sit N gos or Mtts?

[Tmoney999]

I myself play quite a bit of each, I love running deep in a tourney, feels so good but I find sit n go's more of a quick, easy, relaxing game. Saying that I guess i would prefer to play sit n go's for profit, as I seem to win a lot more sit n go's than I cash deep in tourneys, even tho I cash fairly regularly, it seems like sit n go's are a more positive e.v spot for me. What do you prefer, a long grind in a tourney? Or a nice turbo sit n go? What stake do you usually play at as well and on what site?

 

[iPGaming]

I myself prefer MTTs but as of recently I don't really have that much time to play them so multi table SNGs or turbo MTTs are my go to games most of the time. Starting to learn a bit of cash games also.

Always loved playing MTTs but it can be way too hard sometimes. Going deep but not deep enough, wasting all that time for couple dollars feels bad. But once you bink you bink big there. I usually play micro(with some low) stake MTTs on PokerStars.

 

[Tmoney999]

I myself prefer MTTs but as of recently I don't really have that much time to play them so multi table SNGs or turbo MTTs are my go to games most of the time. Starting to learn a bit of cash games also.

Always loved playing MTTs but it can be way too hard sometimes. Going deep but not deep enough, wasting all that time for couple dollars feels bad. But once you bink you bink big there. I usually play micro(with some low) stake MTTs on PokerStars.

I agree, it seems like such a waste of hours of your time if you run deep and bust out towards, close, or on the money bubble. Yes time is a factor to me as well, but I also find sit n go's easier to win. I usually play 4-6 9 handed turbos at a time and cash in 2-3, for a small profit, unless I win then its a nice profit. If i lose i lose but it doesn't seem to happen as often as wins or small wins (2ND & 3RD)

 

[RasterGFX]

I myself play quite a bit of each, I love running deep in a tourney, feels so good but I find sit n go's more of a quick, easy, relaxing game. Saying that I guess i would prefer to play sit n go's for profit, as I seem to win a lot more sit n go's than I cash deep in tourneys, even tho I cash fairly regularly, it seems like sit n go's are a more positive e.v spot for me. What do you prefer, a long grind in a tourney? Or a nice turbo sit n go? What stake do you usually play at as well and on what site?

I like both, freerolls only at the moment. BetOnline. Take last weekend for example. I played the Sunday Freeroll top 50 get ticket to Step 1 sit and go. I finished in 25th? Then I played the sit and go and took 1st so I went to Step 2. Played that sit and go for almost 2 hours just 3 of us left and then I had the chipleader about to double me up all-in and he runner runner'd a flush.... heartbreaking. Didn't even get a dollar out of all of that. In total time spent probably 10 hours. Ughhh!!!

The worst was I qualified for a ticket to the $10,000 Hunter Tourney and on like the 4th hand had AA and instead of playing it smooth went all in and lost to 33 and flop gave a set, no A for me.... Total bummer. I woulda made out like a bandit if I just played it cool.

 

[fundiver199]

I like tournaments but often dont have time to play them. I will admit though, that sometimes it feel like an ineffective way to use time. For whatever reason a full ring tournament tend to play even less hands per hour than a full ring cash game.

So first of all, if I am not playing at least 3-4, or am already near the final table, I tend to lose concentration and start reading the forum or whatever. And second if you are card dead, sometimes you have hardly even been involved, before the blinds have gone up to a level, where it become time to push or fold. Then you run into a cooler, lose a coin flip or suffer a bad beat, and that was it.

With 6-max and Zoom taking a large part of the cash game market, I kind of dont understand, why so few tournaments are run in this format. Even though I am a full ring cash game specialist, my best result in a large MTT was actually a third place in a 4-handed bounty builder on Stars.

When that tournament finished after 8 hours, I have played around 500 hands, and because it was 4-handed, I had been involved in far more action with more chances to use my skill edge, if I had any, that had it been the traditional full ring format. So I kind of wish, these formats were more common.

 

[yoejslattery]

I tend to play the SNG due to the availability and time constraints.

 

[Transcendence]

Hi! Yes me, too, like SNG more! Went sat no late registration and re-entries, all fair, play fast much faster MTT. Although MTT is also cool here is where you can relax if you want a Poker festival that is MTT.

 

[NWPatriot]

I have come to the same conclusion. I love MTT's, but I seem to do better at the SNG's.

One of the frustrating parts of the MTT's for me is the uber long registration times (3 4 or 5 hrs) and the propensity for large qty's of re-buys and re-enters. I find it difficult to put in 4 hrs of time, and then have some guys willing to put in a buyin and play all-in bingo. Yes, they can do whatever they want with their money, but it is very frustrating for those who want to actually play poker. We are then forced to play their game, which is too reckless for my tastes.

