Given the massive variance involved in playing tournaments, if you are healthily bankrolled to play $1.10 - $7.50, is it really worth playing satellites in the same range? The guarantee usually being no more than two or three seats.

It's a part of tournaments I just never touch.

Anyone else?

Originally Posted by YogSothoth

Given the massive variance involved in playing tournaments, if you are healthily bankrolled to play $1.10 - $7.50, is it really worth playing satellites in the same range? The guarantee usually being no more than two or three seats.

It's a part of tournaments I just never touch.

Anyone else?

I agree. If you're properly bankrolled and capable of playing at that level, Satellites are pointless. The only time satellites do make sense is if there is a tournament outside of your bankroll that is really soft. If you can satellite into a $55 game with only a few attemptss at $1.10 then you have a reasonable chance of making some big money.
There's no point trying to get into a tourney that is clearly above your skill level.

I also think that it makes no sense to play satellites on an ongoing basis if you have a good bankroll

I play such satellites, it gives a ghostly desire to win something significant, and maybe not ghostly!

It's pointless to play for casual tournaments, but for some special events it makes sense to do

Whatever buy in your bankroll will allow, that't the highest target tournament you should play a satty too. So if you can do $7.50, you shouldn't do a satty to anything higher than $7.50, if you want to play them at all.

sometimes I play satellites if they have a lot of tickets for an expensive tournament.

Yes, I like mega satys where there's a bunch of tickets given away to a higher buy in than I would normally play. People often make mistakes near the end, going all in, whereas if they sat and did nothing they would be guaranteed a ticket.

for small bankrolls like mine, I consider satellites my best chance of getting the big hit.
in addition to better understanding the dynamics of higher levels of play.
It's just my opinion.

The satellite selector is essential. First, make sure you beat the tournament you're qualifying for. If you are sure that the field is right for you, then you must also cope with the composition of the satellite. After all, as a rule, the composition in the satellite is better than in the tournament for which you are selected through this satellite.

Originally Posted by YogSothoth

Given the massive variance involved in playing tournaments, if you are healthily bankrolled to play $1.10 - $7.50, is it really worth playing satellites in the same range? The guarantee usually being no more than two or three seats.

It's a part of tournaments I just never touch.

Anyone else?

I used to feel the same way, but after 888 Poker updated their software, its no longer possible to hide satellites from the tournament lobby. And being forced to see them I have actually started to play some - which I guess is also, what they were hoping for

The way, I have incorporated satellites into my game, is by playing satellites, which are for tournaments just outside my normal buyin span, and where the satellites price is then in the lower end of my normal buyin span. For me that means mostly playing satellites to 33-55$ tournaments with a price of 3,3-7,5$. What I gain from this is mainly:

* More variation in my game since a satellite bubble is something completely special
* More hands per hour by firing up a satellite rather than waiting for the next regular MTT
* Some satellites are rather soft
* Some satellites might offer an overlay
* Shot taking at mid level buyins in a more gradual way than by buying in directly
* Playing the target tournament feels a bit like a freeroll or reward to myself

Satellites dont make up a huge portion of my schedule though. Maybe somewhere between 5-10% at most. What I would not recommend is to play satellites for tournaments, that are either well within your bankroll or way outside your bankroll. If for instance you have a 1.000$ bankroll, there is no point in playing satellites for 5$ tournament, since you can easily just buy in directly. If on the other hand you play satellites for 109$ tournaments with a 1.000$ bankroll, then you are just gambling your money away. It might work sometimes, but so will buying a lottery ticket

satellites are profitable to play when the input is very high, because most do not understand, that time is also invested.

I would stay away from any satellites like in your example that only offer 2-3 tickets guaranteed. If you are familiar with satellites and have a solid satellite strategy they can be profitable but it is better to select satellites that offer a better payout structure some satellites workout at about every 1 in 10 or 1 in 15 get a ticket. With proper adjustments for playing satellites these can be good value but not any of those with hundreds/thousands players and only 5 tickets .... they are pointless waste of time imo.

If I had a bankroll for tournaments, I would hardly play satellites for tournaments with a $ 30-50 buy-in for $ 3-7. It is better to register for a direct tournament in less cheap tournaments.

Originally Posted by YogSothoth

Given the massive variance involved in playing tournaments, if you are healthily bankrolled to play $1.10 - $7.50, is it really worth playing satellites in the same range? The guarantee usually being no more than two or three seats.

It's a part of tournaments I just never touch.

Anyone else?

If the bankroll allows it, it is better not to play . You spend a lot of time and nerves on this , it is better to keep your mind straight to tournaments with a prize zone

Apparently, it depends on your skills, but personally I prefer satellite tournaments, as I think it is a great opportunity to make good money.

I think that playing satellites of that range will be worth it if you have a very good bank, otherwise the risk is very big and for only few entries, most satellites only guarantee few entries, unless it is a special satellite