Proper Strategy with 3 left in Mini-Step?

[DoomSlice]

I made it to mini-step 3 after fighting through 1 and 2 a few times, and eventually ended up with a 5000-1500-1500 lead over my competition.

Since only places 1-2 move to step 4, I figured that neither of them could call any raise, so I started to move in EVERY hand preflop (blinds 100-200).

Is this proper strategy, or should I have toned it down a little?

[tshort]

I think that is a dumb strategy. I would be very selective of starting hands.

Why are you playing mini-steps anyway?

[raptor517]

u have 25x the bb. let them go to war and bust each other. not reason to apply tons of pressure. if they ARE in fact folding every hand except like AQ+ JJ+, then i dont have a problem shoving any 2. other than that though.. its in yer best interests not to double them up. holla

[DoomSlice]

Well, my thoughts were since they are similar stack sizes, they wouldn't want to risk calling an all in with their KJ type hands that would have a 30% chance of bust them. I figured that THEY would be the ones to wait for the other person to bust. Bad thinking?

[ QUOTE ]
u have 25x the bb. let them go to war and bust each other. not reason to apply tons of pressure. if they ARE in fact folding every hand except like AQ+ JJ+, then i dont have a problem shoving any 2. other than that though.. its in yer best interests not to double them up. holla

[/ QUOTE ]
Sweet! This helped me.

[DoomSlice]

[ QUOTE ]
Why are you playing mini-steps anyway?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because I get bored of cash games, but don't want to buy into the higher buyin STTs.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why are you playing mini-steps anyway?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because I get bored of cash games, but don't want to buy into the higher buyin STTs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Minis are low $/hr but high fun/$.

[pineapple888]

I don't understand the responses so far. Which doesn't mean they are wrong, I just don't understand them.

Isn't this very similar to a standard bubble? The fact that the top two prizes are identical makes shorties even less likely to call an aggressive big stack, since "shooting for first" doesn't help.

Using ICM with .5 for first, .5 for second, and 0 for third, I got the following:

5000 ==> .46
1500 ==> .27
1500 ==> .27

If you double somebody up:

3500 ==> .40
3000 ==> .38
1500 ==> .22

So shorty is risking .27 to gain .11, and you are risking .6 to get .5. Looks like uber-aggression is called for here.

You could try waiting for them to take each other on, but that might not happen for a while. It seems like you should keep pounding on them now so that if they do wake up with a monster later against you, they can't hurt you much.

Am I missing something?

[DoomSlice]

I'm a tournament noob, what does ICM mean and how is it calculated?

Edit: Found it.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, my thoughts were since they are similar stack sizes, they wouldn't want to risk calling an all in with their KJ type hands that would have a 30% chance of bust them. I figured that THEY would be the ones to wait for the other person to bust. Bad thinking?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's pretty hard to argue with this logic. Except when you lose a hand, LOL.

[AlphaWice]

It has to do with game theory. If all opponents are rational, they can only call with amazing hands (KK+). Their range decreases as the ratio between your chips and both your opponents (assuming opponents have similar stacks) increases.

However, its possible for a move to be -EV for both participants, which is the case if say, you push in and the other person calls without this ubertight range.

This is why, because this is only a step 3, I reccomend raptor's strategy to fold it out. Holla