Step 4 Strategy

[etotheipi]

I was playing a Step 4 today and completely bewildered by how to adjust to this strange Sit-n-Go structure. I'm sure this has been discussed before, but I wasn't around for it. Please don't yell at me!

So there were 11 people left and the blinds had gotten up to 150/300. The max stack size between the two tables was about 2500-- a healthy 8xBB. Most people had 4-6xBB. I had caught onto the fact that everyone was playing ridiculously tight, so I started being very aggressive, pushing all-in frequently to steal the blinds (I changed gears after nearly blinding myself to death)

Even if I had enough chips to make a sizeable raise instead of all-in, I usually pushed anyway so that no one could play back. I started this aggression only because I knew everyone was tight and I was sick of bleeding away. But I wasn't quite sure what my strategy SHOULD be.

I was thinking that pushing with A-x was a bad idea since, when I do get called it will often be by Ace-face, and I'd rather be live with 96o in that situation. But beyond that, I couldn't decide whether I should be waiting for hands to bust people acting the way I was, or if I should be the aggressive one.

What is my strategy in that situation? And what hands should I be waiting for with which to push?

Eto...

P.S. - I busted literally 2 seconds after 11th place did on the other table, so I got another Step 4, but I'm not excited about playing it until I get some wise words from you 2+2 guys /images/graemlins/ooo.gif

[spentrent]

[ QUOTE ]
I started this aggression only because I knew everyone was tight and I was sick of bleeding away. But I wasn't quite sure what my strategy SHOULD be.

[/ QUOTE ]

It sounds like you figured it out.

[kdotsky]

I also find that it is not clear what I should be doing in these types of situations. Everyone's got < 10BB, you've got a medium+ stack, a couple/few more need to bust, basically your only move is all-in, and everyone's playing very tight.

- Do you just play super tight and hope the last 2 or 3 bust?
- Do you ever steal? When?
- What hands do you put your stack in the middle with (as the aggressor, of course)?

[steeser]

It also depends on the stack sizes of the players still to act. If there is a big stack left to act, I would have far less aggression unless I had a premium hand, as his calling standards are going to be lower. If there are several stacks around the same size or lower than you to act, I would raise more often, as they are going to have to run into a big hand to call their stack away.

[adanthar]

In general, as a medium stack in a Step 4 with exactly 11 left, *everything* depends on stack sizes sitting to the left of you and the lowest stack left in the tournament.

If you are a medium stack and have another medium stack or two to your left, 'fold every hand until your SB or button is folded to, then go all in blind' is not far off.

The real problem is that 11 isn't the bubble yet and you shouldn't quite be stealing blind. Ideally, you'd have enough chips to bleed some off and still be viable, but if you don't have enough to make it to the tables combining, don't raise into anyone who has any chance of calling. There should be at least 1-2 people at your table autofolding their blinds, anyway.

[ColdestCall]

[ QUOTE ]
It also depends on the stack sizes of the players still to act. If there is a big stack left to act, I would have far less aggression unless I had a premium hand, as his calling standards are going to be lower.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is worth thinking about a bit more because of the flat payout structure of the Steps. If there is a big stack left to act after you near the bubble (and by big stack I mean big enough that he can probably cruise into the money by doing nothing, but would have to play poker if he lost to your all-in), what motivation does he have to lower his calling standards?

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
This is worth thinking about a bit more because of the flat payout structure of the Steps. If there is a big stack left to act after you near the bubble (and by big stack I mean big enough that he can probably cruise into the money by doing nothing, but would have to play poker if he lost to your all-in), what motivation does he have to lower his calling standards?

[/ QUOTE ]

The fact that he doesn't really get what a satellite is.

Don't laugh. It's why the Steps are that good.

[ColdestCall]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is worth thinking about a bit more because of the flat payout structure of the Steps. If there is a big stack left to act after you near the bubble (and by big stack I mean big enough that he can probably cruise into the money by doing nothing, but would have to play poker if he lost to your all-in), what motivation does he have to lower his calling standards?

[/ QUOTE ]

The fact that he doesn't really get what a satellite is.

Don't laugh. It's why the Steps are that good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. No BS? Ok, I'll take your word for it with no reads, but what if you had identified big stack as someone who knew what they were doing?

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
The fact that he doesn't really get what a satellite is.

Don't laugh. It's why the Steps are that good.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm about to start marching into STEP 4s. What do you mean "Steps are that good."

Also, Adanthar, are you playing a lot of STEPs these days?

[steeser]

Exactly, I've seen a lot of large stacks call with hands like A3o, JT, QJ and so on...just trying to be table captain and eliminate people. You have to tread very lightly when you find a player like that.

Generally with 11 left, most big stacks still can't coast into the money due to the high blind structure, but I think they are apt to be a little looser with a call as calling won't eliminate them.

[kdotsky]

So you avoid bigstacks because they might have looser calling sandards.

The thing is, any action is going to cripple someone. If I push on the small stacks, everyone has so little money that it will cripple me if they call and I loose. And won't the shortstacks have looser calling standarsd because they're getting desparate? Does this mean you attack medium stacks?

Thanks.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, Adanthar, are you playing a lot of STEPs these days?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not lately since I've switched sites, but I still have that datamined DB full of them. I have to admit I learned a lot of poker from that thing.

Re: Step 4: You will be very hardpressed to find a big but not monster stack that could almost (but not quite) fold in that doesn't call an all in with AQ/quite a bit worse for 40% of their chips with 11 left. This is a problem for you, especially if they're on your left and you're at the 5 handed table, but there will always be other people's blinds to steal, too.

Yes, pushing into the short stacks is a very bad idea and you should be attacking the medium stacks.

