HOH - Improving Play

[El Maximo]

Im posting on this forum because some of you play NL Ring, most play MTTs, and this forum rocks. I working my way through HOH to improve my MTT play and expand on my SNG play. I found the book to be very good so far and there are alot of areas that I need to improve on. My biggest weakness is post flop play. Ive mainly played Limit Ring and dont have a ton of experience at NL ring. Im going to start playing some more NL Ring to improve my post flop play. I just dont seem to get enough opportunities to play post flop in SnGs or MTTs. I have a few questions for the experts out there:

Do you think following HOH preflop guidelines will be suitable for playing low limit NL ring games? Im not looking to crush these games but just gain some post flop experience. I want to use the HOH guidelines to gain experience with them before putting them into motion in MTTs.

At what stack to blind ratio do you think these preflop guidelines apply. For example, HOH recommends a mix of raising and calling with middle pairs from EP when first in. I always limp and can see how this makes me predictable. At what blind to stack ratio would you abandon raising and just limp?

Any suggestions on using these preflop recommendations for 1-2 table SnGs? Especially ones that start at 1000-1500 chips. I dont plan on making preflop changes on the 10-30 Party SnGs but think HOH preflop recommendations would be better suited for SnGs that start with more chips.

I found the random generator discussion very interesting. Anyone using a similiar system to vary play in SnGs? I think at even the lower limit SnG's this could be applicable. Especially when taking about post flop bet sizes.

[asofel]

IMHO, as Harrington says in several places, the advice works well for fairly conservative tight/smart/etc type players. He does a good job of pointing out on the internet that limping with Aces/Kings is never correct if you can be sure your play is not being studied and reviewed. At the $1000 step5 I'm sure those guys are taking notes and learning each others play. At low level NL games I don't think you have to worry about randomizing things as much.

[betgo]

Harrington's advice is good, but it really doesn't apply much to SNGs for various reasons, particularly below the $100 level.

Predictability is not that important in an SNG, partly because of the level of play, and partly because it is so short and impersonal. Only a pretty high level of player is going to notice how a certain player plays middle pairs.

Also the limping and raising rule applies to MTTs where usually there is a raise which takes the blinds or gets one or two calls.

In an SNG, I usually limp with pairs early on, and mainly play for a set, since multiway action is likely. I usually will call a raise early on with a pair, since the stack sizes and multiway action often give me the right implied odds to play for a set.

This is volume I which covers early tournament play. Late in an SNG, it is usually correct to open push with any pair, because the blinds are worth more than the danger of a higher pair. At this stage, the money is too shallow and you are unlikley to get multiway action to play for a set.

[burningyen]

[ QUOTE ]
Harrington's advice is good, but it really doesn't apply much to SNGs for various reasons, particularly below the $100 level.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have found almost all of Harrington's advice very useful for smaller buy-in SnGs, *except* for the part about trying to vary play. IIRC he does say there's not much reason to vary your play against non-thinking opponents.