Since the lammers you win can be sold, you're still effectively making the decision to drop $10K on the ME. You can still say, "screw BRM. This is a once per year chance to play in a soft $10k." It could be that you're ++EV in the $1.1k, so that even a smaller roll can play them with reasonable RoR. If that's even an issue, you're under-rolled for the ME. Still, at that point you aren't having a serious BRM discussion. You're just gambling with a hoped for edge. If you've had a decent summer, you could decide removing these chunks of cash won't make you homeless. We're back to affording.
Quote:
Have you ever played in one?
Have a friend who is a SNG pro. I assume that the best 6 weeks of his year comes from people who have no business playing large buy-in STTs with pros like him.
Quote:
So it is theoretically good BRM, but in practice satellites will rarely give us a good ROI.
This statement can't be true, except for people with huge bankrolls. If your return on investment is low, you'll need a huge roll. I think another way to put this is that the satty itself could a good investment. The result is that you have to play a bigger tournament. If you aren't +EV in that tournament, you end up with problems. Even if you have an edge in that tournament, you're going to cash pretty rarely. As someone who is concerned about BRM in the smaller sats, you're clearly not rolled for the bigger tournament you just won an entry to. Compared to your normal stakes, the swings in the bigger buy-in are HUGE. Then the question comes down to, "do you care about bankroll in $0.50 entries?"
Quote:
If you have a budget, do what you like
Always thought about this with the old steps tournaments. Let's say you're a pro at higher stakes. How happy are you that all of the guys 3 or 4 levels down pool their money and send a random player up to play you? Assume you're pretty happy to have low micros guys in your games. As a $0.50 player, how happy are the $11 guys to have you show up in their game?