Starting SNG's, some questions

[mithong]

I've been primarily playing limit, but I find SNG's much more exciting and have decided to play them exclusively... I am starting on the 10/1's...

Is the general consensus that you shouldnt be playing ANY hands except for the top 4 and limping with PPairs in levels 1-3...

cuz ive heard a lot of people say that you should try to limp in with a lot of hands in the beginning and build a chip lead...

which one is correct?

[Rolen]

First one. You limp with Q9s on the button. Flop comes Q72 to you + you put in a 2/3 pot sized bet. Everyone folds but the last to act, who puts in a minimum raise. You put him on AQ + figure you're behind but your implied odds if you spike a 9 on the turn are good enough to call...

OR

Fold preflop + save those chips for when you can put them to good use, stealing in the later levels.

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]
which one is correct?

[/ QUOTE ]

Any strategy that you can describe in 1 sentence sucks by definition. Therefore, I choose neither.

Learn how to play NL, then learn how to play NL tournaments.

Read a book on NL, beat the 25NL ring game, and then come back.

[mithong]

k, so start off on 25 NL... does everyone agree with this?

[1C5]

I did the opposite. I started in SnGs and then am now playing NL25. Probably backwards. Hope that playing NL25 will help my SnG game. (Plus I get to clear bonuses at the NL25 at the same time as learning, can't beat that)

[Rolen]

Nope. I know plenty of people who own the cash games and can't beat SNGs. If you've never played NL and you intend to play NL sngs then you should of course learn it, but do it at the 5+1s rather than the cash games.

[jmark71]

You're right, there are two schools of thought there, both of which probably have advantages. Personally, I prefer to play a wider variety of hands early on if I can get to the flop cheaply. On early levels, the blinds are pretty insignificant compared to your stack, so raising with premium, non-paired hands (AK for instance) may not slim the herd as much as you'd like, so you have to play those hands carefully. Obviously premium pairs are a different kettle of fish and you can raise substantially and not terribly mind getting two or three callers.

The problem I see with the approach of only playing premium starting hands is that you may get to the 100/200 level before you even see one and then your stack is 3/4 the starting size and you're forced to make substantial moves. Picking up a few pots early eases the pressure a little on those later levels. There's nothing worse than sitting there getting blinded down and then picking up AA with the blinds at 100/200 and someone picking you off with two pair or something, because they were just as desperate to win a pot to stay alive as you were.

Others may disagree and I'm a relative newbie myself so there's probably a lot that I'm missing, but I'm happy with my approach and my results this year have been acceptable (38% avg ROI on 329 $10-$30 SNGs and 23% ROI so far on 117 $50 SNGs)

[lorinda]

I prefer to play a wider variety of hands early on if I can get to the flop cheaply.

With 800 chips and 15 big blind, it is impossible.

Lori

[Rolen]

Valid points, however I think you over-estimate the amount of 'moves' one needs to pull off in order to maintain a starting stack @ the 100/200 level. 300 Chips is not easy to win at the early levels and carries more risk (IMO) than going allin with junk just once when it's folded to you in the SB at the 100/200 level.

Of course, the best way to play is to pick up BOTH sets of 300 chips /images/graemlins/grin.gif - Personally I prefer to take the latter approach here.

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
k, so start off on 25 NL... does everyone agree with this?

[/ QUOTE ]

no

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]
Nope. I know plenty of people who own the cash games and can't beat SNGs. If you've never played NL and you intend to play NL sngs then you should of course learn it, but do it at the 5+1s rather than the cash games.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't mean to imply that beating the 25NL would guarantee victory in SnGs.

To win NL tournaments, you need understand NL play AND tournament strategy. It's easier to learn the tournament strategy if you already know NL, rather than trying to learn both at the same time.

Furthermore, there isn't a lot of "play" in the SnGs. You really only get 20 hands before the blinds get too big to really play NL. The correct way is usually to play really tight, so you will be playing very few hands. Therefore, it takes forever to actually learn how to play NL if your only exposure is in SnGs.

Of course, you don't need to be a good NL player to beat the 10/1. Unfortunately, some people beat the 10/1 and decide that they never have to learn to play NL, or worse yet, they think they can play NL. They'll just fold a lot and then make moves on the bubble. You can certainly make money this way, but you'll never be a great player.

