i dont care how soft the games are, im not playing a game where i have to have a 10%+ roi just to make more money than the site does, because fact of the matter is less than 5% of the player pool will be good enough to make a 10%+ roi, so majority of the winners are making less $ per game than the site. smh

Is the site still considered as soft as it was 6 months ago?

I don't care if they want to have 9.09% rake (or 10% if you want to say that) at regular speed SNGs, but if they do, then they should have lower rake at the turbo equivalent.

They should also scale rake by buyins - the only point they do this is at $200 6-max turbos - they go from 9.09% to 8.26%. Same thing with hypers, a $2 hyper should not have the same rake as a $150 hyper.

So, I'm fine with the highest rake level they have, other sites have the same level, but Global should be adjusting rake more for format/buyin differences.

Gotta judge for yourself imo.

10% sng rake on reg and turbo speeds isnt just me "wanting to say that" its a fact.

If a SNG is $10+$1, the rake is 9.09%.

$1 in rake divided by $11 in total buyin = 9.09%.

Really simple.

**
But this is why I put "if you want to say that"
Lots of people look at the rake that way, I just don't think that's how it should be calculated. It doesn't make a difference to this discussion though.

bro, it is time to move up

I get that you're trying to do this whole play x games at y stake thing, but there's no reason whatsoever that a guy that has a 17%ROI and 150$ roll ever needs to play a .50+.5 SnG. You're straight up refusing to take probably at minimum 2x as much money as you're winning now.

Back around 2009-2011 I was 2p2 friends with a guy who CRUSHED 10/20, 15/30, and occasionally 30/60 limit hold 'em games on Pokerstars, arguably the biggest winner on the site in those games, but steadfastly refused to play the higher games even though he was perfectly reasonably rolled for them. I kept hammering at him "play higher, play higher, it's time", and EVENTUALLY he joined the 30/60, 50/100, 100/200 games and took shots at 200/400. He basically instantly started making a bunch more money and became a high/nosebleed reg and ended up profusely thanking me for talking enough **** to him until he sacked up and moved up. I made my own games tougher by doing this but it was still easily worth it

Also, these days, we're likely getting reasonably close to the time at which solvers and bots become so advanced/available that the games become non-playable and online poker dies. Get that paper before that time occurs.

lol wat

Why in the plum hell do you care how much money the site makes? The site will always be infinitely richer than any player; talk about fighting a losing battle!

I get that the rake is too damn high, but, by refusing playing with these fishies, you're just cutting off your nose to spite your face.

seriously, being a massive bankroll nit while playing on a site with generally favorable conditions (soft action, despite the ++rake), is straight-up financial malpractice as far as I'm concerned

It's been a decade so I'm pulling the numbers out of my ass, but my buddy went from making something like ~65k one year to making like ~200k the next based solely on my advice to move up. The numbers will obv be smaller for small stakes SnGs but you too can probably make 2-3.5x as much money as you are now.

ah so thats your opinion. like i said, the rake is 10%, thats a FACT

Its a $10 sng with a 10% vig.

Ok, don't play. As far as the regular speeds it's the same rake I have payed since party poker in 2003. The question has always been how much can I make (more so when I was playing for a living). Party poker, stars, bodog, empire, etc, have all probably made more from my play than I was. With supernova elite on stars it was probably close to even, but I think they still made more.

But like I said, if you choose not to play because the site would make money from it then don't. Host some no rake home games and have fun. Whatever makes you happy.

I'm just not sure why you felt the need to share that decision with us.

Yeah, my opinion is that you lack a basic understanding of how rake should be calculated.

If you need a 9.09% edge to overcome the rake in a $10+1 SNG, how can rake be 10%? You don't need a 10% edge in a $10+1 SNG to break-even. You would have a positive ROI of 0.909% with that big of an edge.

It's weird that you wanna get so caught up in this little point I made, when for the most part, I agreed with you that the rake on Global could use a rework. I actually used some logic/reasoning for why it could be changed, instead of lamenting a 9.09% rake as insurmountable (it's not btw).