As such, I seek out the freezout tournaments, but there are not a lot of these available, so I end up playing SNG's anyway.

 

[infonazar]

I prefer MTT tournaments. And most of all, I like PokerStars and 888.

 

[Erickaie]

I love to play in both, i play mtt to hopefully get a big win and i play SitnGos to hopefully get some good buy-ins for mtts

 

[MrPokerVerse]

My decision based on those two formats of games are time. If not playing a 90 or 180 man SnG then not lot of choice beyond that. Liked those 180 back in the day with PokerStars and Full Tilt as the loaded pretty quickly.

Sites I play on, you stuck with MTT for those bigger fields. Hard to get a single table to load these days!

 

[goaldriversv]

i mix up sngs, dons, and mtts. i don't play cash games so these are really the only choices. my main go to are dons and mtts though.

 

[LA PokerKush]

I myself play quite a bit of each, I love running deep in a tourney, feels so good but I find sit n go's more of a quick, easy, relaxing game. Saying that I guess i would prefer to play sit n go's for profit, as I seem to win a lot more sit n go's than I cash deep in tourneys, even tho I cash fairly regularly, it seems like sit n go's are a more positive e.v spot for me. What do you prefer, a long grind in a tourney? Or a nice turbo sit n go? What stake do you usually play at as well and on what site?

Good points, Tmoney, but honestly in poker, what feels better than 1st place binking a tourney? lol

 

[James_Harrison]

Alot of people would recommend starting out, building a bankroll in SNGs. I like huge tournaments because the more entrants the greater a chance that im not knocked out in last place. There are more places to shoot for

 

[Luvepoker]

I prefer MTT over SNG. A SNG is great is I want to play a short game but I just enjoy the longer tournaments. I say play what you enjoy.

 

[edenman1]

I play both MTTs (mostly freerolls) and alot of 10c turbo SNGs

 

[TeUnit]

I prefer sngs, but they seem like they are becoming harder and harder to find and take longer to fill.

 

[Cash2019]

Hello! I think it depends on which discipline will the best result. In order to win a big prize in the MTT, you need to get to the final table, in addition, large tournaments take a lot of time. Single-table tournaments last no more than an hour, and a player can play a large distance in a few days.

 

[flagstone]

I myself play quite a bit of each, I love running deep in a tourney, feels so good but I find sit n go's more of a quick, easy, relaxing game. Saying that I guess i would prefer to play sit n go's for profit, as I seem to win a lot more sit n go's than I cash deep in tourneys, even tho I cash fairly regularly, it seems like sit n go's are a more positive e.v spot for me. What do you prefer, a long grind in a tourney? Or a nice turbo sit n go? What stake do you usually play at as well and on what site?

I haven't finished top 3 in a MTT in so long, that I find my cashes in them are about the same as a sng anyway. You've got to get top 3 in a MTT to make the crazy time it takes worth it really.

As far as stakes go, I'm anywhere from 10 cents to $5 usually.
You can see people's preferred sites and their ids on their profiles.. just in case you hadn't noticed
Good luck at the tables!

 

[Tmoney999]

I haven't finished top 3 in a MTT in so long, that I find my cashes in them are about the same as a sng anyway. You've got to get top 3 in a MTT to make the crazy time it takes worth it really.

As far as stakes go, I'm anywhere from 10 cents to $5 usually.
You can see people's preferred sites and their ids on their profiles.. just in case you hadn't noticed
Good luck at the tables!

Yes its not really worth the MTT grind if you don't finish final table, and usually top 4. That's about the stakes i play to all depends, i haven't played much over 12 except for the odd MTT when i feel like i'm playing well.

 

[Poker Orifice]

Do they still have SNG's?
SnG's are what I started out on while playing online poker. (& MTT's). Then they started with the hypers.... and now it's the Spin's.
I'd love to see the 45man & 27man sng's make a big comeback! (ie. 5% rake might get a movement going?). Even just the old 1500 chip chipstacks like the old Fulltilt days. Those games were great!

Where do people play Sng's at these days? ... if I could find games I might give them a try some days.

 

[lcid86]

MTTs are a better format for me, but hard to find the time.

 

[TheDude6622]

SnG's have a lot less variance. If you feel that you have the patience to make it far and cash in a MTT, play those as well. It's good to mix it up.

 

[Elisondjp]

I prefer MTT tournaments. And most of all, I like PokerStars

 

[redmast]

I like tournaments with a small buy-in of up to $ 5 from 500 to 1,500 players. If I play the SnG , then for 36 people and with a buy-in of $ 1.2.