lately i have been fooling around some with sngs playing turbos and and hyper turbos. for turbos i have been playing the 9 mans and hypers the 6 max. I've noticed that the rake is close to half the amount in the hypers compared to the turbos. My question is what are the realistic differences in roi's between the 2 formats. half the rake seems pretty significant and im curious what people think in terms of whether or not this makes the hypers more profitable over all or if the higher variance of the hypers nullifies the benefit of a lower rake.
Lower rake goes with a lower absolute (ie pre-rake) edge - harder for fish to make massive errors with very few chips, especially aggro fish which are more likely to play hypers. From what I know regs tend to have lower ROIs in the faster games, but can play so many an hour that they are making up for it in $/hr.
All that said, I don't really play them anymore so this could have changed.
It's actually a real positive that these fish are so loose and agro in the early stages of hypers. They are frequently committing ICM suicide at all sorts of times including the bubble. You can really nit it up (relatively speaking of course) and just be making money off them flipping garbage against garbage. A large part of my edge, when I played these for a little while, came down to turning down some clear Nash shoves in bubble situations when I knew that the opponents would be calling suicidally wide.
Imo the common consensus is that hypers make for a far better hourly these days (depending on the stakes you are playing and your winrate). I have no knowledge of the traffic for 9man turbos, but at $3.5/$7 stake hypers you can load up as many tables as you can handle and without game selecting expect on average 1 good reg, 2 regs that are barely winning players along with 2 huge losing fish. With this line up you can expect to achieve somewhere between 3-9% roi depending on how much work you put into learning good shoving/calling ranges by position, by stacksize and by proximity to the bubble(oh and by opponent types as well). These rois aren't far off what you can expect in $15 turbos in my experience (the top end of that range is possibly not achievable anymore) and given the much higher volume you can put in at hypers I think they would be my clear choice if I had to go back to SNGrinding today.
Another point is that I think 18man turbos are a better choice than 9mans but probably not majorly.
If you have a real preference for 9mans over anything then I'd say stick with them for the moment but you should be aware that the earning ceiling for them is very low at this point. A bunch of the most successful 9man turbo grinders ever have transitioned to other formats as there just isn't much to be made there.
mark bourdon
posted in
SNGs
Loading 4 Comments...
i think if the traffic would be as good in turbo , then turbo is the best
Lower rake goes with a lower absolute (ie pre-rake) edge - harder for fish to make massive errors with very few chips, especially aggro fish which are more likely to play hypers. From what I know regs tend to have lower ROIs in the faster games, but can play so many an hour that they are making up for it in $/hr.
All that said, I don't really play them anymore so this could have changed.
It's actually a real positive that these fish are so loose and agro in the early stages of hypers. They are frequently committing ICM suicide at all sorts of times including the bubble. You can really nit it up (relatively speaking of course) and just be making money off them flipping garbage against garbage. A large part of my edge, when I played these for a little while, came down to turning down some clear Nash shoves in bubble situations when I knew that the opponents would be calling suicidally wide.
Imo the common consensus is that hypers make for a far better hourly these days (depending on the stakes you are playing and your winrate). I have no knowledge of the traffic for 9man turbos, but at $3.5/$7 stake hypers you can load up as many tables as you can handle and without game selecting expect on average 1 good reg, 2 regs that are barely winning players along with 2 huge losing fish. With this line up you can expect to achieve somewhere between 3-9% roi depending on how much work you put into learning good shoving/calling ranges by position, by stacksize and by proximity to the bubble(oh and by opponent types as well). These rois aren't far off what you can expect in $15 turbos in my experience (the top end of that range is possibly not achievable anymore) and given the much higher volume you can put in at hypers I think they would be my clear choice if I had to go back to SNGrinding today.
Another point is that I think 18man turbos are a better choice than 9mans but probably not majorly.
If you have a real preference for 9mans over anything then I'd say stick with them for the moment but you should be aware that the earning ceiling for them is very low at this point. A bunch of the most successful 9man turbo grinders ever have transitioned to other formats as there just isn't much to be made there.
Be the first to add a comment