If the OP wants to beat the 10/1, then just play really tight, and learn how to play the bubble. There's nothing wrong with this. If he wants to do this and mix in some 25NL on the side, that's fine too. It depends what his goals are.

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
which one is correct?

[/ QUOTE ]

Any strategy that you can describe in 1 sentence sucks by definition. Therefore, I choose neither.

Learn how to play NL, then learn how to play NL tournaments.

Read a book on NL, beat the 25NL ring game, and then come back.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. SNG play and NL ring game play are about as different and NL and Limit play. Ring game play only really helps for the first few levels and you shouldn't be playing many hands during that time anyway.

[Paul2432]

[ QUOTE ]
First one. You limp with Q9s on the button. Flop comes Q72 to you + you put in a 2/3 pot sized bet. Everyone folds but the last to act, who puts in a minimum raise. You put him on AQ + figure you're behind but your implied odds if you spike a 9 on the turn are good enough to call...

OR

Fold preflop + save those chips for when you can put them to good use, stealing in the later levels.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think this is much of an argument. You could just as easily argue that limping is good because if the flop comes Q92 you might get all-in against AQ and double up.

The answer to the orginal poster is that if you play well after the flop and your opponents do not you can play a few more hands, especially in late position versus multiple limpers. The game conditions need to be right though and even then you can't get carried away.

Paul

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nope. I know plenty of people who own the cash games and can't beat SNGs. If you've never played NL and you intend to play NL sngs then you should of course learn it, but do it at the 5+1s rather than the cash games.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't mean to imply that beating the 25NL would guarantee victory in SnGs.

To win NL tournaments, you need understand NL play AND tournament strategy. It's easier to learn the tournament strategy if you already know NL, rather than trying to learn both at the same time.

Furthermore, there isn't a lot of "play" in the SnGs. You really only get 20 hands before the blinds get too big to really play NL. The correct way is usually to play really tight, so you will be playing very few hands. Therefore, it takes forever to actually learn how to play NL if your only exposure is in SnGs.

Of course, you don't need to be a good NL player to beat the 10/1. Unfortunately, some people beat the 10/1 and decide that they never have to learn to play NL, or worse yet, they think they can play NL. They'll just fold a lot and then make moves on the bubble. You can certainly make money this way, but you'll never be a great player.

If the OP wants to beat the 10/1, then just play really tight, and learn how to play the bubble. There's nothing wrong with this. If he wants to do this and mix in some 25NL on the side, that's fine too. It depends what his goals are.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed...But there are other ways to accomplish these goals w/o playing NL ring. ( I never have except live w/ friends).

I started out as a weenie pooh playing 5+.5 SNGs on Stars. 1500 chips bla bla bla , slow blinds
(u guys know the deal).

The point is, it allowed me to learn a lot about non-push/fold play and allowed me to make so many big mistakes w/o the risk and discouragement. I had to reload from my original 50 once but neve looked back again. Great learning experience...

TP by Sklansky is a must as well...read it 5 times if you're a beginner....there's nothing there you wont find on these boards, but its all in one place.

If you're going to play on Party, the FAQ 10+1 is good too.

[Rolen]

Flop is just as likely to come Q72 as it is Q92, and since the chips you're risking are worth more than the chips you stand to gain..

[jmark71]

[ QUOTE ]

With 800 chips and 15 big blind, it is impossible.


[/ QUOTE ]

Respectfully, I disagree that it's impossible...

I wouldn't say play every hand, but pick your spots. Position is key... you can't start limping in from early/mid position with junk hands of course, but there are times where you'll see (especially at the lower limits) a bunch of folks just calling the blind and you're sitting there with a suited one-gapper or some such that just screams to see the flop. The key is not just seeing the flop, but also playing that flop well. If you pick up a tiny pair (even if it is top pair!), don't expect that to be a winner... what you really want to see is a nice str8 draw or trips which puts you in potentially great shape and that can possibly win a BIG pot on the lower limit tables because 1) people won't expect to see the type of holding you have in early on play, and 2) people tend to bet TOO aggressively when they hit something like TPTK on those lower limit SNGs.

