Quantity or Quality?

[amatola]

You have $10 for the day - you don't play for fun and you do need the money.
The MTTS all start at the same time.
You are a decent, slightly above average player - but no poker wizard
Obviously, the question is what is more likely to give the best return on your investment ( time and money)


Do you:

A) Play 10 X $1 MTTs with a $200 gtd each
B) Play 4 X $2.5 MTTs with a $700 gtd each
C) Play 1 X $10 MTT with a $4000 gtd?

 

[Nafor]

The answer to this is always personal.
Can you crush the A's? If you can, but you can't crush the B's, stick to A's and so on...

 

[akmost]

Volume is a must for an MTT player no matter how good/bad he thinks he is.
A good player is possible not to get ITM in many consecutive tournaments or a bad player may have a deep run in a single tournament because he was lucky.

That's why we always look the long term results.
I have a question , you mean $10 everyday or $10 for one and only day?

Quality and Quantity are irrelevant in my opinion $1 and $10 don't have such a tremendous difference , in the micro ones($1) are super easier to stack off your opponents because they can't fold their bottom pair in a super wet board

Your thread reminds me this one which is mine , if you want take a look at the other member's opinions on that matter!
Go For A Massive Score or For Smaller Wins? - General Poker (cardschat.com)

 

[fundiver199]

If you have 10$ to burn and just want to have some fun, then play whatever gives you the most fun. For some that might be the experience of playing in the more expensive 10$ tournament. For others it might be getting to play 10 times as much in 1$ tournaments. Its not like, you are assured to come out with a profit, regardless which option you choose. The minimum bankroll requirement for MTTs is 100 times the buyin, so with 10$ you are playing with a budget, just like if you have a budget for going to the cinema. Its cool, if you win something, but its certainly not something, you can expect or count on.

 

[amatola]

For me C would be straight out gambling. B hedging my bets - there would be a good chance I would at least make min-cash in 1 - at least making double buy-in so $5. At A i would have a chance of making min on one and a good chance of an FT. sure payouts would be smaller, but I am more likely to increase my original $10 stake.

 

[barbados]

It seems to me that in this case it is better to choose the option A) Play 10 X $1 MTTs with a $200 gtd each. At least because there is an opportunity to play better in the next game if the previous one is unsuccessful.

 

[najisami]

As we all know, nothing is guaranteed in poker and more so in tournaments. That would make the 3rd option out of question except for a pure gambler.
Personally, I would start with two $2.50 tourneys, then move down to the $1 ones if I lose in both of them.
I know that my approach is so far away from what we call bankroll management, but considering the choices and the question, that's what I would do.

 

[ComfyPanda]

The key factor here is that all of the MTTs start at the same time. If you're only slightly above average your small edge will likely not translate to 10 tournaments at the same time. So while playing the higher volume of 10 1$ tournaments gives you better odds to cash/make a deep run when spread out over a session, the 4 2.50$ tournaments is the answer. Option C is pure gambling.

 

[amatola]

As we all know, nothing is guaranteed in poker and more so in tournaments. That would make the 3rd option out of question except for a pure gambler.
Personally, I would start with two $2.50 tourneys, then move down to the $1 ones if I lose in both of them.
I know that my approach is so far away from what we call bankroll management, but considering the choices and the question, that's what I would do.

ooh I like this one....

But they do all start at the same time...

 

[amatola]

The key factor here is that all of the MTTs start at the same time. If you're only slightly above average your small edge will likely not translate to 10 tournaments at the same time. So while playing the higher volume of 10 1$ tournaments gives you better odds to cash/make a deep run when spread out over a session, the 4 2.50$ tournaments is the answer. Option C is pure gambling.

Nice. I have a very average ROI - so A make sense for me - but yeah, for better players I am sure b makes more sense

 

[Luvepoker]

This is an interesting question. There is a problem with this thought. No mater what you play you may not cash at all. Most tournament pay out 15% it seams but you still if you cash on average 1 time in 6 and 2/3 games and not cashing in ten is very possible. To have the best chance overall I would play the 10 and $1.00 each as you are more likely to get something back. For the most likely to have a profit at the end of the day it might be the $10.00 game. Just cashing will make you a profit where cashing 3 or 4 times$ in the 1.00 game may still have you down for the day.

