If you have more 3rd place finishes than 1sts...

[ZeeJustin]

If you have more 3rd place finishes than 1sts, you need to significantly change your play style. Become FAR more aggressive when it's down to 5 and 4 players.

[tolbiny]

Alright, i have more 3rds than firsts- help me out a bit please.
five players left in a 30+3 Party NL sng, i am tied for the big stack with utg- both have T2200 chips. blinds are 100-200
utg limps and i have 55 in the sb- the BB has T700 after posting.
I didnt want to get into a battle with the other big stack at this point, should i have raised insead of calling?

[Daliman]

Bah, showoff. I'll take my stable low risk earn any day. i only have like .3% more anyways.

[eastbay]

I tried that and ended up with more 4ths and 5ths than anything else combined.

When I am reduced to all-in steals, it just feels like treading water with a shark nearby. A steal only buys you one more orbit, and risks everything to do so (typically.)

But there doesn't seem to be any alternative than to steal a lot, and hope you catch a real hand about the same time people get tired of your raising. But that's a lot of hoping.

eastbay

[TylerD]

I disagree, I think its far more important to get in the money first then try to win. If you have more 2nd's than 1st's then there is probably something wrong.

[Sheriff Fatman]

[ QUOTE ]
I disagree, I think its far more important to get in the money first then try to win. If you have more 2nd's than 1st's then there is probably something wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with the first part of this (i.e get in the money first, then worry about finish position) but I'm not sure I agree with the second bit.

Much depends on the format of the game and the relative starting positions. Its much more difficult to change your initial starting position playing limit than it is playing no-limit.

Also, there are often situations where one stack is completely dominant over the other 2. Getting into 2nd place is a good result here, winning is a bonus.

Ironically, I checked my finishes before posting this to see where my results fell. I had to laugh after reading the following:

1st 46
2nd 46
3rd 46

I can truly sit on the fence on this one [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

The limit vs no-limit figures are quite different though:

Limit
1st 17
2nd 22
3rd 16

No Limit
1st 27
2nd 21
3rd 29

This confirms my view that I can apply the '1st or 3rd' strategy far better playing NL than I can at limit.

Sheriff