SNG math theory??? what point does loose early play become ok?

i've seen some posts on people's strategies for tournaments... i guess i made reference to SNG, which i think is one table... but could be multi-table.

my question is this:

has anyone done studies as to best strategy early in these tournaments??? .... i think everyone agrees as time goes on, steal some blinds, hopefully taking advantage of tight image to do so.

but i was wondering, early on it basically costs almost nothing (i.e. one small bet when you have 75 of them), that doesn't it make sense to loosen up a little and try to double up....

i have found it somewhat difficult to play with catch up when a bunch of people have many more chips than me. the internet player seems happy to risk doubling up and then they'll play pretty much any 40% winning situation... so i play 60% winning chances and i have a very good chance of being out of the tournament after one showdown.

seems much better if you can throw a small number of chips in early and see if you can double up.

has anyone done any math work as to how low the starting blinds have to be relative to starting stack for throwing in a few chips early to be worthwile..... i mean, there must surely come a point where you'd put in the minimum bet (i.e. have to put in 2 chips and you have 1 million).

hope people know what i'm talking about.

thanks in advance!!

[wulfheir]

First hand of a $11 Partyskin SNG
4 limps and 3 folds
Action is to HERO on the button.

What range of hands do you limp with?

not totally sure of the blind structure... but let's say 20 chips to call, and you have 1500.... someone like harrington says play very little... but i'd probably play 10+ unsuited, a little looser suited (Q7 maybe minimum) and probably any pocket pair (looking for set), maybe throw away pocket 2's to 4's .....

but that is only with 20 chips out of 1,500 chips.. if it was 100 chips, i would tighten way up to harrington's standards, which are very tight.

but my thought is just the absolute smallness of the early blinds. barely costs you anything, although i absolutely hate it when someone raises after me (basically wasted those chips).

thanks for the response.

It seems to me that there are a lot of chips to be won in the middle stages of the SNG when those loose players decide to become tighter because of their big stacks. I often find myself with an average chip stack a couple of rounds in and then suddenly have lots of chips when the big stacks are cautious and the small stacks decide they should throw all caution to the wind.

[sfwusc]

You play these like MTT. You play for chips.

Most players at low limit MTT and SNG suck (that is being nice). The truth is many of them couldn't win if they could see the other players hold cards-- no way to figure current odds or est odds with a pay off hit.

I play to hit and get paid off. I would play a lot of hands early that would get monsters.

limp will all and maybe raise with some
As and Ks make great flushes
any PP set value
any suit connectors
High connectors

You will increase variance and EV.

SWUSC

[raptor517]

a lot of the reason some very successful 2+2ers dont play the early stages much is because they are on too many tables. they make up for it on the bubble with ideal shovebotting. most of the guys beating the 109s+ at least have SOME idea of how to play early, and certainly would benefit seeing the opponents hole cards. holla

I dont play 11s I play 33s...but if it was the 33s I limp in that situation with any connector above 3, any suited with a top card of q or better, any suited 1 gapper, any pair, and any two cards T+. I would raise any pair JJ or higher and AK.

[Jbrochu]

I don’t believe there is any one “best” strategy for STT SnG’s. People win with many different strategies. While there is no one “best” strategy, some strategies are difficult to play (and teach), while others are relatively easier to play (and teach). Harrington’s recommendations, in his own words, are based on a relatively conservative approach with the emphasis on simplifying his decision-making process while exerting maximum pressure on his opponent.

Clearly, early on in a tournament when your stack size is large in relation to the blinds, one valid strategy is to play more speculative hands hoping for a big payoff. However, you need to either be disciplined enough to give up on these hands when you don’t flop a monster, or skilled enough post-flop to figure when your medium or bottom pair is good. Most beginners don’t have the required discipline or the post-flop skills, and so when they limp in with a speculative hand and flop middle pair, it costs them their entire stack. I believe this is why you see the conservative approach recommended so often for small buy-in on-line STT’s.

Another reason the conservative approach works so well for the small buy-in on-line tournaments is the simple fact that most of your opponents are not paying attention to you. You can play solid and tight poker with absolutely no deception and still get your monster hands paid off, often with a double-up. This is why I don’t mess around too much early with extremely speculative hands, although I will play the better one’s such as J,10 suited and small pairs.

[Nicholasp27]

it'd be interesting if someone did a simulation for this for say, level 1 (10/15 blinds)

make a prelim list of hands to limp in with if 1/2/3/4/etc callers...have it deal 10 random hands...the ones meeting the criteria in the lists above would limp in...then have your player limp in with any 2...if hits flop with good hand (trips/top pair/flush/straight/2 pair/boat) then bet 1/2 pot...any limped hand that hit any part also calls bet...continue on down...over millions of trials u can improve the lists for 1/2/3/4/.../9 limpers before u based on which win big enough pots on average to give them odds to limp based on how often they win the hand


(ie we can say aa may win 60% of time vs random limper, but what size pot will they win on average? depends on how often average limped hand hits enough to call 1/2 pot bet and then so on down to river...if 27 shows to win 15% [5.67-1] of the time against 2 limpers and the average pot is 6bbs, then it's a +ev play against 2 limpers))