When M and Q disagree

First time poster to this forum.....

I've been a successful SnG player for about 4 months now. But recently I've been trying MTT's only to find it's a completely different beast. I had some early success in these tourneys, finishing in the money my first 4 of 5; 3 of those times at the FT. I always play UB mostly on the $33 buyin MTT's.

In all those tourney's I was able to double up early on some loose idiots. But the last 4 tourney's I've encountered the same problem: What am I supposed to do when I have an M of approx. 15 but a Q of about 0.5 - 0.7? According to Harrington, I should start pushing high cards, suited connectors, and mid pairs with an M of less than 10; but I've been finding myself with a 1400 chip stack, 30-60 blinds, but the average chip stack is 2400. And continuing on with yellow zone strategy in this situation doesn't seem to be working....so should I start pushing high cards and mid pairs in these situations?

[Lloyd]

I'm a firm believe in pointing people in the right direction versus just throwing an answer out there. So, since you have read Harrington on Hold Em, read it again and you'll find the answer you're looking for. He specifically addresses this situation.

[nath]

The book explicitly says that you always side with M first when the two conflict.
Q isn't nearly as useful.

[LethalRose]

I've said it once...

[elmitchbo]

Q isn't really that important. more of a side note really. M is what dictates your strategy.

[Lloyd]

[ QUOTE ]
I've said it once...

[/ QUOTE ]
You know people completely disagree with you when you say this, particularly since you haven't read the book. The book is not "dangerous". Most of the confusion or rote play comes from people's lack of comprehension because they really didn't take the time to learn the concepts discussed. This is a perfect example. In no uncertain terms does Harrington address the fact that Q (your chips in relation to average stack) is pretty much meaningless and what should impact your play (among other things, of course) is your M (your stack in relation to blinds/antes).

The fact that this poster/reader missed this (as have others) doesn't make the book dangerous. I'm sure you've heard the adage "I know enough about X to get me in trouble". Same thing here. If you pick up a college textbook on chemistry, skim it, and then go to the lab and blow the place up, it doesn't make chemistry itself dangerous. It's the person who didn't take the time to truly read and understand the book who is dangerous.

Original Poster: please don't take my comments too personally. This has been an ongoing discussion in this forum.

[Lloyd]

And this is why I didn't just give an answer to the original question, but pointed the OP back to HOH - so he could re-read that section to better understand the concepts discussed.

Ok well, sticking to HOH zone strategies is what I was leaning towards when I made this post. I was only seeking those who maybe had unorthodox strategies in these situations.

Since most of those who replied believed that M was much more important than Q (as I did), I can more confidently stick to the HOH strategy for my future MTT's.

And trust me Lloyd, I'm not offended by the comments....I can handle getting my balls busted every now and then.....