Re: Playing for 3rd?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Oh yeah...does anyone else think the OP is actually Gidders promoting his own site?

[/ QUOTE ]

I over/under 82.5%-to-one it's Bill Filmaff.

[/ QUOTE ]

Filmaff rocks.

Re: Playing for 3rd?
 

hmm.... ok...

I was just wondering what was more +EV, playing for 1st from the beginning, or playing to get into the money and then trying to win.

ANYONE?

Re: Playing for 3rd?
 

[ QUOTE ]
hmm.... ok...

I was just wondering what was more +EV, playing for 1st from the beginning, or playing to get into the money and then trying to win.

ANYONE?

[/ QUOTE ]

Both maximizing your chance for first and maximizing your chance for ITM are usually wrong. The correct strategy is a mixture.

Re: Playing for 3rd?
 

He is playing regular SNGs, not turbos... the amount which skill plays a factor is much greater. 50% is definitely possible over 500.

Regarding strategy... On party there are situations where you play for first and others when you play for ITM (which are a far smaller percentage of the time). It is all based on stack sizes and the agressiveness of your opponents. Review curtains' posts, he has the best grasp of this concept IMO.

Re: Playing for 3rd?
 

[ QUOTE ]

Choosing one doesn't necessarily negate the other. While either thought on/near the bubble often works against acting in the most +EV way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe the above statement was confusing.

I think the term "playing for 1st" is misleading. You (and others) phrase such a question as if to imply that by doing so, you are taking particular risks above and beyond what might be mathematically +EV.

"I call that...I'm playing for first!"
"Borderline push my azz...I'm playing for first!"

Such statements aren't necessarily erroring on the aggressive/"play for 1st" side. Many times the "..it's close" calls aren't as close as they appear. This attitude is often failing to recognize the moment, where perhaps based on the current dynamics of the game, ones pushing/calling ranges should be significantly adjusted.

Conversely "playing for 3rd" usually DOES mean what it implies - not risking ruin despite a particular situation being clearly +EV. With hopes that a) you finally get the monster, or b) you outlast other players "playing for 3rd".

GETTING 3rd or GETTING 1st do not have (and should not have) anything to do with a preset determination to strive for such.

The key is to change your understanding, and maybe your definition of "playing for 1st". It is simply playing your cards in the most +EV way at any given moment. Understand that that doesn't always mean "turbo aggressive". It doesn't always mean avoiding risk early. Every hand you choose, or choose not to participate in, presents to you the challenge of finding out what the optimal play is.

Bottom line is that it is not logical to set out to achieve either of your general "+EV" game goals. Rather it is simply the sum result of an accumulation of decisive moments.

"Play for 1st" is the advice we should ALL receive - having a better understanding of what that means

Meh...I never was great at expressing myself, hope this helps.

Re: Playing for 3rd?
 

[ QUOTE ]
hmm.... ok...

I was just wondering what was more +EV, playing for 1st from the beginning, or playing to get into the money and then trying to win.

ANYONE?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a very easy answer. I always play for first, but not at the expense of making a -EV play. If you understood the mathematics of EV, you wouldn't be posing this question, nor using the term EV to ask it. Do you comprehend expected value? It's very disturbing to me the way in which you're posing the question.

Re: Playing for 3rd?
 

bluefeet's answer really helped a great deal. TY for that.


Scuba, what I mean is... it EV to call an allin for all your stack at level 5 and up when you are second in chips, and on the bubble, when the small stack has < 4 BB's?

These are the situations I've been running to a bunch lately, and I'm just trying to learn how to handle them. When I heard Gidders say "always playing for 1st" it had me wondering if that's what his SNG mindset is.

Sorry for the confusion scuba, I'm not really good at explaining things, I was just looking for some help.

Blue feet opened my eyes a little

Re: Playing for 3rd?
 

I think this discussion would be helped if someone created an example where playing for first actually increses chances of finishing first but is still -EV.

I'm too lzay myself...

Re: Playing for 3rd?
 

Gidders tickled me pink in a way that if a woman did it I'd say: "Oh yeah! That's the spot."

Also I'm also curious on the O/U on times rigged gets used during the first downswing.