Sklansky's 7-Stud for Adv. Players vs Stud MTTs

[ChipLeader]

History:
I picked up Stud to some extent on my own, but refined my game after reading Roy Wests book, 42 lesson on Winning 7-Card Stud (at medium and lower limits). I ONLY play Stud multi-table tournaments (MTTs), as the cash money games for 7-stud have tremendous swings that i cant afford.

Question:
I just finished reading 7-Card Stud for Advanced Players by the PokerGod that is David Sklansky, but so far the concepts ive tried to apply from the book have been causing inappropriate swings for a tournament structure. For those who have read the book and are successful at MTTs, what are some concepts you stray from as a result of the tournament structure.

Sidenote:
Prior to reading the book i placed in the money in about 35-40% of the MTTs i played, with about 10% FT finishes, including 1 first, 1 second, 1 3rd, 1 4th, and various placements 5-8. Since reading the book i have only played about 5 but havent made money yet (though i did get a good stack in 1 or 2, it only takes 1 big hand to get short again.) Im not suggesting the advice is wrong, but perhaps some of it isnt appropriate for large tournament play.

Typical structure:
Ante is 1/3 or 1/4 of bringin, complete (or first bet) is 3x or 4x the bring in. 5th street bets (or paired 4th) is ALWAYS twice the "complete" bet amount.
Example
Level 4: Ante- 15, Bring in- 50, complete 150
Level 5: Ante- 15, Bring in- 50, complete 200
Level 6: Ante- 25, Bring in- 100 complete 300
(On fifth street or when a board pairs 4th, twice the completion is allowed)

[jon_1van]

In order to do well in tourneys you need to be willing to run more risks than 7csfap thinks is wise.

you just have to play more pots to have a shot period.

[aamitch10]

I will have to respecfully disagree with you. In my limited but very successfull Stud MTT experience, i believe quite the opposite. I prefer to play ultra tight. I find that fish are willing to call down no matter who the opponent is, and they will knock eachother out. Leaving you in decent position even if you have not been dealt a premium hand. ABout this time the limits are high enough that some ante stealing will keep you afloat untill you do get a hand. Playing more pots means busting out early, in my opinion.

[Bartholow]

Yeah, I think in general you should play tighter in the tourneys. This may be the first time I've really disagreed with Jon 1van.

[frappeboy]

I probably shouldn't even post anything, since I can count the number of times i've played a stud MTT on one hand, but I will anyways...

I think that you should stick to your normal cash game strategy up until where you are almost in the money.. At this point the only thing I would change is not trying to push some small edges I normally would in a ring game.

For instance I would tighten up on close value bets on the end, Not take a card off on 4th with a busted 3 flush, etc.
These are all normally slightly profitable plays, but at this stage they probably turn into slightly negative plays because they increase your standard deviation too much.

Just my 2 cents.

[jon_1van]

Hopefully we are refering to the Party Daily 10+1 tourney. Because that is the only stud tourney format I have experience with

Before the stakes get to about 50/100 or 100/200 playing anything but squeaky tight is disastrous. You are right about that.

But if 200/400 rolls around and you aren't willing to run some risks besides "textbook" ante steals and premium hands you will lose. You will only get 12 hands or so per level. And I don't think you can count on your premium hands showing up or holding up frequently enough to rest on these hands and "textbook" steals alone.


I submit the whole freaking book HoH2 in support of this. Even though this book is about holdem the basic idea behind "inflection points" still applies. The general jist is "if you are far from money and short stacked go freaking crazy to get a mediumish stack"

The reason why bigger stacks are at a premium is because ::
-If you get a good hand and it holds up you can win more money
-If you get a hand cracked you will survive
-People will fold more to you because you can bust them
-If you go card dead for a level or two it won't completely kill you.
-Ante stealing is a viable tactic because the steal itself doesn't commit you



In my successful stud tourney experience here was my strat
-early round (before 50/100 or 100/200 depending on table) :: I play uber tight. Note who complete calling stations are. I need to know this for when I start stealing antes

-Middle to late rounds :: Treat the gap concept more like the grand canyon concept. But if think there is any chance at all to steal the antes I'll play. I don't raise every pot I enter because that starts to decrease my stealing ability. Limping in also allows me to make some hands "stealable" without risking dister (e.g. I have a Q up but there is a K and J behind me. Raising is alittle reckless, but if those players fold I'll probably be able to steal from the BI) This strategy allows you to build a stack when you aren't getting cards to justify it. You just have to be very very careful when you are called

Towards the end of tournies there are a whole lot of "super tighties" If you are passing up chances to steal from tables of super tight players you are really giving up a huge advantage. If a player is so tight that once they enter you can confidently put them on a premium hand you as a stealer will have a super easy hand to play against them. The negative implied odds the tighties will face are huge.

