by EscapePlan9 » Sat Jun 21, 2008 1:27 pm
Yes, they both are appropriate ways to measure "depth". The accepted standard for SNGs is BBs mostly because it's easier to calculate than with M and for SNGs gives you a better idea of when you need to start taking risks. With an M of 5 in an MTT you REALLY need to start making plays - in a SNG, that's equivalent to about 11x BB. You are not so desperate yet.
It's confusing to try to think of SNGs in terms of M, when most people associate M with Harrington's discussion on it in MTTs. And going by Harrington's M, you'd be taking more risks than needed if you use the "M" factor throughout the SNG.
I understand you don't think there's a significant difference and you're welcome to have that opinion. I would never recommend someone who wants to profitably play SNGs to think of their stacks in terms of M though.
Also worth mentioning that "serious" SNG players sometimes play more than 9 tables simultaneously. You need to make your decisions quickly, and again, BB is much easier to calculate.