First 5 SnG's at 10+1

[skirtus]

Just wanted to say thanks for the advice. I was playing $5+1 SnG's at Paradise and moved to the $10+1 SnG's at Party. I placed 1st 2x , 3rd 1x, 4th 1x, and 5th 1x. I definitely could have played better but think I can be a winning player at this level. Im going to track 100 SnG's over the next few weeks and see if I can log a good ROI.

[HighStack]

Hey Skirtus::::: Let me know how you do with your 10+1's on Party, I'm playing at the exact same level on the same site. Took a step down from the 55+5's because I was doing very well, then started doing very poor and losing what I worked hard for. Decided to step down to less money S&G's and to keep reading poker books and discuss past plays and new fundementals with my sucessful friend who got me into this. (He's way above my level...$41,000 profit in less than 7 months)

Anyway, e-mail me if you wanna play at the same table sometime and discuss the results afterward, it's good learning.

later, Mike G. HighStack@verizon.net

[Jason Strasser]

This forum needs to get together and write a really general post that can be visible to all at the top of the page. Like a "Things you should know" about One-Table tourneys. Like really general bankroll requirements, keeping records and what types of sample sizes you need to draw conclusions, very general plays (10x BB all-in/fold), etc. I think it would help out people new to this forum a great deal, instead of having the same group of regulars echo out very similar advice.

Skirtus, 5 sngs are 5 sngs. Great job so far, but you can't draw any conclusions about your progress, because anything can happen in 5 sngs. Once you've played 100 or so, we may be able to see general trends and such, yet you'd have to play a much larger size than even 100 to calculate your ROI with <5% confidence.

[HighStack]

[ QUOTE ]
This forum needs to get together and write a really general post that can be visible to all at the top of the page. Like a "Things you should know" about One-Table tourneys. Like really general bankroll requirements, keeping records and what types of sample sizes you need to draw conclusions, very general plays (10x BB all-in/fold), etc. I think it would help out people new to this forum a great deal, instead of having the same group of regulars echo out very similar advice.

Skirtus, 5 sngs are 5 sngs. Great job so far, but you can't draw any conclusions about your progress, because anything can happen in 5 sngs. Once you've played 100 or so, we may be able to see general trends and such, yet you'd have to play a much larger size than even 100 to calculate your ROI with <5% confidence.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I actually did better at the $55 dollar sng's...the 10's are harder because the players aren't as good, so their methods of meyham are ofter unpredictable compared to the more expreience crowd. (IMO)

[Jason Strasser]

Man this is crazy talk, no offense.

There is no way around this. The players at a $10 SNG are much worse then players at the $50 level. Although there may be more variance at the $10 level, any normal player who plays ABC poker will have a MUCH higher ROI at the $10 level then the $50 level. Why would you ask for tougher players? The odds of having 2-3 more competent people at a $50 sng are much higher. Don't you want the crazies at your table?

[skirtus]

Thanks for the feedback. I do realize that 5 SnGs does not determine much about how well Ill fair at the 10+1 SnGs. Was just testing the waters and liked the results so far. They level of play at the 10+1 Party is not much better than the 5+1 Paradise. I look forward to playing a larger sample size and posting my results. I'm just excited about playing these SnG's. Up $225 by playing 7 $5 and 7 10$ SnGs. Im probably too optimistic about my long term win rate at these levels. Im sure 100-300 SnGs will bring me down to earth quickly.

[HighStack]

[ QUOTE ]
Man this is crazy talk, no offense.

There is no way around this. The players at a $10 SNG are much worse then players at the $50 level. Although there may be more variance at the $10 level, any normal player who plays ABC poker will have a MUCH higher ROI at the $10 level then the $50 level. Why would you ask for tougher players? The odds of having 2-3 more competent people at a $50 sng are much higher. Don't you want the crazies at your table?

[/ QUOTE ]

What's crazy talk? I don't play ABC poker anymore so maybe your comment wasn't for me??? Not sure....anyway...

I'd rather play with better players because they THINK before doing. If I'm playing with people that don't know what they are doing and why, in no way does it match my thought process before I make my move on them sometimes. That can throw my whole game off is all I'm saying.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
I think I actually did better at the $55 dollar sng's...the 10's are harder because the players aren't as good, so their methods of meyham are ofter unpredictable compared to the more expreience crowd. (IMO)

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL, I have never played a 50+5 but this is the sort of nonsense i might have come out with once upon a time. It's basically silly.

Regards ML

[Jason Strasser]

Being a good poker player, especially a sng player, is really about one thing: Adjustments.

You adjust to weaker opponents. You adjust to tight opponents. When the blinds go up, you adjust. When the number of players goes down, you adjust. When you find a type of hand that is hurting you over a large number of games (used to be 77-JJ for me), you adjust and change the way you play them.

If you are playing complicated poker, making calculated bluffs, and trying to push and bully 10+1 SNG players off hands, you have a flaw in your game. The bottom line is, they aren't going to think about their hands as much, and they aren't going to try to put you on a hand very often.

