Log in

View Full Version : I can beat tourneys but not ring games - why?


09-16-2001, 05:45 PM
I admit upfront that I am not a particularly sophisticated player. I don't seem to think in the properly analytical manner when it comes to playing decisions yet this 'Caveman' approach works very nicely in the Paradise single table tourneys - I have only won 3 of the 22 events I have played in, but have finished in the money on 7 other occassions, so I am well ahead at this point. Just as well, because I am bleeding money in the ring games using the same approach.


My basic gameplan is to play very tight in early seats but bet the few hands I play very aggressively and then gradually loosen up as I move toward the blinds to the point where I will almost always go for a steal with any kind of playable hand on the button. My thought process (such as it is)before the flop consists of saying to myself 'I can call two bets with this hand' or 'If nobody opens early I can raise here'etc. Like I said, pretty basic stuff. What I appear to be good at is forcing people to laydown after the flop with second pair or worse.


Obviously this is because it is a freeze out format and there are many players who can't bring themselves to make the correct calls or raises because if I have what I represent then they are going to be in a bad position, chips-wise. Also I win a few bets from the old chestnut of re-raising the 'obvious' stealer in the SB. Essentially on all decision points after the flop I just play super-aggressive and it (probably luckily)seems to work.


As I said this style is killing me in the ring games. It's like I'm playing with the cards face up - nobody lays down when I bet out after the flop and everybody calls or raises when I'm stealing.


Sorry this is so long, but I would be interested to hear whether you think I have called it right - that is that many players are too concious of their chip position or potential position in Tourneys, but they concentrate more on making the right play without regard to the money in ring games.

09-16-2001, 06:30 PM
In single-table tournies, preflop decisions become more important because players so often end up all-in or virtually all-in w/ the flop. Maybe your preflop play is great, but your play on the flop, turn, and river gets progressively worse.


That would seem to account for some difference.


Mojay

09-16-2001, 09:23 PM
Tournaments have special tactics all of their own. Somtimes it is correct to play exceedingly tight (and i do mean exceedingly tight folding JJ or worse preflop, even QQ) and other times you should become very aggresive with next to nothing.


Ring games at low limits (i assume you are playing low limits) are purely best hand wins. Getting off hands that miss, and staying out of pots with hands that can easily become second best is crucial to winning low limit holdem.


If you sort of hit the flop in a ring game, but could well be beat and facing additional bets, get out cheap. In tournaments you usually have to fight a little more particularly as there are so many heads up pots.


Also a bit of practice at shorthanded play should convert a few more in the moneys to 1st places. Over 70% of my money finishes are 1st places, but i rarely come in as the big stack.

09-17-2001, 07:03 PM
I think part of the problem is that it's not really your money in the tournament. I have the same problem. It's a lot different buying in for $300 in a $9-18 game than buying $1000 chips for $55 in the Saturday tournament at Lucky Chances. Most tournament players will get lucky early, but then bust out. I've seen people play 6,7o from early position and hit their straights early on -- by the halfway point they've gone on tilt and lost to the better players. You can lose 2-3 hands going all the way to the river and still have half your chips left when the blinds are $15/30, but when you do this and the blinds are $100/200, you're going to bust out mighty quick. If you are a solid player, you will usually be rewarded. Also, the late seats 10-15 don't really pay that much, what $50-100? which is a ridiculous return for about 3-4 hours of playing poker (remember to take out your $55 buy in fee). When you consider that a good table player can rake in a half or a full rack during that same time, why would they play in the tournament? -- Also, I see a core group of regular tournament players every time I sit down to play and I've started to get a handle on how they bet. When you play with the same group of people it's easier to pick up tells.


Good luck!