Is this just a shootout?

[nothumb]

A friend of mine has started holding $10 buy-in home tourneys with some of the regular players from our small stakes NL game. None of these players are at all tough, so I was happy to play the tourney. However, after playing a few I have noticed that one player (usually a bit of a LAG, but definitely a loose player) will catch three or four hands and be off to the races. Last night I isolated the only LAG player in the game, got him all in when I had TPTK and he had a gutshot on the flop. Naturally he hit it and went on to win the tourney. I'm wondering if this structure (size of blinds vs. size of stacks) is going to make this tourney play more or less the same way every time:

Stack: 50 chips (the guy doesn't own a proper set)
Blinds: 1-2 to start, go up every two rounds. (1-2, 2-4, 3-6, etc etc).

If I was hosting obviously I wouldn't do it this way, but my question is, does this make this a total crapshoot? It sure seems that way. Blinds tend to go up quickly and whoever has a big lead just lets other players get blinded half to death.

[Namebejed7]

The structure guarantees luck will be a large factor, as you only start w/ 25x BB. If you are fairly certain you are better than the other players, more chips would be a good investment. If you trust the other players you can even get away with cheap plastic chips, but some players will sneak in extra and "sprinkle" their stacks. Another alternative that makes it slightly better would be to slow down the blinds. You could add a 1-1 and 2-3 level to slow it down, get creative.

You didn't describe the players too much but they sound similar to my irregular home game. I may get ripped for this, but my strategy has become to not raise anything preflop (or 3rd street, before draw). I see the flop, make a read, and proceed from there. I have found that many home players will see another card for anyprice so you cant "protect" you hand, however, they will pay you off when you have the nuts. I routinely fold aces, I never semi bluff draws, and I always push the nuts, but my case is very extreme. You might need a strategy in between mine and what is considered normal. I have found that this minimizes the luck factor.

[thirddan]

[ QUOTE ]
I routinely fold aces, I never semi bluff draws

[/ QUOTE ]

i don't know your specific situation, but i would imagine that you are leaving a lot of money on the table...also, you should be raising preflop because you do know that people will call you...

[Namebejed7]

I am not saying that this is my normal style of play, I only use it in this particular game. My reasoning is that I will get paid off with a made hand, so I want to see a flop before I commit myself. Why raise preflop to let them flop two pair when they will pay me just as much when they only flop one. I tried my usual style at these games and frequently went home saying something akin to the pros leaving this years world series... "He shouldn't have called that bet!" This approach takes a large portion of the luck factor out.

edit: this is also a tourney, so there is no such thing as leaving money on the table. Thats why I play so risk averse.

[SaintAces]

Why not re-raise all in preflop everytime you get AA?

[Namebejed7]

In any tourney staying alive is more important than anything else. Although you are a huge favorite against all hands when you hold aces, you will still lose around 1 out of 5 times. Therefore, my strategy is to see the flop before I put a lot of money in. Sometimes I wait until the turn or river, depending on the board. My goal is to eliminate the luck element as much as possible.

[Munga30]

Maybe this style works because of your opponents, but your reasoning behind it is certainly wrong.

Generally, your goal should be willing to put your money (or tournament chips) in the pot with the best of it, whether that be before the flop or after. If you can't commit money before the flop, it's because your post-flop game (hand reading and decision making) needs work. If you can't get all in with aces because you can and will lose with it, you need to reconsider whether poker is the game for you.

Tournament structure does create situations where actions that maximize your tournament chips does not maximize your winnings. However, these situations are very specific (e.g., when only a few spots out of a major change in prize money) and you should be playing to maximize your tournament chips at all other times.

What you are trying to do when you "eliminate the luck element" is fight against the very nature of tournaments--increased variance in your results from not being able to buy back in and grind your way back in a good game. When you stop fighting it, you will find your variance *and* your earnings will rise.

[SaintAces]

my thoughts exactly