistent. One suck out in a SNG and you can be out, in cash you just rebuy and keep going knowing you played well and got your money in good. But SNG's and tournaments are unforgiving in this regard.
In a tourney you can play perfect poker for 3 hours and 1 suck out and you bubble out of the money with nothing to show for it .
In cash 1 hand doesn't really faze you. If you've been playing great for 3 hours your likely cashing a winning session.
I think the play in cash is generally tighter because people can sit and wait for great cards, because there is no pressure to act with small blinds.
I'm currently trying to improve my tournament game and so thats why I'm playing more SNG's lately, It just mimic's them better than cash does.