Short Stack Play

[Degen]

Ok been chatting with some other 2ers lately and we've had some disagreements over how best to play when the blinds start growing and your stack starts shrinking:

My approach (at t800 and t1000 starting chips )is to start pushing at lvl 4 with less than t800 in LP when folded to w/ pretty much any top 50% hand, about 1/2 the time. Obviously I adjust if the blinds are loose or if they have short or big stacks etc. But generally speaking i'm doing a lot of pushing from LP w/ A4o and KTo and any PP etc. Once i get over t900 or so I'm slowing down and then opening back up a lot again at lvl 5 if i'm under t1100 or so, w/ basically the same strategy as above.

When i have t600 or below at lvl 4 i'm doing a lot of pushing w/ all sorts of hands from all sorts of positions, looking to keep my head above water w/ the blinds getting huge and also to try and double...this could mean pushing 66 UTG or QJs in EP etc. Preserve FE at all costs.

The less people in the tourney, the more i open up, and the more ppl in, the more i slow down from the above...but generally speaking, thats my game plan.


The others i've talked to think this is poor and it is better to play uber tight here and wait for big hands etc. Having 5 BB's is not so bad etc etc.


Any thoughts?

[ilya]

Well the first thing that comes to mind is that there is a big difference between the various "late" positions. Namely pushing from the SB is *much* better than pushing from the button, and similarly pushing from the button is *much* better than pushing from the CO. And so on.

[Degen]

[ QUOTE ]
Well the first thing that comes to mind is that there is a big difference between the various "late" positions. Namely pushing from the SB is *much* better than pushing from the button, and similarly pushing from the button is *much* better than pushing from the CO. And so on.

[/ QUOTE ]

why do you say it is *much* better? obviously there are less people to dodge, but i also think that the following is true to the extent that it balances this problem out:

pushing from UTG is *much* less obvious a steal than pushing from UTG+1 and pushing from EMP is *much* less obvious a steal than pushing from LMP and pushing from the CO is *much* less obvious than pushing from the button etc etc

-not mocking the * * /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[curtains]

Your whole post was way too generalized. You cant think like that if you want to improve at poker. There is zero chance I could even dream of summing up my general strategy in a situation like that in just a few sentences/paragraphs. There are just way too many factors to even attempt to do so.

Also there is no freaking late position. Its the button, the cutoff, 2 off the button and 3 off the button. Each position is unique and to lump them all in together isn't a good sign.

[lastchance]

Actually, positional factors have a multiplicative effect.

The difference between SB and Button is greater than the difference between Button and CO. And between CO and CO-1 isn't as large a difference as one would make think.

So, an any 2 push from the SB becomes 50-60% from the button, and only goes down to 30-40% from CO.

Those are my guesses.

[curtains]

Degen your last post is almost always incorrect. In sit and gos its basically always better to be on the button or as close as possible. There is no set of opponents or scenario where by moving allin UTG you will suddenly be more profitable than if you had your hand on the button. They will generally be a touch tighter, but not nearly enough so to account for all the extra opponents.

[curtains]

yes lastchance is correct. When there are 2 opponents, your position is by far the best, and gets worse each spot away. However it gets much worse from the SB to the button, than it does from 2 off button to 3 off button. However there is still a signifigant difference between any 2 late/middle positions.

[Degen]

[ QUOTE ]
There is no set of opponents or scenario where by moving allin UTG you will suddenly be more profitable than if you had your hand on the button.

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously not.

But what i am saying that it is an inversly proportional relationship. Meaning that the closer to the button you get the looser the range can be. From 66/QJs UTG to any two from the SB.