Coinflips in SNGs

[ericlambi]

Last week I took a very bad swing in SNGs, losing a ton near the bubble when I went all-in to try and steal blinds, was called, and my 60/40-ish advantage wouldn't hold up. I took a few days off, and played 5 SNGs at lower stakes than normal last night -- 4 out of 5 I was busted when I put my money in with the small advantage, one of those times I was already in the money. I realize that statistically, this is not a highly unlikely event, which is really why I have a problem with it. So here is my question:

Do the players here with good ROI/ITM somehow avoid these situations? I'm talking PP with low chips and very quickly escalating blinds.

What I've noticed is that people learn quickly that crazy play is not likely to get them good results in these tournaments. You always have a couple jackals or guys that are involved in every hand, but it seems every table I sign up for has between 5-8 rocks. In this situation, I am either not building my chipstack early to avoid coinflips, am not making proper decisions related to stealing blinds, or I just need to somehow accept that these coinflips are necessary (and maybe someday I'll win 4 of 5). By contrast in ring games on PP, the players are much more wild and it is easier to avoid these coinflip situations.

Perhaps I can frame the question another way:

Does the ROI of SNGs come from ones ability to reliably get into the top 5-6 and then make calculated risks at getting in the money?

Thanks,

Eric

[bigredlemon]

there seems to be a lot of rocks on PP these days. Most SNGs seems to still have 8 people left by level 4. It used to be heads up by then!

[1C5]

What $$ level are you guys talking about here?

[ericlambi]

$20-$100, but mostly 30/50. It is rare that in the first 4-5 rounds we lose more than 1 player per round, even at the $20+2. Once the blinds get in the 100+ range, things go more quickly.

Do other people not have the same experience here?

[Bigwig]

[ QUOTE ]
Does the ROI of SNGs come from ones ability to reliably get into the top 5-6 and then make calculated risks at getting in the money?

Thanks,

Eric

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, they are far better players on this board than I (about 20-25% ROI at $30's), but here goes:

Yes, most of winning SNG play comes from just surviving the first 3-4 levels, and getting the tourney down to 5-6 players. I would say that a majority of the time I get in the money, I'm still around my starting chip stack when the blinds get to significant levels (50/100). I play at stars, btw, so I'm talking about a stack in the range of 1000-2000.

Here's what I look for in coinflip odds:

Early in an SNG, I don't want to be all-in for all of my stack without a signifcant edge (like 70/30). That means KK or AA.

Further into one, I'll take 60/40. When the stacks are getting somewhat shallow (avg less than 30BB), I'll take 55/45. Short stacked, I want calls from JJ with my AQ. Etc.

[dtbog]

[ QUOTE ]
Short stacked, I want calls from JJ with my AQ. Etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you mean this in reverse, or do you actually mean that you're looking to go in as an underdog to gamble?

Honestly, if I push all-in as a short stack with JJ, I'd rather that AQ fold. I welcome the call from 99 or A8, however.

-DB

[esbesb]

"Does the ROI of SNGs come from ones ability to reliably get into the top 5-6 and then make calculated risks at getting in the money?"


I think this is a pretty good statement. Of course there are times when you are going to have a sizeable stack with 5 players left. Other times when you will have a low stack. But in most of these sngs, you're just going to have to win some 50-50s and 60-40s. Hey, the alternative is getting blinded out.

[raptor517]

when short stacked, he is looking to double up, so a coinflip situation is acceptable, though not ideal.

[Bigwig]

I'm talking about when I'm extremely short stacked, say 600 chips with 50/100 blinds, and the avg. stack is 2700 5 handed. At this point a call from outside the blinds gives you 11:9 on your money when with AQ and you're only an 11:9 dog against JJ. At this point, you don't have enough orbits left to expect to see a better starting all-in hand than AQ, and therefore you absolutely want a call.

[Bigwig]

[ QUOTE ]
when short stacked, he is looking to double up, so a coinflip situation is acceptable, though not ideal.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. Obviously, getting a dominating (7:3, 4:1) chance is ideal, but you're simply too low on chips to wait.

[Vetstadium]

I usually make it to final 5 6 and then sometimes just luck since I am a thief and want them blinds. I am around 20% ROI too which I would like to improve but fine by me. As long as I am making money, maybe they should close this site to newcomers so no one else can learn how to play.

