My regular game is bonus chasing on limit tables on various sites dominated by Europeans but as I tend to be up much later, I have decided to expand my game into Sit n Go tournaments once the other Europeans are in bed. I have chosen Poker Stars to do this on where I have $300 that is not being used. I intend to start at the lowest tables possible and work my way up through the levels, staying at each one until I have played at least 100 games at that level and made at least a 20 buy-in (including rake) profit.

Does this sound like a reasonable way of moving up and finding my level while gaining the experience I will need higher up? I plan to treat this $300 (plus future profits) as though it were my entire bankroll for these games and limit the maximum level I play at based on it being at least a 40 buy-in roll.

My real bankroll is currently between $7k and $8k (after a $1200 downswing - hence the desire for a change sometimes), with total profits being $6k above that so going bust with the sit n go roll won't affect my regular game, although it will be extremely annoying.

All comments or alternative suggestions are welcome

Is the goal to have a change of pace because you're tired of losing, or to learn a new game (are the SNGs NL?), or to learn SNGs, or what?

If you have the patience to play games that are below your "real" bankroll, then I think this is a great plan. Conservative with the roll is always good, and playing low limits when learning a new game is the way to go.

Good luck with it, and remember to post lots of hands for analysis.

Looking at my results so far, I thought the ROI looked very low compared to how I "felt" I was doing. Looking closer, I realised why. The tournaments are 9 man $1 + $0.20 so the prize pool is slightly smaller than a regular 10 man and the rake is much higher than many others. My stats so far after 91 games are

net profit : $8.70
ROI% : 7.97%
ITM% : 45.05%

I made some calculations and if the rake was $0.10 (standard 10%) and the tournies were 10 man (big assumption that I still get the same finish with the extra man but can't think of another way to calculate it), my stats could be more like

net profit : $30.90
and ROI% : 30.87%

I assume these figures look more like what I should expect although it seems it will take me more like 200 games to reach the 20 buy-in profit mark. Have I missed anything I should be taking into consideration here?

Playing 2 tables but staggering when I start them so that it is less likely they will both be in an endgame phase together. the $1 + $0.20 are regular tables, although the 10 player $3 + $0.40 that I see as my next step will be turbo. Should I avoid mixing these this early and make the regular $5 + $0.50 games my next target? Seems a bit of a large first step to take and would make the $10 + $1 the following step rather than the $6 + $0.50 turbos.

My ROI in all SNGs played in the past 2 years is 327%.....of course Ive only played 1 but thats beside the point. I think i can sustain that rate

If the posted figures from 2+2 are correct then players are wasting their time playing SNGs instead of cash games. The hourly rates on those posted figures are a joke unless youre playing 20 at a time and I doubt anyone can sustain thouse ROIs while playing more than 2 or 3.

The one SNG I played and won this morning was definately WAY tougher than what i remember from 2 years ago so I agree that my previous ROI is probably no where near sustainable anymore. I used to be able to fold my way into the money, literally w/o playing a hand sometimes.

Yeah, those were the glory days

I'd agree on the hourly rate stuff. I still kind of have fun playing them, though. As OP said, it's a nice change of pace.