Adjust, you SHOULD be playing ABC poker at the 10+1 level, especially when the blinds are low.

Adjust to the level of competition, and listen to yourself, why would you want to play with better people? Because they think about their hands, when 10+1 players dont?

Please,
-Jason

[dfscott]

[ QUOTE ]
This forum needs to get together and write a really general post that can be visible to all at the top of the page. Like a "Things you should know" about One-Table tourneys. Like really general bankroll requirements, keeping records and what types of sample sizes you need to draw conclusions, very general plays (10x BB all-in/fold), etc. I think it would help out people new to this forum a great deal, instead of having the same group of regulars echo out very similar advice.


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree 100%. For example, I'm just starting out and I'm not sure whether I should be playing PS 5+0.50, PS 6+0.50 or PP 10+1 (or if it even matters).

[HighStack]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think I actually did better at the $55 dollar sng's...the 10's are harder because the players aren't as good, so their methods of meyham are ofter unpredictable compared to the more expreience crowd. (IMO)

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL, I have never played a 50+5 but this is the sort of nonsense i might have come out with once upon a time. It's basically silly.

Regards ML

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is what i'm saying nonsense, I don't get it? Why are you sounding so unpleasent over such a laid-back topic? Why are you sounding condecending in your wording? I just feel 3 parts of your reponse were rude for no reason that's all.

Adjusting to the newer less experienced players is hard for me and i'm admitting it to everyone, is that funny to you? Say something pleasent and relevent if you want to contribute. I'm sorry "my coach" so to speak started me off playing the heads up tables, then the bigger S&G tables first for the most part, and i'm sorry you never have. Hopefully this thread will continue peacefully as it was.

[HighStack]

[ QUOTE ]
why would you want to play with better people? Because they think about their hands, when 10+1 players dont?

Please,
-Jason

[/ QUOTE ]

Another polite ending to a post I see. And yes Strassa the transition to weaker players is hard for me. I'll ask you the same thing I asked the last guy, do you have a problem with me being 1/2 decent at understanding how good players tend to think, and being sort of confused at the decisions rookies make? Other than that your post was good except for the snotty ending with the sarcastic "please."

FYI: I post here to talk and understand the game better through conversation, not to treat anyone like their opinion or feelings are wrong.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
Why are you sounding so unpleasent over such a laid-back topic? Why are you sounding condecending in your wording? I just feel 3 parts of your reponse were rude for no reason that's all.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry it wasn't meant to be at all, see my post on the guy who called my AK with 82o, you will see I have the same problems, but better players are not going to solve them for me I fear. If I sounded condescending or insulting it was by accident, maybe I should work on my communication skills.

Best Regards ML

[Tosh]

[ QUOTE ]
I think I actually did better at the $55 dollar sng's...the 10's are harder because the players aren't as good, so their methods of meyham are ofter unpredictable compared to the more expreience crowd. (IMO)

[/ QUOTE ]

Total nonsense. Bad players are easier to beat than good players. FACT.

[Tosh]

Its not impossible that you are better at playing against ok players than awful players but that is likely because you don't know to adapt.

[Jason Strasser]

I'm sorry if the ending to my last post came across as snotty or whatever, that was not my intentions.

I understand a little bit of what you are saying, what I think you should do is look at your game in a simple way when playing 10+1. Just simplify everything. Adjust.

Sorry if "Please, Jason" rubbed you the wrong way. It was not my intention. I just think what you are saying is completely rediculous.

Peace,
-Jason

[HighStack]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why are you sounding so unpleasent over such a laid-back topic? Why are you sounding condecending in your wording? I just feel 3 parts of your reponse were rude for no reason that's all.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry it wasn't meant to be at all, see my post on the guy who called my AK with 82o, you will see I have the same problems, but better players are not going to solve them for me I fear. If I sounded condescending or insulting it was by accident, maybe I should work on my communication skills.

Best Regards ML

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks bro.....honestly i expect to get flack for my thinking, always have, always will, but i like to inspire other comments so I can learn from you guys. I'm not trying to be different to make anyone angry, what i type is simpley and truly what i'm thinking and how i play. Last thing I want is an argument trust me. take care

[mackthefork]

Trust me I've typed that more than a few times, always get the standard derisive comments. lol

Regards ML

[HighStack]

[ QUOTE ]
Its not impossible that you are better at playing against ok players than awful players but that is likely because you don't know to adapt.

[/ QUOTE ]

correct, exactly why i typed this right above, "And yes Strassa the transition to weaker players is hard for me."

[Laomedon]

Did I hear someone say, "Group hug?"

[HighStack]

[ QUOTE ]
Trust me I've typed that more than a few times, always get the standard derisive comments. lol

Regards ML

[/ QUOTE ]

Lol!!! It's no big deal and thanks for understanding. Just wanted everyone to know I refuse to argue and that's not why i'm here, I'm here to post, read, and take advice from anyone and everyone without snapping back.

