Standard Early play $10 sitngos

[GimmeDaWatch]

So, Ive been playing a ton of the Party $11 sitngos in the last couple weeks after playing mostly ring games at various sites for the last 2 years or so. Accordingly, Ive been hitting up this forum alot more, trying to brush up on my 1 table tourney game, etc. The mantra on these boards is pretty simple, i.e. real tight early, dont take too many chances on the bubble if youre a short-stack, go for 1st once youve locked 3rd, et. al. I've been playing roughly along these lines, except I've been playing alot looser early on than what is normally prescribed. Not terribly loose (e.g. limping w/suited connectors, any pair, any big cards in MP or LP in the 1st 2 levels), but it seems to me that there's a good deal to be gained by seeing flops cheaply in the early levels against real weak players. It stands to reason that the really weak players will be alot more likely to go out in the 1st 4 levels, so dont you lose some value by not playing any pots with them unless you have a huge hand? Ive been able to double up fairly often against some of the worst players at the table, b/c if you do make a hand theyre so likely to pay you off, and this really helps me take my time when the blinds start pushing the action in level 5. Granted, Im sure this becomes increasingly less true as you move up in limits, but Im just speaking to what Ive seen so far. Just a thought, havent really seen anybody else on this forum take this position yet.

[The Yugoslavian]

Many posters take the position you're advocating.

With any luck, at some point, the feelings you have described will pass, /images/graemlins/grin.gif.

Yugoslav
(Who *still* plays too loose early on)

[REL18]

because of people like aleomagus and yugo I have changed I used to think exactly like our first poster thank you two plus two.

[GimmeDaWatch]

[ QUOTE ]
Many posters take the position you're advocating.

With any luck, at some point, the feelings you have described will pass, /images/graemlins/grin.gif.

Yugoslav
(Who *still* plays too loose early on)

[/ QUOTE ]


Ok, so I know that both of you disagree, but would you mind elaborating a bit on your reasoning? I realize that this type of play will occasionally result in my exiting early, but this is uncommon and from my standpoint is definitely +EV.

[The Yugoslavian]

Simply put, your chips can be better spent elsewhere given the many different factors present in Party Poker SNGs.

SNG play is all about finding the optimal spots to spend those chips. I want to get the most value out of my $$ whether it's at Best Buy, Target, or the Party Poker $33s.

Unfortunately, I'm much better at getting max value from Best Buy and Target currently, /images/graemlins/grin.gif.

Yugoslav

[spentrent]

Maybe there's a one sentence answer?

Doubling your stack in the first 30 hands won't help much for the the last 60 hands.

[GimmeDaWatch]

[ QUOTE ]
Simply put, your chips can be better spent elsewhere given the many different factors present in Party Poker SNGs.

SNG play is all about finding the optimal spots to spend those chips. I want to get the most value out of my $$ whether it's at Best Buy, Target, or the Party Poker $33s.

Unfortunately, I'm much better at getting max value from Best Buy and Target currently, /images/graemlins/grin.gif.

Yugoslav

[/ QUOTE ]


Hmmmm, guess we can agree to disagree on this one then, as thats all a little too vague for me. Would you agree that your best chance to play pots with the worst players at the table is in the 1st 2-3 levels, generally speaking?

[lorinda]

For once I'll use an English sport for my anaolgy, usually I try to pander to our American friends.

You've won a competition with the following rules:

A soccer ball is placed on a penalty spot and you are told that if you score a goal, you will be given $1000.

You're half decent at soccer and suspect you can beat the guy in goal 60% of the time, so you'll get $600 on average.

Very nice indeed.

However, you know the goalie involved has an important match to play tomorrow, so your best strategy is to sit next to the ball and wait for him to leave the ground before slotting the ball into the net with over 99% success rate.

The first play is good EV, the second one is better.

Your plays fit the same description.

Lori

[microbet]

[ QUOTE ]
(e.g. limping w/suited connectors, any pair, any big cards in MP or LP in the 1st 2 levels),

[/ QUOTE ]

Any pair or at least 66+ is pretty much standard to limp with.

I think there is a fairly big difference between higher suited connectors in LP as opposed to MP or just big cards in any position.

Personally, and it may be a weakness, I will limp on Button or CO with high suited connectors or Axs in the first round only, and only if the later actors haven't shown a lot of PF raises. Do y'all think even this is too much?

I also limp with the PP's in most situations, but drop some of the lower ones in the 2nd and 3rd level in EP or at a crazy table.

[nothumb]

[ QUOTE ]
Would you agree that your best chance to play pots with the worst players at the table is in the 1st 2-3 levels, generally speaking?

[/ QUOTE ]

Thing is, a lot of players in the 11's are so bad that your edge against all of them is roughly the same. Also, in such a short tourney the bad players will often get their hands on chips early and will still be around in later rounds. In the meantime, they can hurt you with their big stack.

Basically, the problem with limping with any big cards (like QT, KT) or lower suited connectors and one-gappers is that your edge isn't that big, and you can make some second best hands. If you get a few of these speculative hands you can bleed off a lot of chips, sometimes as much as half your stack. The edge you gain by mixing it up with bad players is negated by the fact that they are unpredictable, unbluffable, and that you miss more flops than you hit.

I completely understand the urge to get in and mix it up. You get paid off huge when you hit. But for each time you do that, you risk bleeding off chips that you will desperately want when the blinds get bigger.

I think a good postflop player capable of making a lot of smart laydowns can get away with playing looser than the commonly advocated strategies here, but especially in the lowest levels of SnG's, I don't think it's the best way to play.

NT

[GimmeDaWatch]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe there's a one sentence answer?

Doubling your stack in the first 30 hands won't help much for the the last 60 hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is absurd.

[lorinda]

Maybe there's a one sentence answer?

Never give a sucker an even break.

Lori

[spentrent]

Enlighten me. Do you plan on doubling up more than once in the first 30? If this is your plan, please teach me how to execute it.

EDIT: BTW, if you can double up once every 30 hands, you're wasting your time playing $10+1 tournaments. Stick to the cash games.

[GimmeDaWatch]

[ QUOTE ]
Enlighten me. Do you plan on doubling up more than once in the first 30? If this is your plan, please teach me how to execute it.

EDIT: BTW, if you can double up once every 30 hands, you're wasting your time playing $10+1 tournaments. Stick to the cash games.

[/ QUOTE ]

You said that doubling up in the 1st 30 hands doesnt help you much in the last 60 hands. When you're blinded down to 600 by level 5, as is frequently the case playing extremely tight in the early rounds, and you go all-in on a coinflip and win, does it help you then? Obviously, having more chips keeps you from having to make desperation plays as early as you would otherwise, and also gives you more leeway to steal. I dont "plan" to double up every 30 hands, but by playing more hands early when its cheap, I definitely have a better shot at it. With regards to cash games, it is obviously alot easier to double up in these sitngos with the stacks so shallow and the players so loose.

[The Yugoslavian]

[ QUOTE ]

Hmmmm, guess we can agree to disagree on this one then, as thats all a little too vague for me. Would you agree that your best chance to play pots with the worst players at the table is in the 1st 2-3 levels, generally speaking?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm being vague intentionally, /images/graemlins/smile.gif.

What you are saying applies perhaps to the 109s or 215s (or 1ks). It would seem players like Giga *love* to spot the sucker early and take his chips if at all possible in these high buyins. This probably doesn't happen as much as one would think though as I'm sure he needs a very solid read to risk his stack early. However, I bet he wouldn't be making such 'plays' at all in the lower buyins. Do you see why? If you can, then your original post will be answered.

Yugoslav