Playing in the WCOOP main event

[Alchemist]

Last night I managed to survive one of the Stars super satellites to gain entry to the O8 Main Event on Wednesday. I felt I played well in it, a little more aggressively than I'm used to but I also got quite lucky at times. Considering I'm a $1/2 player (+3-4BB/100) with fairly limited tourney experience, I'm looking for some last-minute tournament strategy advice.

The sort of things I'm looking for is:
o what sort of hands that would normally be considered marginal would be good for stealing blinds from the CO or SB? What about defending the BB?

o At what point regarding stack size to blind ratio should I start loosening up my starting hand requirements and/or bringing weaker hands in for a raise?

Hell, should I just sell my W$ for a guaranteed ~$500? Right now there's a big overlay in the tourney. 206 entrants, pays the top 27. Lowest payout gets 0.7% or $1750. Should I expect MUCH better competition/more aggression in the Main Event vs. the super sat?

TIA

[Ribbo]

In all honesty, maybe you should have thought about all this before you attempted to qualify. You wouldn't find me entering a rally driving competition just because I passed my driving test, so why enter a tournament then admit you're not good enough?

[Alchemist]

[ QUOTE ]
In all honesty, maybe you should have thought about all this before you attempted to qualify. You wouldn't find me entering a rally driving competition just because I passed my driving test, so why enter a tournament then admit you're not good enough?

[/ QUOTE ]

I entered using FPP, which I don't really have a use for so figured it'd be a cheap way to take a stab at it.

Nonetheless, I think I have a reasonable shot at the money. I just think the luck factor is simply huge.
In the first satellite I had to finish in the top 17/177. In the super, it was 9/332. How much can be attributed to skill vs. luck? I felt totally charmed when my stack was getting low and the BB was coming around to me. I'd get a great starting hand, raise PF and get usually one caller. Then the board would hit me perfectly. My A3 would bring a board of 257. I don't think my lows ever got counterfeited.

I even scooped a pot with A3JQ vs AA3K (Board: 74JTK). Does that make me a good player? When I got cards worth pushing, I pushed and they held up.

So I'm faced with the decision of taking a sure (smallish) profit vs. rolling the dice at a potentially big score. My gut's telling me to play, cause I think I'd regret passing up this opportunity. But at the same time, there's the option of pocketing a sure thing over what sometimes seems like a coin-flipping contest.

[DeadMoneyOC]

How important would 500 be to you? Hope comfortable would you feel playing in a tournament of this size? I think you could easily be a favorite against the field though. There are probably going to be a lot of donks.

[ClaytonN]

[ QUOTE ]
How important would 500 be to you?

[/ QUOTE ]

[mshalen]

Run out and buy a copy (and read) Harrington on Holdem both volumes. This will give you an edge in tourney play over a typical O8 cash player.

[Alchemist]

[ QUOTE ]
How important would 500 be to you? Hope comfortable would you feel playing in a tournament of this size?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not terribly. That also has been a driving force in favor of playing. But of course I'd miss it if I bust out 2 hours into the tourney.

[ QUOTE ]
I think you could easily be a favorite against the field though. There are probably going to be a lot of donks.

[/ QUOTE ]
I doubt there will be a lot of them. though I think something can be said for playing against sensible opponents versus idiots who play 85% of hands and hit lucky cards. In the super sat, there seemed to be people just giving away their chips with some incomprehensibly bad play which was critical in building a decent stack midway through the tourney.

[muse21]

I would probably sell the entry, but I'm a nit.

You paid nothing to get where you are, so you have nothing to lose, right? If you intend to compete in tourneys with similar buy-in's in the future then the experience (knowing what to expect from the competition) and the potential confidence boost may be worth the $500.

[Ribbo]

When you're learning the game, confidence is very important, your mental attitude is vital. Coming out with something to show for your play is definately going to help you. Take the tournament dollars.

[PhilTheThrill14]

Isn't the experience of playing in a large tournament with nice payouts "something"? Or does the "something" you mention have to be money? You are talking about hm learning the game and such and even mention confidence and mental attitude. So why bail out and miss out on the experience - which he needs. Doesn't make sense to me.

Play the tournament - have fun - pay attention and learn what you can.

If your bankroll could use a $500 boost, I say unregister and take the money. If your bankroll wouldn't miss the 500, I say go for it, as you have as reasonable a shot as anybody else.

It may be worthwhile to read Tournament Poker for Advanced Players to get a hold of some tournament strategy.

[Ribbo]

[ QUOTE ]
Isn't the experience of playing in a large tournament with nice payouts "something"? Or does the "something" you mention have to be money? You are talking about hm learning the game and such and even mention confidence and mental attitude. So why bail out and miss out on the experience - which he needs. Doesn't make sense to me.