[Scuba Chuck]

Adanthar, I apologize if I seem like I'm pestering, but I'm still interested in my question...

[ QUOTE ]
What do you mean "Steps are that good."


[/ QUOTE ]

Or did you answer this? Meaning that they are fishier than it seems they should/likely are.

[kdotsky]

OK so let me run by you guys this thought I had. How much you steal should depend on the behavior of the table. So in the situation where everyone is being ultra-tight, and you've got a bit more than most people, why not just try to wait it out? However, if whoever are the small stacks at the time are being very aggressive and get back up to medium stack just by taking blinds, then you have to keep up with the pack and look for stealing oppurtunities. In this situation the table is more active, but the calling standards of everyone is probably not much different - it's just there's more pots being opened.

Thoughts?

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
OK so let me run by you guys this thought I had. How much you steal should depend on the behavior of the table. So in the situation where everyone is being ultra-tight, and you've got a bit more than most people, why not just try to wait it out? However, if whoever are the small stacks at the time are being very aggressive and get back up to medium stack just by taking blinds, then you have to keep up with the pack and look for stealing oppurtunities. In this situation the table is more active, but the calling standards of everyone is probably not much different - it's just there's more pots being opened.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I read this right, I'm pretty sure you've got this bassackwards.

[skipperbob]

"W-T-F" kinda drugs u on, Cowboy?

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]

"W-T-F" kinda drugs u on, Cowboy?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just the office koolaid.

Did I read that wrong. If the table is ultra tight, and I've got a big stack, just sit back and wait to slide ITM? Man, that's not what I'm doing, so maybe I am on drugs.

[skipperbob]

Not U!..Kdotsky

[Scuba Chuck]

Phew, I'm always worried I'm drinking too much koolaid.

[The Yugoslavian]

[ QUOTE ]
Phew, I'm always worried I'm drinking too much koolaid.

[/ QUOTE ]

This office does not drink koolaid, it gathers around the Heineken cooler.

Kdotsky has found something *much* stronger and more potent -- I'm not sure what, but it is certainly not koolaid nor Heineken.

Yugoslav

[etotheipi]

What about pushing standards? Sure there will be frequent stealing. But what about those times you have a "good" hand. I put that word in quotes, because I have no idea how to define it in this context.

What qualifies as a "good" hand enough to push with it from any position, and call raises and such. Obviously, there's various levels of situation dependency, but there must be a strategy for selecting hands that you want to get called (or call all-in with)

No one responded to my mention of avoiding pushing with A-x. I figure, when you get called it'll frequently be by Ace-Face and then you're a huge dog. I'd rather have 96o in that situation.

On that same note, why even bother with pushing with less than AA-JJ, AK to get called? I mean, when everyone is that tight, you're not going to get called by worse than AQ, so most hands you push with will be no better than 96o (Again, this depends on the players to act behind you, but I am assuming an average players with average stack sizes).

Thoughts?

Eto...

[kamrann]

He was simply saying that they are excellent value because so many of the players do not know how to adjust their style from normal SNG to a satellite/flat payout structure.

[kdotsky]

lol - at least I found an area of my game I can fix

So seriously be a little more constructive about this...

So I think I see why I am wrong, let me make sure. If there's more action at the table... other people opening up pots (but still tight with calls), then you sit back because the chances of others busting is greater. If the table is ultra-tight, nobody's going anywhere soon so you try to pick up a few huge blinds and put yourself in much better position, even though you could run into a monster and be gone.

?

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
So I think I see why I am wrong, let me make sure. If there's more action at the table... other people opening up pots (but still tight with calls), then you sit back because the chances of others busting is greater. If the table is ultra-tight, nobody's going anywhere soon so you try to pick up a few huge blinds and put yourself in much better position, even though you could run into a monster and be gone.


[/ QUOTE ]

Back to the koolaid and heineken for you.

[kdotsky]

[ QUOTE ]
Back to the koolaid and heineken for you.

[/ QUOTE ]

It was funny the first time...

I've obviously discovered a hole in my game, and I'm trying to fix it - that's why I'm here, that's why we're all here. If you don't plan on helping me, then please don't reply to mock me multiple times.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
Meaning that they are fishier than it seems they should/likely are.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like Scuba answered, the Steps are full of people that may play SNG's or limit ring or multis but certainly don't ever play satellites (or play them very badly.) You can get from Step 1 to Step 5 in the 2 tables for something like a $250 average, as best as I can tell. That's *crazy*.

[ QUOTE ]
What qualifies as a "good" hand enough to push with it from any position, and call raises and such.

[/ QUOTE ]

In a Step 4 in the particular situation I'm talking about, pushing is good with two cards. If no one else at the table knows I only have one card, one card is good, too.

Calling should never be done with less than kings.


[ QUOTE ]
On that same note, why even bother with pushing with less than AA-JJ, AK to get called?

[/ QUOTE ]

From UTG at a Step 4, with an average stack that will still have enough FE after the blinds pass, a couple of loose(r) big stacks at the table and 10 people left, I believe JJ and AK may both be folds. QQ is close.

They are so tight that when there's any significant chance of getting called you should simply throw away almost any hand. It is far too easy to push blind next time, especially if there is any shot the SB folds to you (as will happen often.)

[Scuba Chuck]

If you can't get our sick demented dry humor, then maybe forum for you not. My comment was that you're back on track! Cool? /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[kdotsky]

[ QUOTE ]
If you can't get our sick demented dry humor, then maybe forum for you not. My comment was that you're back on track! Cool? /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah thanks - I thought it was funny, but then got frustrated/confused when I was trying to see if I understood why I was wrong, and obviously I didn't get your reply.

Back to the Heineken...