1-table vs 2-table SNG

Hi everybody,

I'm playing some poker beside my education and found out the best way for me to be profitable was to play SNGs instead of cash. But the question now is should I play 1- table or 2-table SNGs?

Would it be wise to play the 1-table because of the 30% ITM chance or is it better to play the 2-tables with a 20 % ITM chance?

I found out that it's quite difficult to multi-table SNGs because you hardly get any reads on the opponents and therefore I gave the 2-tables a shot, because of the bigger price pool.

Can anyone give their opinion on the subject.

It's actually very easy to multitable single table SNGs, particularly turbos, because many of the decisions are very straightforward and it's rare that you have very sophisticated postflop play (ie. you're either all in preflop or all in on the flop except for levels 1 and 2).

If you want to multitable, you really need a heads up display to give you some of the information that you miss by not being able to watch every table.

I think he is talking about the advantages/disadvantages of playing 9 or 18 max...

Expect higher variance at 18 max, but if the field is weak, that can mean a faster bankroll improvement.

I recommend you to get used to 1 table first, manage push/fold mode...and then move to 2-table games.

Exactly Raoni_Poker, I'm already used to the 1 table SNGs and have a pretty decent ROI of 50% over 80 games, but wondered if the 2-tables would be more profitable than the 1 table, What are the cons and pros etc.

Originally Posted by CasualCasper

Exactly Raoni_Poker, I'm already used to the 1 table SNGs and have a pretty decent ROI of 50% over 80 games, but wondered if the 2-tables would be more profitable than the 1 table, What are the cons and pros etc.

Pros are that there is slightly more money to be made. You have 18 players (at Pokerstars) and 4 players cash. That gives the winner $21.60 for the same $3.40, up from $15 in a ten man or $13.50 in a 9-man (non-turbo). You may get some looser players who will make more mistakes at a two table than a single.

Cons include the fact that statistically you are less likely to be ITM. For instance in a 10-man you've got a 30% chance (without taking into consideration skill or any other factors) and in the 9-man you've got a 33% chance. In an 18-man two table, you've got a 22% chance of making it in the money. So your ITM should drop, but your ROI should increase. It's a matter of how much.

Another consideration is that a two-table SNG will take longer. How much time you have to play is a factor. For instance, a $3.40 SNG turbo 10-man will run about 30-50 minutes depending on the players. A 18-man turbo will run about 45-75 minutes.

I certainly suggest you try a few and see how they go. I don't play a lot of the 18-man because I felt I made more money playing the 10-man, but it's all about how you like to play.

Originally Posted by CasualCasper

Exactly Raoni_Poker, I'm already used to the 1 table SNGs and have a pretty decent ROI of 50% over 80 games, but wondered if the 2-tables would be more profitable than the 1 table, What are the cons and pros etc.

Congratulations on your nice results, but you're running way hot at the moment and your sample size is too small to draw any conclusions. Take a look at the FAQs if you'd like a guide as to what ROIs may be achievable over the long term.

As for your question about 1- vs 2-table SNGs (which I didn't answer), I agree that there are pros and cons of both. Generally speaking however, deeper stacked games tend to favour better players (and 2-table games are by definition deeper stacked since there are twice as many players) and I think there tend to be less hardcore ICM multitablers at the 2-table games than the single table ones.

Taipan -

That's a good point. What about Stars' 27- 45- 90- and 180-man tourneys? I know this is the one-table forum, but do you feel there are fewer ICM grinders in those?

Another factor to consider with the 1 vs. 2 table question is how much you depend on reads/info. I used to play 1 table exclusively because getting thrown into a different table at some random point screwed me up because my reads just vanished. My game is now at a point where this factor is much less important.

Kijjo - what do you mean about : "My game is now at a point where this factor is much less important."

Do you just ignore the reads and play the cards, instead of playing the opponents + the cards?

I think I'm going to try some of each and see how it goes, but you've made it clearer to me what the advantages and disadvantages are.

@Raoni_Poker, just watched your personal challenge, how come you chose to pay 20% rake instead of 10% on the SNGs you play.
I recently moved from one site to another, because the rake was 20% on the low-buy-in SNG's. So thaught why pay 20% rake, when I can pay 10%.

Originally Posted by dontezuma

That's a good point. What about Stars' 27- 45- 90- and 180-man tourneys? I know this is the one-table forum, but do you feel there are fewer ICM grinders in those?

I can't speak for the 27, 45 and 90 person tourneys but I have played a few hundred of the 180s, and there are definitely a number of multitabler grinders who have moved into those games. There once was a time when the 180s were new that a good player could achieve up to 100% ROI; these days that's probably down to 30%. Still plenty of donks who donate their money though.

I've said it before - the stars 45/90/180s are the softest MTTs around.

Regarding 1 or 2 table Sng

The 2 table Sng tend to be a bit softer in the 16-27 level then the single table ones especially when the $16 are full of mulittablers

However if you play the 2 table you have to have a good mid game shorthanded game

CasualCasper - basically yes. I've got PT3 which helps you gather info for quicker reads (though you still don't have much to go on when you switch tables sometimes at least it's something) and I think after you've played a few hundred of these and studied and analyzed SNGs, you reach a point where you know the odds, you know the math, you know the likelihood of what you're facing, the marginal situations seem to become easier to figure out and it becomes more about discipline of doing what you know you should do rather than what you'd like to do.
I am by no means saying I've mastered this game, I'm simply saying that at some point, the reads at the reads in SNGs become easier and easier to assess quickly.

[quote="taipan168"]

Originally Posted by CasualCasper

Exactly Raoni_Poker,

As for your question about 1- vs 2-table SNGs......... I think there tend to be less hardcore ICM multitablers at the 2-table games than the single table ones.

^^^^
this

In the micro limits $5 & under, you'll find the tables full o' donks. My guess is... they have trouble cashing consistently in the 9's.
Personally I much prefer the 9's. My suggestion would be to stick to the 9's but it's a matter of preference.

Originally Posted by CasualCasper

Kijjo - what do you mean about : "My game is now at a point where this factor is much less important."

@Raoni_Poker, just watched your personal challenge, how come you chose to pay 20% rake instead of 10% on the SNGs you play.
I recently moved from one site to another, because the rake was 20% on the low-buy-in SNG's. So thaught why pay 20% rake, when I can pay 10%.

I'm playing 20% rake because I'm trying to clear my 50$ no-deposit bonus. Therefore until I clear this bonus, I cannot move to another site.
In terms of making bonus points, paying 20% allows you to clear it faster, but variance can get you harder in losing streaks. Thats my case right now...I had 23$ profit and I'm now around 10$ profit.

Another thing i like to consider is to play 10 man instead of 9 man...the prize is better and always a donkey is elimined earlier anyway.