Of course, it's relatively rare that you'll hit a hand that pulls in that pot, but in my limited experience, early on in a SNG is the only time you can play those itty-bitty connectors cheaply /images/graemlins/grin.gif and if you can avoid having a short stack with blinds rising, all the better.

Again, this isn't advice telling you to play every connector under the sun, or playing crap like KTo UTG, but look for opportunites early on where you can get to see a cheap flop where connecting with the flop can yield a large pot.

I agree it's harder to win a $300 pot when the blinds are 10/15, but I like looking for those opportunities early on as well as later if I can. There's an old adage in poker that you can't go broke going all-in against a smaller stack, so I like to be in a position in later levels where I don't have to worry as much about the larger stacks (because I am one!). One way to get there is to be observant of opportunities for bigger pots early.

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]
SNG play and NL ring game play are about as different and NL and Limit play.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd say that most people recommend learning Limit before learning NL also.

It's like telling a child to learn skip learning addition/subtraction and just go straight to multiplication/division. Division is quite different then addition, so why bother with addition?

Instead, you should learn the fundamentals of NL by actually playing NL. You can then read TPFAP by Sklansky and he will explain what adjustments to make for tournament play. TPFAP is very clear that it should only be read by someone who already knows how to play and play well.

I know there are many paths to success. I happen to believe the best is to learn the fundamentals first. If you just give him the Aleo 10+1 cookbook, he's not learning the fundamentals. It's like skipping all grade school math and giving calculators to 1st graders.

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
SNG play and NL ring game play are about as different and NL and Limit play.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd say that most people recommend learning Limit before learning NL also.

It's like telling a child to learn skip learning addition/subtraction and just go straight to multiplication/division. Division is quite different then addition, so why bother with addition?

Instead, you should learn the fundamentals of NL by actually playing NL. You can then read TPFAP by Sklansky and he will explain what adjustments to make for tournament play. TPFAP is very clear that it should only be read by someone who already knows how to play and play well.

I know there are many paths to success. I happen to believe the best is to learn the fundamentals first. If you just give him the Aleo 10+1 cookbook, he's not learning the fundamentals. It's like skipping all grade school math and giving calculators to 1st graders.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was assuming he knew the fundamentals...And some of these fundamentals you speak of also will later need some "unlearning" when applied to SNG NL...(which is where TPFAP comes in I assume).

I'm sure I'd be lost in limit HE ring right now...

I think SNG strategy can be learned in a bubble...i dont see why learning the basics, within the SNG framework, is such a problem...I dont think your Math analogy is really analogous here.

[networkman]

You're a limit player, play limit tourneys first to get a handle on tourney play.

What happens next really depends on how much effort you're prepared/able to put into learning.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
The problem I see with the approach of only playing premium starting hands is that you may get to the 100/200 level before you even see one and then your stack is 3/4 the starting size and you're forced to make substantial moves.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you see this as a problem? Please explain further...

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
If you just give him the Aleo 10+1 cookbook, he's not learning the fundamentals. It's like skipping all grade school math and giving calculators to 1st graders.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol, guess I'm playing with a calculator. /images/graemlins/blush.gif

If you understand the principles of poker, but not all the odds, you need to learn the odds and how to apply them. It's a great piece of advice. I didn't follow it though. I learned along the way. Is this way better? I don't know, it worked for me.

The next thing you need to have is great patience. If you don't have patience at this stage, I think LHE tourney games are a good place to start and learn. Structured betting will probably save you some $$$.

And, finally, the answer to OP's question depends on what site you're playing at. If you're going to play at Party Poker, where the starting stacks are at t800, which is where most of the posters here play, then playing many hands is detrimental. If you're going to play at another site, like PokerStars, where the starting stack is t1500, you can open up your preflop hand selection quite a bit more.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
There's an old adage in poker that you can't go broke going all-in against a smaller stack, so I like to be in a position in later levels where I don't have to worry as much about the larger stacks (because I am one!). One way to get there is to be observant of opportunities for bigger pots early.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's pretty funny. I think in Party Poker SitNGos, the one way to be sure you're not one of the bigger stacks later is to follow you're advice earlier. This is based purely on probabilities of course.