[Runner Runner]

Proper tournament strategy depends so much more on how deep you are, how deep others are, how the table is playing, how you characterize your opponent, etc...

You can use concepts from 7CSFAP, but most importantly you must understand how they apply to the tournament situation you are presented with. This being said, some situations that are only marginally +EV for a cash game (described in 7CSFAP) should be avoided unless you are deep enough that they don't significantly cripple your stack.

[BeerMoney]

I think it is more important to push small edges and take risks as payout structures are top heavy, and you want to get in the top 3 payouts, not cruise into the money and get $15 back for your 4 hours of time.

[BeerMoney]

Jon, I like your whole analysis.

IMHO, I think people who are looking to avoid coinflips, etc. will not have the best results in tourneys.

I also think its interesting you mention harrington's book, as I think it is a must read for any poker player, even those who don't play NLHE tourneys, as its strategy is often talking about how you perceive your opponents, and how they perceive you. This idea is of course in any form of poker. He does such a good job of talking about strategies, I think these books are a must.

[aamitch10]

OK... I definatly agree with you John, just took you explaining what you meant. I probably play too textbook as the limits are getting large, but it has not been a problem for me. I tend to take the approach of, "OK I will make it in the money, now lets hope for a good hand to finish 1st"

[ChipLeader]

I am indeed referring to the 10.00 daily, as well at the 20.00 7G guarenteed nightly, its at 9:45 for those who are unaware of it.

The rule of thumb in HE is to keep your money out of these coinflip situations unless you are to small stacked to wait any longer, or have committed enough chips where the pot odds demand it. Here you are talking about taking these edges when the blinds can cripple you most? Somebody said they play ubertight because theres calling stations all tourny and i tend to agree with that.

A prime example is a pair with overcard kicker, lets say you have [3K]3 and are up against [xx]J. In ring you would play this if you could get it heads up and youd play it to the end. If ante is 25, bringin is 100 and the completion bet is 300, and you have to raise to get it heads up, you are risking:
25+300+300=625 to ante and heads-up raise.
300 on 4th, 600 on 5th, 600 on 6th.= 2125
Even when you have a moderate stack like 5G at this level, which will actually be one of the bigstacks, you are risking almost half of it on a 50/50. Wouldnt it be better to wait until you had a hand with a better chance, or get out unimproved earlier?

I dont know if this is right, but it seems like it to me.

[PoorLawyer]

[ QUOTE ]
History:
I picked up Stud to some extent on my own, but refined my game after reading Roy Wests book, 42 lesson on Winning 7-Card Stud (at medium and lower limits). I ONLY play Stud multi-table tournaments (MTTs), as the cash money games for 7-stud have tremendous swings that i cant afford.

Question:
I just finished reading 7-Card Stud for Advanced Players by the PokerGod that is David Sklansky, but so far the concepts ive tried to apply from the book have been causing inappropriate swings for a tournament structure. For those who have read the book and are successful at MTTs, what are some concepts you stray from as a result of the tournament structure.

Sidenote:
Prior to reading the book i placed in the money in about 35-40% of the MTTs i played, with about 10% FT finishes, including 1 first, 1 second, 1 3rd, 1 4th, and various placements 5-8. Since reading the book i have only played about 5 but havent made money yet (though i did get a good stack in 1 or 2, it only takes 1 big hand to get short again.) Im not suggesting the advice is wrong, but perhaps some of it isnt appropriate for large tournament play.

