ChessMan
07-27-2004, 04:10 PM
Hi,
I play 2-table sit & go's with $2.20 buy-in's. Top five places pay, $14,$10,$8,$6,$2. I've finished from 1st to 5th respectively: 6,7,5,4,3.
After I've played 10,000 games, should I be happy if the distribution looks like this? Or is it more common for a good player to skew more towards first.
Note that first doesn't pay that much more than second or third although there is a little jump there.
I tend to play very tightly, but aggressively bet those hands I choose to play. Sometimes I limp in good position early on in the game, and if the flop is reasonable I'll try to win some small pots without controversy, unless I have the nuts of course!
So I throw out a lot of Ax offsuit. I try very hard to get ITM at almost any cost. That means with seven to ten players left I throw out suited connectors if they aren't face cards, or I'll fold KQo preflop when faced with a raise or if I have terrible position, or just don't feel like it. Faced with any raise, it is very rare that I would call unless I'm holding a premium premium hand.
However, at the appropriate moment around 4th to 7th place, I switch gears and get very aggressive. Some fraction of the time if the small blind and big blind stacks are smaller than mine, I'll attempt steals on the button with all-in raises holding almost any pair or Ax. It seems to work as I was so tight earlier in the game, most seem to assume I'm holding a premium hand.
So there's a little about my style. I would guess that I should be happy with the slight skewness to the first and second places considering that I'm usually not one of the largest three stacks at the bubble?
Also, I know that this is a hopelessly small sample. I know it is no indication of future performance. I am only curious to know that if this distribution is maintained after 10,000 games, should I be happy with that?
I play 2-table sit & go's with $2.20 buy-in's. Top five places pay, $14,$10,$8,$6,$2. I've finished from 1st to 5th respectively: 6,7,5,4,3.
After I've played 10,000 games, should I be happy if the distribution looks like this? Or is it more common for a good player to skew more towards first.
Note that first doesn't pay that much more than second or third although there is a little jump there.
I tend to play very tightly, but aggressively bet those hands I choose to play. Sometimes I limp in good position early on in the game, and if the flop is reasonable I'll try to win some small pots without controversy, unless I have the nuts of course!
So I throw out a lot of Ax offsuit. I try very hard to get ITM at almost any cost. That means with seven to ten players left I throw out suited connectors if they aren't face cards, or I'll fold KQo preflop when faced with a raise or if I have terrible position, or just don't feel like it. Faced with any raise, it is very rare that I would call unless I'm holding a premium premium hand.
However, at the appropriate moment around 4th to 7th place, I switch gears and get very aggressive. Some fraction of the time if the small blind and big blind stacks are smaller than mine, I'll attempt steals on the button with all-in raises holding almost any pair or Ax. It seems to work as I was so tight earlier in the game, most seem to assume I'm holding a premium hand.
So there's a little about my style. I would guess that I should be happy with the slight skewness to the first and second places considering that I'm usually not one of the largest three stacks at the bubble?
Also, I know that this is a hopelessly small sample. I know it is no indication of future performance. I am only curious to know that if this distribution is maintained after 10,000 games, should I be happy with that?