[Marcotte]

[ QUOTE ]
But in most of these sngs, you're just going to have to win some 50-50s and 60-40s. Hey, the alternative is getting blinded out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe I'm taking this a little out of context, but I don't think a good (by 2+2 standards) player should have to win coin flips in most of his or her tournaments. Surely they will face some, but it seems to me if you have to win more than one coin flip in most of your tournaments in order to get ITM, your numbers aren't going to be that good.

My theory is that the good/great players use a strategy such that they avoid as many coin flips as possible. Can anyone support this with real world data?

[alexbrew]

If you hit a low limit table on PP with 5 rocks that play decently, you're going to have the fate of the cards cruelly determine your outcome some of the time.

I was in a game yestday where 4 of us made it to 500/1000 blinds. It was ridiculously stupid. If you couldn't steal the blinds at least once each button pass you were pretty much done.

[Mr_J]

Yep I'm constantly facing 8-9 players into level 4. Then a few usually drop like flies and blinds are 200/400 by the time I get to the bubble.

[Bigwig]

[ QUOTE ]
but I don't think a good player should have to win coin flips in most of his or her tournaments....Surely they will face some

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a bit contradictory. Do you see why?

[/sklansky]

[ QUOTE ]
My theory is that the good/great players use a strategy such that they avoid as many coin flips as possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course. But this isn't ESP. You put opponents on a range of hands, such as AA-77, AKs-ATs, AK-AJ, KQ-KJs, KQ. If you hold QQ, you have about 63% equity here, and that's pretty good, certainly worth a reraise all-in in many tourney situations. But sometimes, when you get called by AKs, and guess what, that's a coinflip.

The idea isn't to never have coinflips, it's to minimize them. But there are certain situations where a coinflip is welcome, such as when you're extremely short stacked and not yet to the bubble, or when you're a big stack and you're getting odds on an all-in from a shorty who's only putting 20% of your chips at risk.

[Mr_J]

I'm in the same spot right now, just moved up to $50s and am 12/15 OTM right now. 60% of those have been busted on the bubble, and just 20% ITM. The "coinflips" (usually better than that) just haven't been going my way. I don't think you can really do anything about it, but just keep playing and hope that longterm results reflect your probabilities.

[Mr_J]

I should point out that I'm actually even though I'm 13/17 OTM.

[Greg Zabawa]

You simply cannot avoid situations on the bubble where you may only be a 60-65% favorite. For example, today I had AKs twice with 4 people left, got all my chips in with 1 caller and got sucked out on by A3 and QJ. The blinds move so fast that these situations are unavoidable a lot of the time unless you double up early and can avoid, which will happen 1 in 5 times if you're lucky. It is usually how I fare us these 60-40 matchups that determines my success for the session. If I'm actually winning 60% of these, then I usually have a decent session, but it honestly feels like, at times, that having AK vs Ax is a coinflip b/c you see dominated hands suck out so often.

[Phoenix1010]

"Jackals..." Hah, I find it funny that people have started using Hellmuth's animal player profiles.

I'd say it's pretty accurate to say that winning play includes consistently getting into the top 5 or 6 players and making your moves there. Someone (Raptor, I believe) said recently that you don't win the game in the early levels, you only lose it. It's also true that avoiding coinflips is usually a good idea at any stage of the game, but sometimes they are unavoidable. You seem to understand that coinflips and 60/40's are necessary when it gets short handed and the blinds go up, so I won't discuss why the value of small advantage/even money all-ins goes up later in the game.

Yes, you must accept that these coinflips are a part of the game. What is most important though, is how they come about. There are going to be times when you can be almost certain that the best you can expect is a coinflip. Here's the key: If you're mostly CALLING all-in when you know the best case scenario is 50/50, you're making losing plays. If you're mostly PUSHING when you know the best case scenario is 50/50, you're making winning plays. Push with deuces more than you call with deuces. When the hands are equal the player doing the pushing has the best chance of winning.

The good players with high ROI/ITM don't necessarily have some method of avoiding getting into coinflips when they're shortstacked with high blinds; it's sometimes impossible to avoid if you find yourself in that situation. When you're on the verge of blinding out, you can't wait until you have a large advantage to make a move. What you can do, and what the best players do, is give yourself the best chance of winning.

Use your fold equity as much you can while you have it, and remember that aggressive all-ins are far more powerful than passive all-ins. Take advantage of all those mice and elephants whenever you can. Hope your next streak is a good one. Good luck on your next coinflip.

