I started playing some $5 hyper ko 6max sng's (24man) and was wondering if they are beatable and if anyone has played a decent amount of games with a positive ROI?

The rake seems really high (5$ = 2.25+2.25+0.50$)

What are your thoughts?

This is my chart on it Should i try to play it more or give up? Im a lot down wih money.
Every tourney starts with 500 chips, after 2000 tournaments im down more than 200 000 chips.

Any advices?

It's a rake trap, they start off with 10bb's right, having 10% rake in those is just absurd.
You better play the KO sng's that have ~5% rake and starts with 25bb.

I don't have a model for KOs and PSKOs specifically, but I've found in normal tournaments the starting stack isn't as important as people think - as it just adds a few levels to the start of the tournament - 25BBs would normally be an extra 4 levels at the start before you get down to roughly the situation you have anyway at the start of a 10BB tournament.

The speed of the blind increase is far more important in determining the length of the tournament and therefore the value for money.

The fact it's 6-max helps though as you get to play more hands per blind increase than under 9-max.

Looking at it - the other factor to consider is the non-standard levels - many levels double the blinds - on average they double every 1.5 levels (depending on where you measure from) rather than every 3 levels as is more standard online - that means in effect you have 1 minute levels rather than 2 minute levels.

It should be possible to make money at this but only if the good player / terrible player is heavily in your favour - particularly if the others are playing way too tight and you can just collect blinds to insulate you from the variance of other people's shoves, the starting stack is M of 3.7 and doubtless some people aren't playing as if it is - but if there are any other decent player in it then no. To get to the money the field needs to half in size just over twice - you need to double up rather than bust something like 54% of the time just to break even after rake.

But if they added a 10/20/4 and a 15/30/6 level to the start of this then we would be 25BB deep for about three hands and 17BB deep for another three hands - it wouldn't change much and it wouldn't 2.5x the total value in the tournament.

Yes, this is the main issue, the starting stack size just adds insult to injury.

I guess 24-mans are marginally beatable, for like 5% ROI, which is fine considering how quick they are on average - a lot of the time you're out in the first hand and can load another one - and you can easily play 80-100 of them per hour (adding $3s if the traffic is lacking).

But I might give 6-mans a go, they do seem raked a bit more favourably and so a bit more profitable. Not much more profitable because the reg-to-fish ratio must be worse there.

I made full report of all sessions of this format. On 3$-5$ I could make more than 7$ just from rakeback an hour, but even I made winrate more than 5bb/100 I probably could not not be break even from the game. Unfortunately I can not say that for sure cos I was on big downswing and I did not want to spent more money to find it out. (there are 2 sheets)https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing

Where do you stand oh the common/used statment some players like to say that "Any form of poker is beatable" or "The game will always be beatable"? Do you agree? disagree? Cheers.

^It's truer than the majority on 2p2 think because you eventually reach a point where the stronger players see they aren't winning and go elsewhere. I don't think it's absolutely true though, because often you haen't reached that point and theres a constant supply of new regs just as there is recs, and often it's so close that you're just flipping coins anyway.

On another site I sometimes get tickets to play 10BB cash poker which has 1% rake. That's beatable - because you can get more of an edge than that - and also because you're not allowed to open more than 2 tables of it so you don't have tons of regs grinding it.

In a tournament you pay all the rake at the start and the rest is free - but if we model this one like a 16 man all-in knock out, all the money gets put in 4 times, so that would be more like 2.5% per all-in. What's the pay-out structure though? - because once you're in the money you're not flipping for all the money any more.

I am one of those people who favor larger starting stacks. I agree with what Lek said but I feel that the deeper stacks, even for a short while provides Regs with a much need edge that would be needed to beat the games for a "good" amount which I don't personally think is possible in this format

This is the payout structure:

1st $17.82
2nd $17.82
3rd $11.88
4th $6.48

I think we can get close to working out the rake in cash terms if we were to model this as a heads-up flippament

At first, your equity in the tournament is $108/24 =$4.5

Now imagine 12 players go all-in against 12 other players:

Round 1 - 12 vs 12 flip
Players finishing 13th-2th Equity is zero
Remaining 12 equity is $9

We repeat the process:

Round 2 - 6 vs 6 flip
7-12 final equity is $2.25 (the bounty they won on the previous round)
Remaining 6 Equity is $15.75

Round 3 - 3 vs 3 flip
4-6 equity is $6.66
last 3 equity is $24.84

Round 4 - positions 4-6 need to have another 3-way flip for 4th place money

Round 5 - positions 1-3 have a 3-way flip for equity in 1st-3rd + the bounties

Total amount of equity wagered
R1 $108 (12 pots of $9)
R2 $81 (6 pots of $13.50)
R3 $54.54 (3 pots of $18.18)
R4 $6.48 (1 pot of 6.48)
R5 $18.63 (they have $11.88 locked up, final battle is for 2x5.94 and 3x2.25)

So through this flippament the total pot size has an equity value of $268.65
The rake on this tournament is $12 which we pay at the start. 12 / (268.65+12) = 0.043 - in other words you pay 4.3% rake on this.

I'm not sure if that's beatable or not. I can beat 10BB poker with 1% rake on another site but even that's a bit swingy. The closest equivalent on PS is 20BB capped poker with a 4.5% rake, but that's on the heavy side and there is a lot more skill in playing 20BB deep than 10BB deep IMHO.