Should I be playing large tournaments ie 600 players for a very small buy-in to get more practice or small tables of 6 - 9 player for a slightly larger buy-in?

4 Answers 4


I advocate starting off with the "smaller tournament" approach to start learning. Most of the money that you make in large-field tournaments will come from the few times you end up placing high at the final table. There is a huge difference in money between going out first at the final table and placing in the top 3. Thus I recommend first developing the skills to ensure that when you get deep into a tournament, you can maximize your chance of winning.

Play at a final table is well-mirrored by play in a single-table tournament (often referred to as a sit-and-go or SNG). Use them as a training ground to master the relevant concepts. Without that mastery, you will be unlikely to master final-table and short-handed situations anywhere near as quickly as SNGs enable, which will slow your growth and may well reduce your overall winning potential.


Definitely start playing SNG's (sit-no-go's). Great way to get used to playing full tables, and is a great emulation of a final table (since you start with 9 and play to the end with one table). Once you become able to consistently cash in SNG's, you can move to 20-40 player tourney's that help you learn how to grind and play with a greater variety of players.

  • A sit'n'go is any tournament that starts after a fixed field size is attained. It could be a 1 table tournament, or it could be much larger - many online sites offer 180 or 360 person SNGs. Jan 31, 2012 at 19:31
  • True. haha Playing on my phone has got me used to single table sng's.
    – Chris
    Jan 31, 2012 at 21:43

That decision will come down to just a few things. How much money you're willing to risk, and how much time you're willing to invest.

The buy-in is up to you. I'd suggest you consider your ideal conditions like...

  • How long can you focus for, to play your "A-Game"?
  • How much time are you willing to spend playing? 1 hour? 2? 5?
  • What pace do you enjoy? slow, inactive and time to think? fast, active and quick decisions to make?

If your aim is to improve, there really isn't a better substitute than playing low enough stakes for it not to bother you emotionally and simultaneously increase the volume of tournaments you play in. There are always cash-games as an alternative.

A simple tournament example would be a 180-man tournament (9 player tables). The intervals of the blinds are usually between 5-10 minutes per level, and generally this equates to about 3 hours of play, given the starting stacks that are common...if you are good or fortunate enough to win it!

I hope that helps. Good luck.


Most casinos and card rooms have lower attendance, lower buy-in tourneys. They are designed for the newer players. Most of these tournaments however are likely to have a percentage of regulars so you're likely to get a good mix from experienced player down to dead money.

In smaller tourneys what you're looking for is bank-roll management and learning how to deal with different types of players.

As always, the larger the buy-in the better the 'overall' calibre of player is. a $5 buy-in online vs 1500 players is very different from a $40 buy-in against 80 players at a hotel on the Las Vegas Strip.

Personally, I like smaller pickup tourneys (one or two tables) for starting out. You get to practice the game first and deal with table changing effects later.

  • A $5 online tournament probably has a much more skilled field than a $40 Vegas tournament, if you could even find one that cheap live. Jan 31, 2012 at 19:32

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.