 

[maestro121920]

For me both. Haha. I need to balance both because everything in life needs a balance so it will go direct you in the correct path. In poker, it is just the same. Good luck to everyone who read this. God Bless

 

[nuttea]

You have $10 for the day - you don't play for fun and you do need the money.
The MTTS all start at the same time.
You are a decent, slightly above average player - but no poker wizard
Obviously, the question is what is more likely to give the best return on your investment ( time and money)


Do you:

A) Play 10 X $1 MTTs with a $200 gtd each
B) Play 4 X $2.5 MTTs with a $700 gtd each
C) Play 1 X $10 MTT with a $4000 gtd?

is it possible to combine thoughtful play and dense multi-tabling? More likely no than yes! Few people manage to do a detailed analysis of each current hand when playing at 12 or more tables. That said, you also need to play many hours a day for more hands played in a month. The brain simply will not have time to assimilate such a large amount of incoming information, it will also be difficult to follow, and even more so to write notes about the peculiarities of the opponents' game. Of course, you may be the one who will be able to play 3+ thousand hands a day, while also carefully considering your actions, but the vast majority of players cannot cope with this task.
Reducing the effect of dispersion. In particular, this applies to those who have chosen a lower limit and increased the volume of the game by one and a half to two times. The more hands you play, the faster the downstrokes will go, and there won't be much pressure over time compared to playing on a small number of tables
Getting more experience of giving. Plus, which can be useless if you are not working on the game outside the tables, and are not trying to introduce any innovations into your strategy. With the passage of time, and the accumulation of a large number of hands, it will be easier for you to recognize which adjustments in your game are better to exclude and which can be left.

 

[mariale_1990]

I think the best option would be "A" I think it would be the most correct if you only have that $ 10 and if you need the money, there are people who like to take risks and sometimes it works for them but other times not, I suppose you should evaluate very well with how much accounts, what you need to achieve and evaluate the pros and cons of all options

 

[sharipov8090]

If you have 10 dollars, I would advise you to play tournaments for 0.25 - 0.10 sit and go.You should not go higher, it contradicts your bankroll.

 

[theANMATOR]

This is a pretty cool question - however I don't like any of the options.
If the 1.00 buyins were the lowest available - I would not begin to play them until I had at minimum 50 dollars in my bankroll.

I didn't start playing 0.55 cent buyin events until I had built up $20.00 in my bankroll from grinding freerolls. And even then I was stepping out of my comfort zone for my BR, which was to have no less than 100 buyins for the largest buyin level I play.

I guess I'm nitty with bankroll management.

 

[MakTrue]

You have $10 for the day - you don't play for fun and you do need the money.
The MTTS all start at the same time.
You are a decent, slightly above average player - but no poker wizard
Obviously, the question is what is more likely to give the best return on your investment ( time and money)


Do you:

A) Play 10 X $1 MTTs with a $200 gtd each
B) Play 4 X $2.5 MTTs with a $700 gtd each
C) Play 1 X $10 MTT with a $4000 gtd?

Good day!
Interest Ask!!!
If I had 10 per game, I would have approached the largest tournament for $ 10 with high quality and concentration.

 

[perrypip]

If the money is important to you you want to maximize volume as that will minimize variance. So you should go for quantity. Option A would be best.

If you don't care about the money and just want entertainment you can take your pick whatever suits you best. Best for me would be option B.

 

[forrow10]

Probably I would play mixed MTT. In this case will try to play 5 MTT at $1 and 2 MTT $2.5
I think that playing 10 tournaments would be really exhausted

 

[PatriceM915]

Certainly, there are different factors to the answers. At 1 *, there is more chance if you fall into any of them. With 2 * you are more likely to win better prizes if you make it to the final tables. With 3 * you have only one chance and imagine taking an As As and going all-in and the opponent winning, then you would already lose your bank. I prefer option 2.

[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.54)][COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.54)][/COLOR]














[/COLOR]

 

[pcurley17]

i feel like its completely personal

 

[black and]

In my opinion, 10 tournaments with a buy-in of 1 dollar is the most promising option.