Yeah, that's fine. I understand why some people use 10% as the number for rake. I used the 9.09% number (because it makes more sense) in my original post about it and added a qualifier that I was referring to the same thing as HORUS when he says it's 10%. That's all.

I'd be all for a discussion on the actual rake situation on Global though.

https://prnt.sc/laws13

I'm in need of some advice on making the jump from the $6.60 9 mans to the $11 9 & 6 mans. I feel like there is very little skill difference in the player pool of the $11 vs the $6; more regulars for sure but overall skill level is very similar in my opinion.

I track my results in a spreadsheet but I'm a spreadsheet noob so I don't know how to use formulas to get info based on stake instead of just the total sng itm, roi and profit that the maker of the spreadsheet set-up. If I could maybe that would give me some more info to go on?

I use ICM Trainer from PokerStrategy.com in quiz mode for about 15 minutes before each session to get my mode right and I use it between sessions to study hands I was unsure of and to play with different ranges in different situations. Obviously I'm still a noob player but I feel like if I'm making enough good decisions to win at the $6 level I should also be able to win at the $11 level.

Currently I'm back grinding on the $6's building up the bankroll for some more shots at the $11's but in the meantime I was hoping that I could get some advice from the other Global sng grinders on how they made the jump to a higher stake level and I'd love to hear from some other $11 Global grinders who specifically made this same jump.

Thanks everyone!

There is a difference between "Rake" and an "Entry Fee"

Rake is taking from a "Pot" like in a ring game... $100 pot, $5 is taken out.

Entry Fee's are put aside separate from the player pool. Regardless of action, number of entries, or size of the pot, the Entry Fee remains the same.

I only play hypers, but if you can beat the $6 level you'll be fine at $11s. I'm not sure of that program you use to review ICM, but
eventually it will be worth investing in the holdemresources calculator, or ICMIZER. In terms of tracking, there's not much you can do other than check sharkscope results.

If you want to equate it to cash. The sum of the buy-ins is the "pot," and the entry fees are taken out as rake.

hodler is correct. $10+$1 is 9.09% rake. You could call it a 10% fee if you wanted.

Not sure why this discussion matters, though.

everybody talkin' 'bout some semantics regarding rake and ignoring my brilliant posts with regards to more aggressive bankroll management thus I am slightly tilted

hodler is technically right fwiw but allow me to assure you that moving up in stakes aggressively (always when you have an obvious skill edge, but even usually when not) is infinitely more valuable than ever worrying about rake

On that note I salute the player breakubad who is showing some ambition to move up. If you even bother to concern yourself with learning ICM stuff and/or thinking about poker beyond level 1 and/or messing around with software to correct the mistakes we all constantly make intuitively you are by definition +ev in low stakes Global SnGs so take shots at any time you are remotely reasonably rolled, and thank me later.

For people playing 25+ hours per week, I suggest periodically playing games above your usual, just to break the monotony, if nothing else. Increases the excitement and impact of all of your decisions, and delays burnout. This on top of the obv +++money effects of LAG BRM if you are a sound player.

OH SNAP I JUST SURPASSED JAREDPOKER FOR MOST 2018 SNG PROFIT

I care about this more than anybody ever should, especially for someone who has hardly played any SnGs in the last few months.

He'll probably have beat me by 12/31/2018 but I'mma celebrate.

I need to drink more of this smooth beer and get back on the grind asap

also I must laud jaredpoker for his dedication to the game -- he's always been massively underrated by the haters but he's obv put in some work and gotten a ton better as time goes on and is now arguably the best SnG player on the site

I often get the feeling when reading some of these posts of yours which are passionately defending or explaining some concept that you're really just trying to promote an environment that will keep you happier, longer. For instance, in this case, even if everything you say is true, I can't help but "hear" you also deviously, secretly thinking "and hey, if I'm wrong, still; let's get some of you noob suckas up to MY house! Especially in light of the "too many regs on Global" threads.

Anyway. Just an amusing thought.

