Aggressiveness Cycle in Party Steps

[beetyjoose]

In the past I rarely played any of the party poker "step" SNGs. My success with them was minimal; meaning every now and then I would play a step while I was multi-tabling other standard SNGs. Perhaps I would move up a step or two, go back down, play around in the middle for a while and eventually bust out.

This was pretty standard for me until I soon realized the type of play that was consistent for these steps. The difference of play between a Step 1 ($11+1) and a $10+1 SNG is drastically different; infact they are complete opposites.

Most players play the first few steps as if they are on the bubble of a big MTT. So weak/tight, it is as if they are just desperate to hang on and maybe advance to the next round, hoping to eventually win the big money. Obviously this doesn't work. Generally a $10+1 is a donk fest that is easily conquered by solid play.

All one needs to do in these steps to succeed is to play TAG for the first few rounds and then go super aggressive (obviously picking your spots) thereafter.

This technique has been succesfull through the first 3 steps. Now I am on the 4th and 5th steps and my question is:

Should I continue with the same technique? Or is it logical to assume that the players who have made it thus far know that this is the correct way to play. Thus, leaving me with the decision of whether or not to alter my game plan.

If anyone has had some reasonable success with these, I would greatly appreciate your input.

[yid3655]

At the step 4 and 5 levels imo you should be evaluating your table and once again play differently to how the majority are. It will also be important to quickly make judgements on all players whereas at the lower limits this may not have as much value

[beetyjoose]

Would it be fair to saythat step 4-5 should be played as a midlevel ($30-$50) SNG?

[citanul]

oh yeah, it's very safe to assume that a $500 buyin and a $1000 buyin sng, neither with the same structure as the $33s or the $55s would be the same.

citanul

[beetyjoose]

[ QUOTE ]
oh yeah, it's very safe to assume that a $500 buyin and a $1000 buyin sng, neither with the same structure as the $33s or the $55s would be the same.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

I was just asking for advice from more experienced players. I don't see the constructiveness of flaming me and not offering any help. If I was a pro I wouldn't be asking for help. Sorry if I appeared ignorant.

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
I was just asking for advice from more experienced players. I don't see the constructiveness of flaming me and not offering any help. If I was a pro I wouldn't be asking for help. Sorry if I appeared ignorant.

[/ QUOTE ]

i did not intend it as a flame. i intended it as being blunt and making your realize the flaw in that line of thinking. i often prefer that people come to realize things themselves instead of just handing them the answers.

citanul

[beetyjoose]

[ QUOTE ]


i did not intend it as a flame. i intended it as being blunt and making your realize the flaw in that line of thinking. i often prefer that people come to realize things themselves instead of just handing them the answers.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough. I admit I did not explain my line of thinking and how I arrived at my conclusion.

My reasoning for the above statement which seemed ill prepared was for the following:

I've played $5-$100 SNGs. We all know the $5s are a supreme donk fest. $10's not being much better either. The 20s and 30s are mixed with are range of players usually beatable by TAG and good position play.

The $50s are the first level with T1000 chips. Naturally there is more play as a result of this. You see few bonehead plays i.e. all in UTG for T30 in blinds with 55, as in the lower stakes.

The majority of players in the $100s play a TAG style and are fully concentrated on position poker. It is not uncommon to see multiple hands fold around to blinds consistantly.

So, my reasoning for my one line comparison between steps and standard SNGs was a result of the previous statements. It seems that some of the players playing the step 4 and 5 will be the best players on PP as they are buying directly in with their large bankroll. Another group of players have made it in from a smaller stake and probably usually play SNGs in which they are not willing to risk more than $30-50 a pop. Hence, not having the experience of the $100+ SNGs.

Of couse my generalizations are soley based on my own experience and personal sample size. I'm not summing up all players and their techniques. I realize I could be completely off base in my logic which is why I come to you guys.

[fisherman112]

[ QUOTE ]

i did not intend it as a flame. i intended it as being blunt and making your realize the flaw in that line of thinking. i often prefer that people come to realize things themselves instead of just handing them the answers.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

let's be honest, it was kind of a flame.

[citanul]

no, honestly it was not intended as a flame.

citanul

[citanul]

i think you should watch a few step 5s before playing one. most step 5s i've ever played have been >50% "regulars" who buy in at at least step 4. most of those are buying in at step 5 directly. the number of people who are freerolling their way up from basically anywhere above step 3 is very small.

citanul