Typical structure:
Ante is 1/3 or 1/4 of bringin, complete (or first bet) is 3x or 4x the bring in. 5th street bets (or paired 4th) is ALWAYS twice the "complete" bet amount.
Example
Level 4: Ante- 15, Bring in- 50, complete 150
Level 5: Ante- 15, Bring in- 50, complete 200
Level 6: Ante- 25, Bring in- 100 complete 300
(On fifth street or when a board pairs 4th, twice the completion is allowed)

[/ QUOTE ]

your sample size is so small that it is tough to make a comment. How many tournaments have you played that make up your 35-40% cashing?? Not making the money in 5 tournaments is nothing to really get too concerned about....yet

[jon_1van]

[ QUOTE ]
The rule of thumb in HE is to keep your money out of these coinflip situations

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, not strictly true. In general you don't call when the "best case" is a coin flip. For Instance, there is a big bet to you preflop and you have 99, Here you only call if you are super desperate. Because that is the only time when you should risk him having an overpair. So you aren't keeping your money out of coinflip, you are keeping your money out of domination. And the fact that you won't call doesn't mean you wouldn't raise from the preflop raisers seat with 99. There is a world of difference between calling and raising.



A monster part about playing tournies correctly is navagating stack sizes.

If I have a good size stack holding 3K3 and another big stack showing a Q raises I will probably fold

But there exists a stack that the Q can have that will make me call.

As his stack decreases the damage he can do to me decreases.
As his stack decreases the more the antes and the BI will offset the fact that I'll be a slight dog.


Your right that you don't make alot in tournies taking marginal hands against big stacks.

But you will make money if you can keep picking off small stacks when you have an overlay. The nice thing about stud is that hands run realtively close in value. So forcing players with small stacks all-in (or making them realize that's where they'll be if go past 3rd) will never be that wrong. Lots of times they'll fold, and the times they don't you won't be too far behind and you'll have the antes/BI to amortorize your risk.

[ChipLeader]

Jon, you quoted HALF my sentence on HE, i think you need to reread it. I said you keep out of these situatios unless you are shortstacked, which you repeated in your post.

However, your points were extremely valid on playing more aggressively when they are short, but not taking these slight edges when they can do a lot of damage. I assume when YOU are the shortstack you would wait until you had the overpair to get your chips in, rather than having the slight disadvantage.

Example: [4A]4
When bigstack, play it hard if you can get it heads up against 1 shortstack holding anything under an A.

When shortstack, throw it out if you cant reasonably steal or limp in for the bring in.

Are these statements correct?

[ChipLeader]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
History:
I picked up Stud to some extent on my own, but refined my game after reading Roy Wests book, 42 lesson on Winning 7-Card Stud (at medium and lower limits). I ONLY play Stud multi-table tournaments (MTTs), as the cash money games for 7-stud have tremendous swings that i cant afford.

Question:
I just finished reading 7-Card Stud for Advanced Players by the PokerGod that is David Sklansky, but so far the concepts ive tried to apply from the book have been causing inappropriate swings for a tournament structure. For those who have read the book and are successful at MTTs, what are some concepts you stray from as a result of the tournament structure.

Sidenote:
Prior to reading the book i placed in the money in about 35-40% of the MTTs i played, with about 10% FT finishes, including 1 first, 1 second, 1 3rd, 1 4th, and various placements 5-8. Since reading the book i have only played about 5 but havent made money yet (though i did get a good stack in 1 or 2, it only takes 1 big hand to get short again.) Im not suggesting the advice is wrong, but perhaps some of it isnt appropriate for large tournament play.

Typical structure:
Ante is 1/3 or 1/4 of bringin, complete (or first bet) is 3x or 4x the bring in. 5th street bets (or paired 4th) is ALWAYS twice the "complete" bet amount.
Example
Level 4: Ante- 15, Bring in- 50, complete 150
Level 5: Ante- 15, Bring in- 50, complete 200
Level 6: Ante- 25, Bring in- 100 complete 300
(On fifth street or when a board pairs 4th, twice the completion is allowed)

[/ QUOTE ]

your sample size is so small that it is tough to make a comment. How many tournaments have you played that make up your 35-40% cashing?? Not making the money in 5 tournaments is nothing to really get too concerned about....yet

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasnt saying im losing because the book is wrong, I just think there are concepts that are unsuitable for extremely loose/weak PartyPoker MTTs. I have been trying to play every hand the way i read it should be played, or close to, but find im risking a big chunk of chips in too many spots. Tournaments are very different from ring, and this book was clearly written in regards to ring.