I'd like to follow your advice but due to living in WA (i.e.: they cut me off from further deposits) and also poor BRM on my part with what $weeps I had left (playing $218 Sundays, etc, with like a $1000 bankroll that I couldn't replenish), I need to keep my risk of ruin extremely low just so I can continue playing. But also, I got no jobby job, and **** using this degree of mine, so I need to get them papers of which you speak. It's a tough balance, even moreso since I'm relatively new to the lower variance SNG grind.

Long story short, my poorly managed and unreplenishable $1000 was down to $0.65 from playing out-of-BR MTTs (and having the worst swong of my life) when I turned to my first SNG, having avoided them previously, since I had assumed the player pool would be better and more strat. specialized compared to MTTs. Now, after grinding $0.55s, and then $1.10 Mollys, then $3.30s, etc, for a few months (and withdrawing for some expenses; no choice) I currently have a working BR of ~$400 and ~1900 SNGs under my belt. Since getting up to about $250, I used a BRM calculator that considers ROI (11.3%) and ITM (40.6%), and it cleared me as "officially" being rolled to play up to $11 (but I have also been taking relatively frequent shots at $22s, and have done pretty well).

So, so far so good in the "risk of ruin" sense, but def not making what I need to be making even when playing a heavy schedule. So I'd love to play higher, but despite what you say, jumping to $33 or $44s just seems super irresponsible, considering everything I've said, and especially since according to classical BRM I'm being pretty reckless as it is playing $11 and $22s (although I do go down to $3.30s for "cushion", and play plenty of Maggies as well).

Anyway. Mostly venting/bragging but also wondering what you guys think re: when does **** really get tough compared to lower levels? For instance, although I do better when I really focus and play fewer tables, you often don't need to pay that much attention to exploit bad/worse players at $22 and below - I just watch TV and replay big hands, notice really stupid moves, etc, and (allegedly) play better by default at the various stages such that they naturally do themselves in at some point, far more often than not. Ideally against me but against someone else is fine too. Even the remaining players when shorthanded and blinds start getting high seem to be fairly exploitable more often than not. So at what point is this no longer terribly true? You say $6s and $11s are about the same, and I agree. $22s don't seem terribly tougher either, but can the same be said about $33s or $44s? Or above? (Ftr I only play 9-mans, and prefer non-turbos when available. No Hypers.)

Also, congrats. I guess. Dickhead. (<- Cause I'm jealous.)

Separately I'd like to also complain about how many gotdamn 4th places I get. This game is ****ing stupid and you are all stupid.

Agent 0027 (Codename: DarthLoudPack) 10/24/18
Operation Benjamins: Complete - 10/27/18

$3.30 buy-in sng's (6 entrant) x7, ($23.10 Investment)
$1.10 buy-in sng's (6 entrant) x20, ($22.00 Investment)
$1.10 buy-in sng's (6 entrant) x20, (Turbo), ($22.00 Investment)
$1.10 buy-in sng's (27 entrant) x2, (Turbo), ($02.20 Investment) (1/27) (4/27)
$0.55 buy-in sng's (9 entrant) x38, (Turbo), ($20.90 Investment)
$0.55 buy-in sng's (6 entrant) x14, (Turbo), ($07.70 Investment)
Daily $500 GTD $3.30

Starting Balance: $168.61
Total Investment: $101.20 (102 Games) ($1.007 per game) (7.29 entrants per game)
Ending Balance: $215.16
(+$46.55) (45.998% roi)

Operation 42: Objective
$3.30 buy-in sng's (6 entrant) x06, ($19.80 Investment)
$1.10 buy-in sng's (6 entrant) x06, ($06.60 Investment)
$1.10 buy-in sng's (6 entrant) x06, (Turbo), ($06.60 Investment)
$0.55 buy-in sng's (6 entrant) x06, ($03.30 Investment)
$0.55 buy-in sng's (9 entrant) x12, (Turbo), ($06.60 Investment)

36 sng's

Total Investment: $42.90 (36 Games) ($1.191 per game) (7 entrants per game)
Starting Balance: $168.61

Because its the global poker sng discussion thread?

can we plz add $5/$10 27 man, and $10/$20 18 man sngs to lobby, def think they would run.