Level 3 and finish distribution.

[suited_ace]

I've been worried about my finish distribution (previous post (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=singletable&Number=332 0660&Forum=&Words=&Searchpage=0&Limit=25&Main=3320 660&Search=true&where=bodysub&Name=26243&daterange =1&newerval=1&newertype=w&olderval=&oldertype=&bod yprev=#Post3320660)) lately, so I've been studying to try and figure out how to get it better and improve my ROI in the process.

When I did that post I already had a something in mind: my suspicion was that I was playing the early levels too tight. After taking a look at my HHs, I found that level 3 is way more important than I thought in the 800 chip tournies.

With the blinds at 25/50, the average stack has 16BBs, which is usually the spot where players start playing really tight. There's still room for post-flop play, but not that much. This is the perfect spot to run a few bluffs and to play very agressively pre-flop, so that's what I did. Compared to how I use to play lvl3, I now look like a total maniac.

I've played ~100 tournies after changing my play, so it's too early to know for sure if this is really as effective as I think it is. FWIW, my finish distribution since I started to play like this is finnaly 1sts > 2nds > 3rds. Those extra chips end up being extremely valuable when you get to the bubble and then ITM.

[Seth Money]

Nice, suited.

I've been having some similiar trouble lately with my distribution, been ITM 40.7% but my ROI is suffering because in end game I don't have enough chips late. So mine has been 1 < 2 < 3 over the past 500 or so tournaments. Its frustrating isn't it? 3rd place sucks, but maybe you could PM me or post on here after about 500 tourneys to see if the trend continues..... I'm going to look into my play in the 3rd level though.

Seth

[Misfire]

This reminds me of the PVS (http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=&Number=1997018&page=& view=&sb=5&o=&fpart=) post that was pointed out to me the other day.

[suited_ace]

Yeah, but I think you can be even more aggressive. PVS says, and I quote:

[ QUOTE ]
If I have an average stack of 800, I don't do much in level 3. The blinds aren't worth stealing, and you don't have a enough chips to really play a hand to the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

My point is that if I have an average stack of 800, that's exactly when I'm starting to look for good stealing/bluffing spots. I don't need to look for those if I got my stack to over 1000 chips when level 3 comes, and if my stack is under 700, I'm basically in push/fold mode.

With ~800 chips, my ideal situation is to have position over just one opponent, see a flop and try to keep the pot small to see the turn. If you get to the turn or even to the river without a huge pot, the low-limit players are dumb enough for you to know when to get out of the hand and when the pot is there for you to steal.

If my steal fails, I'm left w/ ~500 chips, and I'm more than comfortable playing with that in level 4. It's not a very pretty situation, but it's not the end of the world either. I'd rather take that shot at level 3 that usually gives me enough chips to sail through level 4 without a hand than to get in level 4 w/ an average stack without having taken any risks.

Not only that, I'm playing way more aggressively pre-flop. I've been raising w/ AQ from any position if it's 7-handed or less, I've been treating JJ as if it were QQ. In many spots I'm re-raising all-in w/ AK too.

Again, my sample size is still too small, but I really feel this is it.

[Freudian]

I play level 3 more like level 4, and not like level 1-2. Gets me more chips sometimes. Gets me into trouble sometimes. As long as you keep in mind that a raise to 150 doesn't have the folding equity you would think it has, I don't see a problem with playing level 3 aggressively.

[bones]

[ QUOTE ]
With the blinds at 25/50, the average stack has 16BBs

[/ QUOTE ]

Only true if all 10 players are still in. This is rarely the case.

[suited_ace]

Oooooops... That's what you get for posting when you really should be in bed.