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]
I think SNG strategy can be learned in a bubble...i dont see why learning the basics, within the SNG framework, is such a problem...I dont think your Math analogy is really analogous here.

[/ QUOTE ]

It definately can be done, and has been many times. I just worry about new players that come here looking for a "system". They will get a system and might be able to beat the 10/1. However, they don't really learn why the system works and therefore can't adjust to tougher games.

Once you learn to play NL, you understand there is no "system", but just a series of decisions that depend on many factors. Adjusting from from NL to tournament-NL is easy. Unlearning a flawed system is more difficult, IMO.

[revots33]

[ QUOTE ]
I prefer to play a wider variety of hands early on if I can get to the flop cheaply.

With 800 chips and 15 big blind, it is impossible.


[/ QUOTE ]

Although if you play on Stars you get 1500 chips to start - so on Stars I'd say playing a few speculative hands if you can limp in for $20 or $30 might make sense occasionally.

Another option for OP - Limit tournaments. Not as fun as NL but if limit is your better game you might want to try them.

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think SNG strategy can be learned in a bubble...i dont see why learning the basics, within the SNG framework, is such a problem...I dont think your Math analogy is really analogous here.

[/ QUOTE ]

It definately can be done, and has been many times. I just worry about new players that come here looking for a "system". They will get a system and might be able to beat the 10/1. However, they don't really learn why the system works and therefore can't adjust to tougher games.

Once you learn to play NL, you understand there is no "system", but just a series of decisions that depend on many factors. Adjusting from from NL to tournament-NL is easy. Unlearning a flawed system is more difficult, IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think we agree in principle. But what are some specific examples (basics) that you think benefit a beginner playing ring NL that carry over to SNG? Opening hand reqs, Gap concept, pot odds, etc..?

Again, I think its actually cheaper to learn these concepts at very low buyins playing SNGs while simultaneously learning a SNG system...they are not mutually exclusive. Again, I should clarify that I have exclusively played on Stars since day 1 and we may be talking about apples and oranges here.

[The Yugoslavian]

There certainly are 'systems' that would make someone a winning player at low limit STTs. However, to truly kill the games one must *understand* all the best ways of extracting chips while avoiding the lure to hemmorage chips. Not just sometimes make the right plays but actually knows why the right play is the right play and how to find the optimal situations rather than settling for poorer ones.

Also as important (and I'd argue it is probably more important) to beating any structure of poker long term is one's ability to continue to play the right way over time (this can only be successfully done after truly *understanding* why the 'correct' moves are 'correct').

Yugoslav

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]
I think we agree in principle. But what are some specific examples (basics) that you think benefit a beginner playing ring NL that carry over to SNG? Opening hand reqs, Gap concept, pot odds, etc..?

[/ QUOTE ]

Implied odds, position, pretty much everything. We definately agree in principal.

A good player that wants to learn will likely succeed either way. A new player might get sidetracked by following a system. You see the system-think (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=singletable&Number=2030448 ) here all the time.

Therefore, I recommend learning NL first because it works for both.

I think your suggestion of starting with the 5/.50 on pokerstars is a great one in any case.

[pooh74]

Good link...good posts on that one too.

[Paul2432]

[ QUOTE ]
Flop is just as likely to come Q72 as it is Q92, and since the chips you're risking are worth more than the chips you stand to gain..

[/ QUOTE ]

That is why I said you need to play well post flop. I agree that if you misplay your hand when the flop comes Q72 you should probably fold pre-flop.

My main point though, was that "the flop might come XXX and I could get check-raised" is not in and of itself a reason not to play a hand. You could make the same argument about AA. (the flop could come JJ2 and someone might check-raise me on the flop so I should fold preflop).

Paul

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
You only need a 40% chance of winning to make this a +EV call. I'm too lazy to do $EV, but I'm sure its similiar given your large stack.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the reason you disagree with the forum on situations like this is because situations that are +CEV, are not always +$EV.

See this link (http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=843788&page=7&view=co llapsed&sb=7&o=all&vc=1)

[Rolen]

If you're going to see a flop, the advantage AA has over Q9 is that of the thousands of possible flops, a lot more of them will suit AA than Q9. In either case you might get a bad one, but of course you play the odds and odds are you're gonna like the flop with AA, and you're not gonna like it with Q9!