Regards,
Steve

[Mr_J]

"It is usually how I fare us these 60-40 matchups that determines my success for the session"

The bubble coinflips are the key. As long as we are getting in as the favourite most of the time, we'll place more than we bust. When we do place, we'll probally place well.

I've found so far that I usually either bust out on the bubble, or come 1st (twice as many 1sts as seconds). Small sample but I think the idea to go for first is good. 20% ITM and 60% bubble up at the $50s. Even if these were only coinflips (50/50), I would be 40% ITM on average and profiting nicely. Unfortunately I've been unlucky but am still about even.

[raptor517]

I have always wondered where people said that they had a 35% roi playing 100+9s. i have had a 38% playing the 50+5s, etc.. i have been playing sngs for a good amount of time, and those numbers are simply not sustainable. the reason for this is because of the number of marginal situations you put yourself in when it gets down to 5-6 people. there simply MUST be coinflips. the blinds are too high for people not to call with marginal hands, as they are too high for you not to push with marginal hands.

the true key to winning long term in these sngs is to just make the top 6. you cant win a sng early. period. you can double up sometimes, yea, against the person who will go all in with QQ early, (which you shouldnt do) when you have AA or KK. these are the only 2 hands i will go all in with in the first 2 rounds. period. You have to make the final 6 players. when there are 6 left, 400 dollars is already dead (in a 100+9). so 6 players are playing for 1400. thats how you make money even though there are a lot of coinflips. you steal your blinds better than the other players, and when you are called, you double up or bust half the time. this is just how it is.

to be honest, i dont think there is a whole lot of skill involved in a sng. i could teach my sister how to play in a matter of hours, and she could be a winning player in the 50+5s and down. tight play early, making the top 5-6, blind steals, and coinflips. thats all there is. the problem with this is that the sngs are extremely swingy. you will have a set of 200 where u have a 1% roi, then the next set you will have a 38% roi. thats just the nature of the beast. however, i would love to see some replays of people that claim 30%+ long term roi in the 109s or 215s, just to see what yall do that creates such a great number. thanks.

[UMTerp]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this yet, but of course the higher-ROI players are willing to take coinflips. And there's a reason that they play tight early and do the "gambling" late - it's all the dead money in the pot. Simple as that. You're often getting 3-2 or so on your coinflips near the end of the tourneys. Coupled with the folding equity you have, since good players generally tend to try to get their money in first, that's all the advantage they need. Sure they're still gonna lose 50% (or a little more) if they get called, but the large blinds make the risk worth their while. And if a good player can win even one coinflip in the late stages, he can often manipulate his stack to a Top-2 stack without ever having to show down another hand til he's in the money.

[Marcotte]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
but I don't think a good player should have to win coin flips in most of his or her tournaments....Surely they will face some

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a bit contradictory. Do you see why?

[/sklansky]


[/ QUOTE ]

lol Yeah, that was poorly worded, wasn't it? What I'm trying to say is that while everyone will face coinflips, each one you face will increase your chance of busting out. A great player may only face an average of 1-2 before he/she gets ITM, while an average fish may face 5-7 (and other situations where he is less than 50%). One is obviously a lot more likely to survive 2 flips than 7.

IOW, a good player isn't good because they win coinflips. They are good because they only have to win one or two.


[ QUOTE ]
My theory is that the good/great players use a strategy such that they avoid as many coin flips as possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course. But this isn't ESP. You put opponents on a range of hands, such as AA-77, AKs-ATs, AK-AJ, KQ-KJs, KQ. If you hold QQ, you have about 63% equity here, and that's pretty good, certainly worth a reraise all-in in many tourney situations. But sometimes, when you get called by AKs, and guess what, that's a coinflip.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think were pretty much in total agreement. I think Terp hit the nail on the head with the comment about the dead money. At 200-400, the 600 chips in the blinds is enough compensation most of the time for the sub-optimal gamble (not neccesarily <50%) you take.

[captZEEbo1]

I haven't read all the posts, but coinflips are avoidable to a degree. For instance, you should not be CALLING allins with 22, but you can PUSH 22 as a steal or whatever. So if you find yourself calling a LOT with hands like A9, KQ, 22-55, you are probably unnecessarily getting involved in coinflips (though at some point, you get desperate and HAVE to call with marginal holdings).

I've been folding AQ lately when there are like 5-6 people left and I have a decent chip stack. When I feel it's the wrong situation, I don't have any problems with foldling AQo. For instance, if I'm the chipleader, and can comfortably make it to the money, and the 2nd place chipleader goes allin, it's not necessarily a good call.