Mike!!

[kbagge]

those of you who have been successful at 10/1's and 20/2's can you help to give us an outline of how to play successfully and how to adjust to the 'non-thinker'. I am used to playing NL 100 on party and mostly cash games

[HighStack]

[ QUOTE ]
Did I hear someone say, "Group hug?"

[/ QUOTE ]

lol, no doubt.... We're almost at that point huh? heh /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Tosh]

Yeah and I strongly recommend learning. Your profits will soar.

[HighStack]

[ QUOTE ]
those of you who have been successful at 10/1's and 20/2's can you help to give us an outline of how to play successfully and how to adjust to the 'non-thinker'. I am used to playing NL 100 on party and mostly cash games

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah that would be some great advice if anyone knows.

[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
Why is what i'm saying nonsense, I don't get it? Why are you sounding so unpleasent over such a laid-back topic? Why are you sounding condecending in your wording? I just feel 3 parts of your reponse were rude for no reason that's all.

Adjusting to the newer less experienced players is hard for me and i'm admitting it to everyone, is that funny to you? Say something pleasent and relevent if you want to contribute. I'm sorry "my coach" so to speak started me off playing the heads up tables, then the bigger S&G tables first for the most part, and i'm sorry you never have. Hopefully this thread will continue peacefully as it was.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think that the problem you are talking about here is common to many players. They feel they can read OK players pretty easily, because OK players have a tendency to play in a by-the-book, predictable manner, even if they are tight-aggressive (which is good), while total rookies, or complete low-limit "gamblers" are more tough to cope with, since they have no "rules", they are unpredictable, and also: they are not worried about getting the worst of it, repeatedly.

However, not being able to beat the fishiest fish at the lowest levels, because they are not "clever" enough, and not predictable enough for your taste, is a sign that you are yourself only an OK player, who cannot adapt well, and will probably have pretty hard time dealing with players who are a bit better than OK, i.e, players who have already develpoed beyond "by-the-book" play, and are, in a deep sense, unpredictable.

What is interesting here, is that there are 3 stages transition (this is EXTREMELY simplified, of course), which is circular in some tricky way:

1. Being completely unpredictable, and getting the worst of it (a fish).

2. Being OK-predictable-by-the-book (players who have hard time beating the fish and can somehow manage against other MORE predictable players, but not really.)

3. Being a good player, who plays UNPREDICTABLY against the OK players, but "PREDICTABLY-SMART" against the fish, who CAN'T RECOGNIZE PREDICTABILIY.

So, it seems you are now at stage 2. Only when you are able to CRUSH the fishy games, you are getting into stage 3.

Of course, there are many many stages in between, and also beneath 1st stage and above 3rd stage.

I mean all this in good spirit, and I truely apologize if it sounds too critical or harsh.

[HighStack]

I think that the problem you are talking about here is common to many players. They feel they can read OK players pretty easily, because OK players have a tendency to play in a by-the-book, predictable manner, even if they are tight-aggressive (which is good), while total rookies, or complete low-limit "gamblers" are more tough to cope with, since they have no "rules", they are unpredictable, and also: they are not worried about getting the worst of it, repeatedly.

However, not being able to beat the fishiest fish at the lowest levels, because they are not "clever" enough, and not predictable enough for your taste, is a sign that you are yourself only an OK player, who cannot adapt well, and will probably have pretty hard time dealing with players who are a bit better than OK, i.e, players who have already develpoed beyond "by-the-book" play, and are, in a deep sense, unpredictable.

What is interesting here, is that there are 3 stages transition (this is EXTREMELY simplified, of course), which is circular in some tricky way:

1. Being completely unpredictable, and getting the worst of it (a fish).

2. Being OK-predictable-by-the-book (players who have hard time beating the fish and can somehow manage against other MORE predictable players, but not really.)

3. Being a good player, who plays UNPREDICTABLY against the OK players, but "PREDICTABLY-SMART" against the fish, who CAN'T RECOGNIZE PREDICTABILIY.

So, it seems you are now at stage 2. Only when you are able to CRUSH the fishy games, you are getting into stage 3.

Of course, there are many many stages in between.

I mean all this in good spirit, and I truely apologize if it sounds too critical or harsh.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not harsh at all, great reading is all that was buddy. I agree with you and feel I am only an average player. I also think I missed out on a lot by moving to 55 sng's too quickly that's why i'm back tracking to the 10+1's and having a problem with these people. Thanks Mantis!

[skirtus]

There is alot of information in this forum and on the web that will give you some good strategies for winning at these SnG's. I personally play very tight until the table is down to 5-6 players. At this point Im changing to very aggressive play. Most of the $10+1 players I see dont play well short-handed and they will let you steal blinds like crazy since they fear getting knocked out so close to the money. Most of the time I have 30-50% of chips by the time it's down to 3 people. I think the best ways to improve your profit is to improve your short-handed and HU play. I seem to do well in these situations. Im knew to these so others can give you more experienced advice.