Looking to move up in Buy Ins.

[natsgrampy]

Recently I have made some money in the ACR Special freerolls and through the recent uptick in Bitcoin. I usually play low / micro stakes tourneys ( up to $6.60 ). I would like to try some $11, $16.50, $22.00 games.

I'm looking for some thoughts and guidance on whether to play the large field, big guarantee games say, $25,000 or, the smaller field smaller guarantees, like $2500.
I realize, the percentage of payouts is basically the same. I was wondering if it would be better to play in a field of say 1000 vs. 3000. I'm thinking the smaller field is easier to navigate, but, the reward is less.

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

 

[JappsPK]

Regarding your question, it's important to consider your goals and bankroll when deciding which games to play. While larger field tournaments may have bigger guarantees, they also tend to have more players, making it more difficult to navigate through the field and reach the final table. On the other hand, smaller field tournaments may have smaller guarantees, but they also have fewer players, which can increase your chances of reaching the final table and winning a prize.

You should also consider the level of competition in the tournaments you are interested in playing. Larger buy-in tournaments tend to attract more experienced and skilled players, while smaller buy-in tournaments may have a mix of players with varying levels of experience.

Ultimately, it's important to strike a balance between taking calculated risks and staying within your bankroll limits. As you consider playing higher buy-in tournaments, make sure to do so responsibly and within your means.

Best of luck at the tables!

 

[Jamil]

Tournaments have rewarding prizes, but you must have free time for that, because they may last up to 6 hours

 

[PokerHunter21]

Regarding your question, it's important to consider your goals and bankroll when deciding which games to play. While larger field tournaments may have bigger guarantees, they also tend to have more players, making it more difficult to navigate through the field and reach the final table. On the other hand, smaller field tournaments may have smaller guarantees, but they also have fewer players, which can increase your chances of reaching the final table and winning a prize.

You should also consider the level of competition in the tournaments you are interested in playing. Larger buy-in tournaments tend to attract more experienced and skilled players, while smaller buy-in tournaments may have a mix of players with varying levels of experience.

Ultimately, it's important to strike a balance between taking calculated risks and staying within your bankroll limits. As you consider playing higher buy-in tournaments, make sure to do so responsibly and within your means.

Best of luck at the tables!

I completely agree with Japps, I guess to add onto this you're looking for more for some key indicators. Between low and medium and high stakes there are different styles of play to be aware of. You have to understand your opponents would usually be more experienced in medium stakes, usually in the long term. I would find a HUD that gives you stats on other players, that way you'll able to see if they're a regular players or not, this is particularly useful in cash games.. If you feel like you're dominating the smaller stakes or better than most and can read the table more often than not perhaps try some satellites helps saves cash.

 

[PINOY]

Check your win rate versus the field your playing, bankroll management like 250-500 buy-in for big field MTT.

 

[balo]

There are more variance in the larger fields so you would need a bankroll that can survive a bad run. I think I would play mostly up to 1000 player fields if possible. And add a few of the bigger ones. Good luck.

 

[AKQ]

Recently I have made some money in the ACR Special Freerolls and through the recent uptick in Bitcoin. I usually play low / micro stakes tourneys ( up to $6.60 ). I would like to try some $11, $16.50, $22.00 games.

I'm looking for some thoughts and guidance on whether to play the large field, big guarantee games say, $25,000 or, the smaller field smaller guarantees, like $2500.
I realize, the percentage of payouts is basically the same. I was wondering if it would be better to play in a field of say 1000 vs. 3000. I'm thinking the smaller field is easier to navigate, but, the reward is less.

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

do the 16.50 -33$ 2500 gtds
or honestly
hit the cash game tables and be a frikin nit with a side of lunacy of course!

 

[antonis32123]

If you feel confident about your skills , of your results are very good and you wave watched the action at the higher buyin games , then why not , go and play the higher buyin games with your increased bankroll .

 

[fundiver199]

It depends on, what you want. If you are basically looking to buy some lottery tickets, then of course the potential reward is larger in MTTs with a large field. But if you want to find out relatively quickly, if you can beat those slightly more expensive games, then its better to play in smaller fields. With that being said there are usually not that many tournaments available on a particular site. So assuming the plan is to play on ACR, you probably somewhat need to play, what is available.

Also I will say, that assuming the same site and same time of day, the larger field tournaments are obviously the more popular ones, and this often means, they are the softest. Its true, that maybe there are some professional MTT players, who play across multible sites and basically ignore anything with a price pool less than X or Y. But in general the way poker work, is that the sharks follow the fish.

So if one tournament is more popular than another, which play at the same time on the same site, then its because, more fish like the larger tournament. A good example of this is tournaments with or without bounties on pokerstars. Those with bounties generally attract larger fields and are also the softest assuming the same buyin and same time of day.

 

[spunka]

I dont think the field sieze is THAT importent as getting into the money will be roughly the same.
Bigger field more players get paid.

 

[Luvepoker]

Recently I have made some money in the ACR Special Freerolls and through the recent uptick in Bitcoin. I usually play low / micro stakes tourneys ( up to $6.60 ). I would like to try some $11, $16.50, $22.00 games.

I'm looking for some thoughts and guidance on whether to play the large field, big guarantee games say, $25,000 or, the smaller field smaller guarantees, like $2500.
I realize, the percentage of payouts is basically the same. I was wondering if it would be better to play in a field of say 1000 vs. 3000. I'm thinking the smaller field is easier to navigate, but, the reward is less.

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

Congratulation and good luck in moving up George. Wishing you the best of luck.

Personally, I like the bigger games sizes as they are so rewarding to win but to be honest the best way to go would be smalling player size games. The variance in the larger games is so much wider if you don't have the bank roll you are much more likely to go broke. Think about the colossus event we played in 2019. You and I went deep but when you look at what we won it was not even 4 Buy ins for me. that's the problem with the 3K player games. You could play for 2 years just to get that big score to get ahead.

 

[Poker Orifice]

Play both. There are advantages/disadvantages to each. By playing both you'll also get the best of both (lowering variance, playing vs. more weak players)

 

[kon44]

Yep, both as above... do both 👌

 

[eetenor]

Recently I have made some money in the ACR Special Freerolls and through the recent uptick in Bitcoin. I usually play low / micro stakes tourneys ( up to $6.60 ). I would like to try some $11, $16.50, $22.00 games.

I'm looking for some thoughts and guidance on whether to play the large field, big guarantee games say, $25,000 or, the smaller field smaller guarantees, like $2500.
I realize, the percentage of payouts is basically the same. I was wondering if it would be better to play in a field of say 1000 vs. 3000. I'm thinking the smaller field is easier to navigate, but, the reward is less.

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

Small field tournaments are the standard for Pro players who are grinding- they then mix in the large field tournies to their grind- By grind I mean of course more than Ten tournaments a session

A useful point about field size is that you will have to win many more flips in a large field to win than small field which means a far longer time period to get a solid return - So if playing large fields expect to lose or break even for several months before getting a score- it could be even longer than a year or two depending on variance.

 

[kon44]

@eetenor is right there but I’m speaking in concept. The constant SnGs I was playing live were the bread Andy butter for the cash game and larger entry games I used to play. Online is as I discovered a fair tougher and different ball game. In your situation, the smaller field returns will fund your larger field entries while keeping you comfortable.

 

[natsgrampy]

Thank you for your help. I think I'll go with the smaller guarantees. Even though the big guarantees are pretty tempting, I like the lower variance of a smaller field as some of you suggest. I'll let you know how I make out.

 

[makisaa]

If your bankroll allows these levels of buy in, then there is nothing to stop you to play higher. It depends from your game and your strategy.