SNGs/TPFAP: What's early? What's close?

[parappa]

TPFAP says that you should avoid close gambles early in a tournament. Several questions:

a) what's a close gamble? 75/25 seems obviously not close. 50/50 seems obviously close. What about 60/40?

b) Is it ever "early" in a Party SNG? If so, when does "early" end? When you are at 10xbb? When the blinds hit 50/100?

Thanks!

[PrayingMantis]

It is very much dependant on the field. Againt tough opponents, who you know will not make big mistakes, and will hang tight up until pretty late in the game, you have generally a smaller edge, and therefore you should use more of what you perceive as small edges, early on.

However, against weaker opposition, that will play loose and bust each other without your involvement, you should generally be less willing to go far with smaller edges, early on. You don't really need it.

Actually, I believe that many times, these are the reasons why it might be confusing for lower-limit players to read posts regarding higher-limit SNGs, because sometimes the "optimal" play is VERY different, especially regarding aggressiveness in middle-late stages, but also regarding play and choice of hands at early stages of the game.

I know I havn't mentioned any numbers here (regarding how exactly early is "early", and how small is a "small edge", and what is exaclty "weaker opposition"), but that's because
it will get too specific, and in real life it is very situation-dependant.

[Sam T.]

Maybe it's because I'm not a math kind of guy, but I always took "close gamble" to be metaphorical rather than literal.

If it's early in the tournament, and I'm not sure what the right play is (for example if there are legitimate arguments for both folding both calling a particular hand), I'm more apt to take the conservative route and fold.

A metaphorical interpretation also allows you more flexibility depending on your opponents and the texture of the table. I'm not sure you can put numbers on this (though if anyone could it is Sklansky!)

[parappa]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe it's because I'm not a math kind of guy, but I always took "close gamble" to be metaphorical rather than literal.

If it's early in the tournament, and I'm not sure what the right play is (for example if there are legitimate arguments for both folding both calling a particular hand), I'm more apt to take the conservative route and fold.

A metaphorical interpretation also allows you more flexibility depending on your opponents and the texture of the table. I'm not sure you can put numbers on this (though if anyone could it is Sklansky!)

[/ QUOTE ]

That's what I've always done as well. I'm just going through a bunch of the headsup numbers and the question keeps nagging at me. I suppose that, if I had to put a number on it, I'd say I wanted 70:30 in the early stages, 60:40 around the bubble, and I'd probably be willing to go like 45:55 if I could when I got desparately short-stacked.

But of course PM is right. I think the 10+1s are quite variable and I range from tables where we're down to 6 in the first round to tables that I consider extremely tough. In the really wild ones, I feel like I can get in with a huge advantage and, since you can fold your way into 3rd with only one or two blind steals when you're lucky enough to get a table like this, I wait for a monster. But in the tough games (and I think there are tough games at the 10+1 level), I guess it's thinner.

All part of my futile desire to have an easy answer for every situation, I guess /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

[jah0550]

With the blind structure the way it is at Party, you have to push premium hands. Even if it's early in the tourney, I still push good hands.(ie TPTK or 2 pair...) Once the blinds go up to 25/50, you only have about 13 times the BB. I believe the only way to play on Party is to be extremely aggressive when you are involved in a pot otherwise the blinds will eat you up.

[parappa]

I'm going to try from the other end. Is there an easy answer if I rephrase this?

Q: Is there a stack/blind ratio in a tournament where you cannot pass up a +EV situation, no matter how marginally +EV? It seems obvious to me that a stack of 3xbb is this way, and I'm thinking that this is also true of a stack of 5xbb. When your stack is 10xbb can you still speak of passing up marginal gambles in favor of getting better ones later?

Assume 5-handed, everyone has 1600 chips and blinds are 75/150. Does it still make sense to talk of avoiding marginal gambles if your opponents are weak, or do you have to take every +EV chance you can get?

[KJ o]

I would have to say yes, it's correct to pass 51/49 situations with 10xBB, assuming opponents also have stacks aproximately your size (or less) and they are weak, i.e. at Party.

If you have 10xBB in the WSOP, you are in deep trouble. If you have that on Party, you have a pretty good chance of post-and-folding yourself into the money (not that that is the optimal strategy, of course).