If you were (let's say) Doyle Brunson

[Hung]

I've been playing online poker since December last year. So that's about a couple of months.
I don't think I have already played 100 tournaments. But I think I reached the last table about 15% of the time. If I had played 100 tournaments that means I got 15 times final table. But it also means that I lost 85 times. I'm still making profit, but it seems so small.
I wonder how Doyle does it. If he played 100 tournaments, how many would he win? All kinds of tournaments. $1, $10, $100 or $10000 multitable tournaments.
If you want to win a big tournament like the WSOP, you'll need to win all your coinflips. AK vs QQ or any other 50/50 hand. Just one single mistake and you'll be out. How do they avoid these situations?
I think that's the key. I'd like to win more tournaments.
So how many tournaments would a worldchamp win out of 100? All kinds of tournaments. All NL HE, but all kinds of stakes. Freeroll, small and big stakes.

[RiverMel]

Hung asked how many Doyle would win of all kinds: small buy-in, large buy-in, huge buy-in, and freerolls. Which made me wonder: Would Doyle (or any other pro) end up doing less well in online freerolls because people play so haphazardly and without much regard to normal strategy? Would this "throw him off" and / or cause him to be in too many strange confrontations as to lower his win rate?

[Hung]

That's what I tried to ask. But my English is a bit crappy.
I just wonder if a pro could survive in a big sea where fish gather in big meetings. And I also wanted to know if it's possible to reach the final table 50% of the time.

[Greg (FossilMan)]

If you're thinking of tourneys with 100 players or more, nobody can ever reach the final table half the time.

A simple rule of thumb, that I believe though I've never seen it proven, is that the top pros finish in each paying spot about twice as often as average. So, out of 100 players, a top pro makes the final table about 20 times rather than 10.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[RiverMel]

Greg,
What about the other question--how would you do in a NL online freeroll , for instance?

[Martin Aigner]

Greg, don´t you think that it depends pretty much which buy in you play in? I have read that Stu Ungar played in 35 tournaments with a buy in of $5000 and WON 10 out of them. ( see http://www.cardplayer.com/?sec=afeature&art_id=44 )

Of course one can´t say that he would have won 100 out of 350 tourneys, still this is a EXTREMLY high percentage. Still I doubt that he would have won this high percentage in say $300 buy in events.

Regards

Martin Aigner

[lwinfieldm]

The fact that the blinds in the big tournaments only go up every hour and they dont even double up i think gives the better player more of an advantage.

[cferejohn]

Strong tournament players should do their damndest to avoid "coin flip" situations unless they have a reasonable chip-lead over the fellow coin-flipee. That way, if they lose, they are still alive. Not always possible, I realize, but a way to minimize the "I have to win all my coin flips" issue.

[Greg (FossilMan)]

I don't know for a fact, since I've never really played in one. I suspect my expectation would be at least double the average player, however.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Hung:

Doyle would not win many tournaments. It's just tough to do. One thing that does seem to happen is that there always seems to be someone who does win more than their fair share of tournaments in a short period of time. Part of this is the fact that they play tournaments well. Part is also the fact that they were lucky over a period of time.

Another thing that I believe happens is that opponents begin to realize that these very aggressive tournament stars need to be called more. Once this happens, even though their strategy is correct, it loses a little of its effectiveness.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Hung]

I'm doing pretty well then /forums/images/icons/laugh.gif
I'll be the next Doyle then LOL /forums/images/icons/wink.gif /forums/images/icons/wink.gif Just kidding of course.
I reach top 30 out of 100 most of the time. I don't reach final table all the time. I bust out very soon because I try to double up with a coinflip. Or I get crappy cards for a long time and I bust out somewhere 30th. If I get a few good flops and I double twice I'm on my way for the final table. Yesterday I got 2nd in a multitable tournament. 98players. The day before that I got 11th (more then 100 players). I play small tournaments. And the loose players drop out really fast. If I can reach final table 1 out of 5 times, that already very good, isn't it?

I'm rereading the books I have. For the moment I'm reading the theory of poker by sklansky. I also read tournament poker. And I think it helped me alot. I had difficulties with big hands. I couldn't muck them and I moved all-in too often. Or called all-in too often with AKo or AKs. I try to avoid all-in. Unless I'm low on chips or when I have no other choice.

[Mike Haven]

one of the reasons that many of the big names climb a long way up what seem to be a disproportionate number of ladders is because of "respect" by other "lesser" players

you might be surprised by the cards that are lain down in the face of a big raise by brunson or his like which would never reach the muck if another lesser player had made the same raise in the same circumstances

[Hung]

I have a very good example.
Remember when I said you have to win most of your coinflips?
There're days you can't even beat 4/1 favorite. Yesterday I knew it was one of those days. That's why I mucked all hands expect the nuts. The 5 tophands like AA, KK, QQ, AKs, etc.
I folded every hand during a long period. 120 players, 35 were already out. I lost 150 in chips at blinds. Still good. I get A /forums/images/icons/heart.gif K /forums/images/icons/heart.gif This is one of my favorite hands. I love this hand. It looks so nice. It looks even nicer then AA. I think blinds were 20-40. I'm in middle postion. I raise 40, making it 80 to call. Almost the whole table calls. I didn't wanted to raise big, because I knew I was gonna miss the flop. It was't going to happen today. So one raise should limit the field and I could muck if I flopped rags. UTG who called earier (chipleader with 3k) moves all in. He was on a steal. I put him on AQ or maybe AK. I have the best of it. My odds are really good. It's not a coinflip. I know I had a huge advantage. My cards were suited. And I knew he just wanted to steal. If I put him on QQ I would never call. Because that's a coinflip and I wont it. Anyway. I cal with my AKs and we open our cards. He holds AJo. Woehoe! Just as I thought. Flop: rags. Turn Q and river J. /forums/images/icons/frown.gif
I just knew it. It was a feeling I had before I started. I wasn't going to win my 50/50. This is why I think it's impssoble for anyone (even the very best) to win most of their tournaments. Should I have mucked my hand? Remember what the theory of poker says? I knew what he had, and if we played open I'd do the same.
Next time better luck.