[jon_1van]

[ QUOTE ]
I assume when YOU are the shortstack you would wait until you had the overpair to get your chips in, rather than having the slight disadvantage.

Example: [4A]4


[/ QUOTE ]


I would open any pot for a raise unless my cards were dead.

If the pot was raised to me a number of things would have to occur to make me fold.
-The raises is someone who I believe to be ultratight
-The current level just started (read I have about 10 hands before stakes increase again)
-The raisers up card is 100% live and his suit is deadish (if his suit is live he'll be more likely to have a flush draw, which I'd want to play against)
-Note, if my pair was 8's or higher I would never fold. There are now too many hands like 44K that I'll be ahead of.


I think the value of the bigstack is worth a little risk...hell, I'm small, I'm probably gonna bust anyway.

[Andy B]

You may just be reverting towards the mean. By this I mean that you were running good before, and your current losing streak is just bringing your overall results closer to what they ought to be. Not cashing five tournaments in a row doesn't strike me as anything unusual. I've never played in an on-line multi-table tournament other than 2+2 events, but I have played a lot of live MTTs, and I have gone some very long streaks without cashing. The first 20 or so I played, for example.

7CS4AP is geared towards medium-to-high ante structures. The structures you cite are pretty low, the lowest I've ever seen for a tournament. More normal antes for stud tournaments:

$150/300: $25 ante, $50 force
$200/400: $50 ante, $75 force
$300/600: $50 ante, $100 force

$200/400 might have a $25 ante, or it might have a $50 bring-in.

[PokrLikeItsProse]

[ QUOTE ]
You may just be reverting towards the mean. By this I mean that you were running good before, and your current losing streak is just bringing your overall results closer to what they ought to be.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, running better than your true level doesn't make you more likely to have a losing streak after your good run as some sort of karmic restoration.

[PoorLawyer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You may just be reverting towards the mean. By this I mean that you were running good before, and your current losing streak is just bringing your overall results closer to what they ought to be.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, running better than your true level doesn't make you more likely to have a losing streak after your good run as some sort of karmic restoration.

[/ QUOTE ]

well in the long run it kind of does. if you flip 10 heads in a row, it doesnt mean you have some kind of magic quarter. Call it what you want, but eventually it will drop down to hitting 1/2 the time.

[PokrLikeItsProse]

[ QUOTE ]
well in the long run it kind of does. if you flip 10 heads in a row, it doesnt mean you have some kind of magic quarter. Call it what you want, but eventually it will drop down to hitting 1/2 the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, in the long run, it kind of doesn't. If you flip 10 heads in a row to start off with and keep on flipping the coin, in the long run, you are likely to end up +10 on heads. Flip the coin a million more times and your expectation is that you will end up having flipped heads 500,010 times and tails 500,000 times. Flip it 100 more times, and those numbers become 60-50. It doesn't mean that in the next 100 flips, you will turn up tails 55 times to balance out that streak of 10 heads that you started out with.

This is basic statistics, like how the probability of being dealt aces on the next hand is equal to the probability of being dealt aces on the next hand given that you were dealt aces on the previous hand.

[PoorLawyer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
well in the long run it kind of does. if you flip 10 heads in a row, it doesnt mean you have some kind of magic quarter. Call it what you want, but eventually it will drop down to hitting 1/2 the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, in the long run, it kind of doesn't. If you flip 10 heads in a row to start off with and keep on flipping the coin, in the long run, you are likely to end up +10 on heads. Flip the coin a million more times and your expectation is that you will end up having flipped heads 500,010 times and tails 500,000 times. Flip it 100 more times, and those numbers become 60-50. It doesn't mean that in the next 100 flips, you will turn up tails 55 times to balance out that streak of 10 heads that you started out with.

This is basic statistics, like how the probability of being dealt aces on the next hand is equal to the probability of being dealt aces on the next hand given that you were dealt aces on the previous hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you DO have a magic quarter.

[BeerMoney]

Who cares.

[jon_1van]

Magic Quarter Lepercuans