strategy based on buy-in?

[FREDSKINS]

CasinoArizona has recently started tournaments with no buy-in, well sort of. No entry $7 table fee every half hour until your eliminated. So the only time I get in I'm thinking (this is no-limit by the way) play like a nut early and either get a big chip lead or be out $7 and into a ring game. So I play like a nut (wont go though the hands in fear of laughter) and get $11,000 in chips out of $280,000 and this is in the first half hour. Anyways i revert to my real no-limit tournament stragety and 4.5 hours later I find myself out $63 with about a 35th place finish out of 280 which is respectable but I would have rather gotten 280th and had my $63 back but......CasinoArizona puts up $12,500 for these tournaments. this kind of tournament would usually cost $100 to $150.

[Ignatius]

Could you elaborate on the structure: When is the first $7 fee collected (at the start or after 1/2h)? Does the time-fee contribute to the prize pool? Are there rebuys/addons available? Are the $12,500 added or merely guaranteed? What is the typical enventual prize pool? How fast do the blinds increase? How fast is the field shrinking? How long does the tourney usually last? What does the payout structure look like?

[FREDSKINS]

you must pay $7 at the start along with every half hour when the blinds increase. The prize pool is $12,500 and is paid out to the final 20. It takes about 4 hrs to make it to the money and there are no re-buys and no add ons.I dont know exactly how they distribute the money.

[Ignatius]

So the prize pool is fixed. With 280 entrants, your initial equity is about $45 (or about 2h 40 min worth of time fee). So, a proftiable strategy has to assure that during the first 4 limits, you either at least double your stack or bust out. Unless the blinds start out very low, this should happen in due course, so as long as you keep an average stack, no massive changes in strategy should be required besides that you should be more apt to push marginal edges early on, as there is no premium on survial. When you get short stacked to a point of having considerably less than your original buyin, it is reasonable to move in even if as a slight dog before the limit increases.
.
Generally, while playing survial-poker is obviously wrong with this format, by always forcing a decision during the first level (i.e. playing a "maniac strategy"), you are probably losing more in equity than you save in entry-fees.

[FREDSKINS]

thanks