Play the tournament - have fun - pay attention and learn what you can.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can't have fun when you're playing above your comfortable threshold for a stake. He will not learn anything playing in that tournament that he wont learn playing in other multitable tournaments with smaller buyins. Your comments make little practical sense.

[TGoldman]

Had you not won the seat, would you otherwise consider buying directly into the tournament for $500? Why or why not? Don't think of the seat as a freeroll. It has real cash value that should be considered as part of your bankroll. Thinking of playing the tournament as solely a learning experience is an awfully expensive way to learn.

[Alchemist]

[ QUOTE ]
Had you not won the seat, would you otherwise consider buying directly into the tournament for $500? Why or why not? Don't think of the seat as a freeroll. It has real cash value that should be considered as part of your bankroll. Thinking of playing the tournament as solely a learning experience is an awfully expensive way to learn.

[/ QUOTE ]
I never, ever would have considered spending $530 to enter the tournament directly--that's over 20% my current BR. In fact I wasn't even aware until I won the super sat that you could unregister, take W$ and sell them to other players (for about 90% their face value). Thus arose the dilemma. The only other tourneys I've entered were a handful of $10+1 MTTs and $5 SnGs. FWIW I did place 5/291 in one of the $10 ones.

I've been playing (and winning) online for 9-10 months. I'm probably long overdue for moving up in limits and I think the extra few hundred will help as a buffer for downswings.

Ribbo said:
[ QUOTE ]
He will not learn anything playing in that tournament that he wont learn playing in other multitable tournaments with smaller buyins.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree I won't learn anything significant. However I think it'd be a great experience to see how I match up against the supposed 'best'. Which would be one of the regrets if I didn't play, because I think I could play a strong game like in the super sat.

However the situation is exactly like how TGoldman puts it. Since I can take a near cash equivalent out, it's really no different than spending the money to buy into the tourney.
So after a lot of deliberation, I've decided to sell my seat and watch the match from the rail. I appreciate everyone's thoughts, discussion and book suggestions, I'll give them a look.

Cheers

[PhilTheThrill14]

"You can't have fun when you're playing above your comfortable threshold for a stake."

Says who? You?

"He will not learn anything playing in that tournament that he wont learn playing in other multitable tournaments with smaller buyins."

Says who? You?

Your comments make little practical sense as well - as they are generic and unfounded. Of course he can have fun - it's not like he has put up the actual $500 to enter - it's almost like a freeroll (I said almost) situation for him. I know I could have fun and the stakes would be way above my usual stakes - and I mean way. He'll get the experience (learn what it's like) of playing for high stakes - he won't get that playing in the lower buy-in tournies you speak of.

I think your response was incorrect - can you provide me with something to backup your belief that he can't have fun playing for high stakes (do you know him?) and that he won't learn anything useful that he couldn't already learn in a low(er) buy-in MTT? I just don't see it.

[Ribbo]

[ QUOTE ]
Your comments make little practical sense as well - as they are generic and unfounded. Of course he can have fun - it's not like he has put up the actual $500 to enter -

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes he has put up the $500. He won the entry fee in the previous tournament, he can then choose whether to enter this one or use the tournament dollars in any other events.
[ QUOTE ]
He'll get the experience (learn what it's like) of playing for high stakes

[/ QUOTE ]
Bullshit. This is completely meaningless and pointless when it comes to experience. The experience that matters is learning tournament strategy, and how to adjust your aggression to the willingness of other players to fold or call with their marginal hands. Experiencing "high stakes" has absolutely no bearing on the situation, especially since he wont be playing "high stakes" for a very long time. Such a tournament will attract the same skill of players as any $50 multitable, with one main difference, he himself will only get one chance to learn how to play.
[ QUOTE ]
he won't get that playing in the lower buy-in tournies you speak of.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's because he for a long time will be playing lower stakes, so there is no reason whatsoever for getting "experience" playing anything other than the stakes that matter. I have no interest sitting in the same game as Doyle Brunson to get experience playing him because I never intend to play him. There is no value whatsoever in what you are suggesting.

[ QUOTE ]
I think your response was incorrect - can you provide me with something to backup your belief that he can't have fun playing for high stakes (do you know him?) and that he won't learn anything useful that he couldn't already learn in a low(er) buy-in MTT? I just don't see it.

[/ QUOTE ] To stake $500 in one go, is a lot for anyone who admits it would be a significant portion of his bankroll. Let me put it another way for you. One of the important, and I stress this, factors for omaha is bankroll management. If he hasn't got the brains to take the cash rather than the tournament entry, then he will become a terrible player, who plays above his limit regularily and will experience going bankrupt for his roll.

[Drizztdj]

Unless you have a high 5 or 6 figure bankroll, I don't think a $500 tourney is the place to "have fun". There's plenty of $1 and $2 tourneys for that.