TPFAP - Adjusting Strategy Because the Stakes Rise

The three reasons the book gives for adjusting strategy:


1. In the money or near it, tighten up with a short stack because others may bust out allowing you to move up the rankings.

2. The rise in stakes (soon) will equalize your short stack with other shortish stacks and allow you to employ your superior all-in tactics.

3. Early on in the tourny as advertising (by playing either loose or tight) to gain calls or folds when the stakes are higher and the rewards consequently greater.


The overall idea is to play tighter, not looser when your stack is short (except for the special advertising early in a nolimit tourny).


The book does not elaborate when you should loosen up and play more aggressively because your stack is getting short, in fact the first paragraph explictly knocks this idea on the head. But I have repeatedly read postings on this forum that address just that tactic, some giving actual hand rankings.


Am I missing something here?

I don't think you are necessarily missing anything, it's just a question of weighting the various factors properly.


The first point comes into play only in more specific circumstances than most people think. I think it really applies when you are moderately short-stacked but can still survive a few rounds, other player(s) are very short-stacked, and eliminating them will move you up significantly in £££.


The second point would apply a lot less to big-bet poker and I think that a lot of the posts you reference might well have been big-bet posts.


I'm not sure how the third point applies to short-stack play late in the tournament.


I think that DS is talking about adjustments that you make in specific circumstances to "normal" play rather than a set of catch-all guidelines. And "normal" play means that you have to play more hands when the blinds are big compared to your stack (see Theory of Poker).


Hope this helps,


Andy.

Tommy,


In TPFAP, Sklansky does mention one exception to your third point: when your table is soon to be

broken up, the loose plays discussed will be of less value because the other players won't be around very long.


perfidious

If your stack is very short, so short that while a raise by you now has some chance of stealing the blinds, but soon you will not have enough to do that, you often should pick a hand soon and go for it.


For example, if it's early in a stud tourney, and I've got (J4)4 with a couple of cards higher than J behind me, I'll likely fold. But, if I'm down to 5 or fewer small bets, I'll probably raise here. I know if I get called I'm probably behind, but at least I have some chance of stealing the antes/bring-in now, plus some chance of forcing a caller to fold on 4th or 5th street. In other words, some of my wins will occur without a showdown.


If I wait until I'm anted down to 1 or 2 small bets, it is almost certain that I will get called on 3rd and 4th streets, and will have to showdown a winner. Even if I wait until I get a big pair (and get one before being anted to nothing), if I can't make them fold, my big pair still has to hold up to win. AND, even when it does, since I only had 1-2 small bets in my stack, even after winning I only have 3-5 small bets. That is, my stack is no bigger than when I folded the (J4)4 hand earlier.


If you can fold your way into the money, then it is sometimes correct to do so. Sometimes, your stack is so short that last place money is big compared to your stack size.


But, if you can't quite fold your way to the cash, it is often better to go with a mediocre hand while you still have enough chips to make people fold than it is to wait for a premium hand.


Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)