Qualifiers vs. Main Events

[Monty9]

Hello all,

Is it just me or are Qualifiers easier to beat than main events?

I have won 3 seats in the last 2 months to some of the BIG tourneys.

I don't do that well in the big events but I think that might just be variance etc. Other MTT's I play I am ITM over half the time and have gone deep a few times.

I don't play that many MTT's, maybe 3 a week, but I think I am like 3 for 5 playing the qualifiers. Maybe its the lower field that seem to be the trend in the Q's?

Any thoughts?

[SteveO]

Could be a few things. I don't play many qualifiers and prefer direct buy-in. But in the past, I stuck to the single table or 3 table qualifiers rather than the open MTT low-buy in qualifiers.

First, you are dealing with lesser competition for the most part. The big money will just buy in direct and not waste the time on a qualifer.

Second, people are playing for a low buy in and losing $20 is easier than $150 +. Also along those lines, look at your play. Are you playing a little more aggressive knowing that you have less to lose in the qualifer and then puckering up in the main event.

[michael1123]

By BIG events do you mean like the $200 Sunday tournaments or 5k+ buyin live events?

[drmcboy]

Many opps go tight a little early and aren't able to take advantage of the bubble like you probably are.

obv varience could be playing a role here.

Also depending on the amount of seats... you're dodging the "need a hand or two to hold up" phase. If there are 18 seats (example), you may never reach a point (as you pretty much always do in a FO) where you end up in a few huge AI confrontations where you either need to win flips or have 3-4 dominating hands hold up. That period of FOs add a lot of varience in - A2 beats KK about1 in 3... but if the seats are awarded before you hit that boiling point it should be a little easier to 'win' a sat.

[Monty9]

Yes Mich,

I am taking about the 200k & 500 k events.

and thanks to all that replied.