I've been playing hold em off and on for fun for about 2 years now,mostly SitnGos, and I've decided that I'd like to legitimately attempt to become a winning player. I'm not looking to get rich quick or anything like that, I plan on starting small with $50 and working up from there.

I've read these forums for a while now and just recently ordered two books that were highly suggested, Secrets of SitnGos by Phil Shaw, and SitnGo Strategy by Collin Moshman. They just arrived today and I am half way through Secrets of SitnGos, which talks alot about ICM and using programs to calculate it during live play. I've always played on FullTilt, but decided I wanted to start fresh after I studied the books for a while, so I had planned on switching to PokerStars. Since PokerStars banned SNGEGT, should I look to play elsewhere? Is it absolutely necessary? Are there any other programs that I should use?

What is the general rule of thumb about playing within your bankroll? What SnGs should I play with 50$? Any other general advice would be greatly appreciated.

You are new player and you have to be patient and solid. Don’t fall in love with your hands and be prepared to have a lot of bad beats.

With your bankroll I think $1 SNGs are good. You don’t know yet your variance and with about 50 buy-ins you can feel safe and play with your mind and not your emotions.

I’d suggest you to play in cash games but if you like SNGs… It’s ok.
The most important advice… STUDY A LOT and STUDY a lot.

Post hands and ask for advice.
Talk with other poker players.

Good luck!

FYP

25% rake? Is this true? Do they really offer $1.00 + $0.33 tournaments? Or even $1 + $0.25, if that's what was meant (20% rake)?

Obviously, if so, I'd avoid such a thing. But I find it hard to imagine.

on stars they have $1+ 0.20 SNGs so 20 % and they have $1 + 0.10 turbo double or nothing too so 10 %

I'm just wondering - I had to cash my bankroll and i'm only at 100$ now (up from 20$ again ugh) playing 2nl - I am pretty decent at SNGs, should I start playing the 3$ 45 mans to help with my bankroll and concentration? Or should I just stick to cash?

Ah, that's pretty bad.

Also, sorry to be technical, as it's still bad, but I reckon $1+ 0.20 is 16.7%, but tomayto tomahto.

The rake percentage is described as a percent of the buy in.

So if the rake is $1 and the tournament costs $10, it's a 10% rake.

If the rake is $.20 and the tournament costs $1, it is 0.2/1 = 20% rake.

I guess you can define it in whatever terms you prefer, but it would probably be easier for you if you used the same terminology as everyone else.

r u figuring in rakeback? and are you accounting for the likely bronze star?

true dat

Stay away from turbo's and double or nothing. Try to play the regular length games.

I think that guy is right in saying that 1.00 + 0.20 is 17% rake but that isn't what most people say around here.

If a pot is 2.00 and they take 5% rake, you get 1.90. If the pot is 1.20 and the rake is 17%, you get 1.00.

Uhh, you just said the same thing twice. You can't compare the rake in a cash game to what he is trying to say.

If everyone pays $1.20, the house keeps 16.7%, and we play for the rest, then it's more sensible to call it a 16.7% rake. In fact, that's exactly what it is.

The average player, playing this format, has an expected return on investment of -16.7%. Just like betting on an American Roulette wheel gets you -5.25%. In poker, your that's the edge you have to overcome with skill. In roulette... well, good luck!

Thinking of $1 + 0.10 as a "10% rake" isn't very inaccurate, just marginally so. As the size of the house take gets bigger though, this shorthand becomes less accurate.

If I played in a $1 + $1 tournament, for instance, the house take wouldn't be 100%. Clearly it would be 50%, and the average player would expect to lose 50% of their investment in such a tournament.

Thanks for comin' out. I said the same thing twice to prove a point- that you should treat a pot the same as a buyin when it comes to rake. 1.00+0.2 is 17% rake not 20%.

NO WAY!
It is bigger variance in MTTs.
Try $1 if you want or stay there you are!

+1 (Again variance...)

You are right in your calculations but you are talking abour the percentage of the rake according to the total amount paid but....
The 99,9% of the SNG players when they say "X%" they mean the "mark up". In other words the % that we add to the initial number. This is right too...

Now.. when we talk about cash games, we use the first way. In tournaments we use the second because it is easier.

Again.. you are right but we ALL describe it that way!

Why is this? I've been starting to get serious about poker for the last month or so now and have mainly been playing turbo $3.40 SNG turbos or SNG double or nothing turbos. Should I have stuck to the regular length games then?

turbos=increased luck, decreased skill factor. The longer the tourney, the more skill takes over.

SNG double or nothing turbos= double or nothing is a different beast to play. Its like playing for third place.

I'd honestly recommend if your going to play STTs play the 2.25 turbos on FTP. You can put in a bunch of volume and really learn the push/fold part of the game fairly quickly. Even with a BR of $50, as long as you know basic poker you can beat these fairly easy as their are only a few regs. This is where I started a while ago and they have helped a bunch.

Yes I have definitely noticed this with the DoN's, although I'm just trying to build my BR up at the moment and get a bit more confident with the game as a whole - double or nothings seem like an ok way to do this as they are relatively soft by the looks of things.

I will try the normal length games from now on then.

quit now while your still sane.

Rember.... The strategy in normal SNGs is different!

deposit 100 instead of 50, and play the $3 sngs. they pay similar rake the $1 sngs last time i checked