General tournament question

[theronin1]

I've just started playing poker online. Is it wise to call many times hoping to get a favourable flop? Or is it better to just be tight aggresive?

[george w of poker]

tight aggressive unless the blinds are very small compared to the size of your stack. then you can loosen up some but don't go overboard.

[theronin1]

[ QUOTE ]
tight aggressive unless the blinds are very small compared to the size of your stack. then you can loosen up some but don't go overboard.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would you consider $15 big blind compared with a starting stack of $800 to be small enough?

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
tight aggressive unless the blinds are very small compared to the size of your stack. then you can loosen up some but don't go overboard.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would you consider $15 big blind compared with a starting stack of $800 to be small enough?

[/ QUOTE ]

That is a very high blind, relative to the initial stack, and requires tight play. $15 is about 2% of your stack (OK, 1.875%). I be interested in what others think, but I would say that the BB would have to be under 1% of my initial stack before I'd even think about it being small enough to play a little looser.

[LetsRock]

I think there's 2 basic schools of thought on early SnG strategy.

One is to play very tight (near auto-fold) and let the rest of the table take each other out. This type of strategy is a pretty good way to help you get in the money, but can make it tough to win the whole thing, since you'll be pretty short stacked when it gets down to the final 3. (I have actually finished 3rd in several SnGs by never playing a single hand (blind off)) This works best if the table is very aggressive and a little on the maniac side.

The other school is to play a little loose in the opening rounds. Take a few cheap chances on multiway pots and see if you can flop a hiddne monster. You can get some pretty big pots for a minimal risk which is good. This works better if the table is weak-tight or even better if you just happen to catch the right cards at the right time against maniacs.

My basic game plan is to play fairly loose (but not rediculous) for the first few levels, or until I've lost 10% of my starting stack. If I drain 10% off I tighten up and hope for cards. I feel that I'm good enough to give up that much of my stack early on and still be able to compete. If I catch a few hands, it's easy to build a big stack making it easier to coast into the money (if the the cards don't cooperate) or have one of the bigger stacks when it gets down to bubble time.

[blackaces13]

[ QUOTE ]
Take a few cheap chances on multiway pots and see if you can flop a hiddne monster. You can get some pretty big pots for a minimal risk which is good. This works better if the table is weak-tight

[/ QUOTE ]

Lets Rock,

Clearly this style works best if the table is loose passive, not weak tight. Monsters are wasted on a weak tight table. The whole "take cheap shots" philosophy, which I used to subscribe too and still sometimes do, is predicated upon playing speculative hands like Axs and 9To and it is only viable against loose passive opponents. Weak tight players are terrible targets for A6s or 9To, they don't pay you off enough nor do they give you multiway pots, a necessity for non-broadway suited connectors and small pairs. Against weak tights I think you should try to pick up pots with nothing when rags flop or bluff at paired low card flops like 8-3-3. Also, try to not to play with weak tights. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[blackaces13]

[ QUOTE ]
I would say that the BB would have to be under 1% of my initial stack before I'd even think about it being small enough to play a little looser.

[/ QUOTE ]


The answer to this question varies based on whether you play NL or limit. In NL it makes more sense to take a crack at a multiway pot with a speculative hand as you may double or triple up. However, in limit small blinds mean small payoffs even when you do draw to your monster.