Win More Or Win More Often

I've heard various poker players not want to sign-up for a daily tourney because they say there isn't enough players to make it worthwhile. I tell them that it's easier to win a smaller tournament. They usually say, "Yeah, but whatever."

So this got me thinking... Is it better to win more in a larger field tournament, or win more often in small field tournaments?

I decided to crack open my database, and crunch some numbers. In order to get a large sample size, I looked at all tournaments back to 2007, over three years, which is 306 tournaments. Here are some stats, broken down by entrants.

20 Players Or Less
Tourneys: 94
Cashes: 32 (34%)
Wins/Chops: 19 (20.2%)
ROI: 49.79%

21-40 Players
Tourneys:152
Cashes: 26 (17%)
Wins/Chops: 10 (6.6%)
ROI: 29.60%

41 Players Or More
Tourneys: 60
Cashes: 9 (15%)
Wins/Chops: 3 (5%)
ROI: -26.43%

I'm a little surprised by some these numbers. Obviously, the Cash% and Win% would be higher in a smaller field. I expected the ROIs to be similar, but the fact that they are so far apart is unexpected.

I think one reason for this is my larger buy-in events. I've played 20 tournaments that were over $200 and over 20 players, and I've only cashed in one of them for $802. A bigger score in one of these tournaments would probably put my ROI into the profit range.

Another reason could be that my tournament game needs some work in larger field events. I've played in 20 CPMG tourneys over 40 players since 2007, and have just one chop and a 3rd place. Twenty tourneys isn't a large sample size, but I should have better results than these.

So to answer the original question, is it better to win more, or win more often? Before I looked at the numbers, my answer was Both. Naturally, you want to hit the Big Score in a larger field tournament. But cashing more regularly in smaller tournaments helps reduce the variance of being a tourney player. I still think that's the answer, but it also depends on your style and you success in the different field sizes.