Agree/Disagree
 

In a conversation with a fellow poker player about sng strategy, he summarized his theory: I disagreed STRONGLY with this...maybe i'm wrong, but please give me your opinions:

"the key in sng's is to never have to go all in. every person who is serious about sng's will tell you that"

"you can play hard with out putting all of your chips at risk"

"you should NEVER have to go all in without the nuts before the blinds get to 100/200 unless you are desperately short stacked"

talking PP sngs, 11's or 22's.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

I go all in before the blinds hit 100/200 in the majority of my games. Much of the time with garbage.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

Yes, but what do you think of the cheesy fiesta potatoes? I heard that they were a hidden treasure, but both times I've ordered them they've been pretty disgusting. Small sample size?

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

Disagree, example:

You have 7s 7d
flop comes 7h 8d Ts

I don't have the nuts but I'm still going go all in if possible.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

Cheesy fiest potatoes? What, is that the new Dominos side dish or some crap? Sounds pretty nasty.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

no sir, taco bell, and boy are they ever a hidden treasure.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure I go all in before the blinds hit 100/200 in EVERY sng I play. Your friend can't be winning if he doesn't do this.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

on the contrary, i've won about 7k playing sngs. (I'm his friend)

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

[ QUOTE ]
on the contrary, i've won about 7k playing sngs. (I'm his friend)

[/ QUOTE ]
So you're saying, if the blinds are 50/100 and you have 700. You get 55 in the BB. Flop comes 25K, someone puts you all in, you're going to fold?

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

STT poker is all about accumulating chips without showdown. In short stack STTS, FE is king.

That has nothing to do with having all or some of your chips in the middle.

Yugoslav

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

I'm saying that it is your objective to not get all of your chips in the pot unless you are sure you have the winning hand. SURE you have the winning hand. The object is not to go all in with AQ preflop with 750 chips when the blinds are at 50/100

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm saying that it is your objective to not get all of your chips in the pot unless you are sure you have the winning hand. SURE you have the winning hand. The object is not to go all in with AQ preflop with 750 chips when the blinds are at 50/100

[/ QUOTE ]
With those blinds and that stack, I would go all in with AQ on the button when folded to me every time. What would you do? Folding is out of the question. Raise? To what? 300? Just plain stupid.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm saying that it is your objective to not get all of your chips in the pot unless you are sure you have the winning hand. SURE you have the winning hand. The object is not to go all in with AQ preflop with 750 chips when the blinds are at 50/100

[/ QUOTE ]
You couldn't be more wrong.In this exact situation I go all in everytime if I'm the first one in.
7k over how long?

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

are you telling me that would would push all in at a 10+1 in first position with AQ? that's absurd. the play at these tables is so loose, it's not out of the question to be called by J10 and 92. i prefer to be able to see a flop, and outplay people from there, rather then relying on blind luck.

7k = almost 2 years

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

[ QUOTE ]
are you telling me that would would push all in at a 10+1 in first position with AQ? that's absurd. the play at these tables is so loose, it's not out of the question to be called by J10 and 92. i prefer to be able to see a flop, and outplay people from there, rather then relying on blind luck.

7k = almost 2 years

[/ QUOTE ]

you're not talking sense...you *want* people to call 700 with JT or 92 if you have AQ. strong hands are often worth more in push/fold situations at lower buyins than at higher ones precisely because your opponents call so loosely.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

What's absurd is doing anything else. What are you going to do? Limp? What if someone min-raises? You're gonna call off another 100 leaving you with only 550? Then you fold if you miss the flop?

This kind of action will get you into a world of trouble. You might as well just give away your chips.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

[ QUOTE ]
7k = almost 2 years

[/ QUOTE ]

That stat isn't going to blow people away around here.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

They rock

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

[ QUOTE ]
are you telling me that would would push all in at a 10+1 in first position with AQ? that's absurd. the play at these tables is so loose, it's not out of the question to be called by J10 and 92. i prefer to be able to see a flop, and outplay people from there, rather then relying on blind luck.

7k = almost 2 years

[/ QUOTE ]

See the fact that you're willing to make any kind of statement about whether a play is correct or not without stack sizes, number of players left, etc, kind of indicates you don't know what you're talking about.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

$7,000/2yrs or $7,000/730 days = $9.59 a day. Your playing for lunch money?

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

[ QUOTE ]
$7,000/2yrs or $7,000/730 days = $9.59 a day. Your playing for lunch money?

[/ QUOTE ]

On the other hand, it's not a bad result for a hobby. Ask people who play golf or ski as a hobby what their +/- is for the last 2 years. I'm pretty sure our boy here has them crushed.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
7k = almost 2 years

[/ QUOTE ]

That stat isn't going to blow people away around here.

[/ QUOTE ]

vnh.

move up in limits then. seems like your game is wayyy too catered to play $11s and $22s. The higher games, there's considerably less donks (although my recent $55s heater would disagree) and pushing while you still have FE is CRUCIAL.

in conclusion, to the OP: I disagree. You're fired!!

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

[ QUOTE ]
Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure I go all in before the blinds hit 100/200 in EVERY sng I play. Your friend can't be winning if he doesn't do this.

[/ QUOTE ]I'm not sure why you think there is only one approach to winning SNG play. We might consider his approach inferior (and it might be) but that doesn't meanhe can't use it at the 11s and 22s and beat the game.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm saying that it is your objective to not get all of your chips in the pot unless you are sure you have the winning hand. SURE you have the winning hand. The object is not to go all in with AQ preflop with 750 chips when the blinds are at 50/100

[/ QUOTE ]
With those blinds and that stack, I would go all in with AQ on the button when folded to me every time. What would you do? Folding is out of the question. Raise? To what? 300? Just plain stupid.

[/ QUOTE ]


Button? Hell I'm tossing my stack in UTG with this monster.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure I go all in before the blinds hit 100/200 in EVERY sng I play. Your friend can't be winning if he doesn't do this.

[/ QUOTE ]I'm not sure why you think there is only one approach to winning SNG play. We might consider his approach inferior (and it might be) but that doesn't meanhe can't use it at the 11s and 22s and beat the game.

[/ QUOTE ]
I never said there is only one approach. I just think his approach sucks. I think you underestimate how extreme HIS approach is. I really do find it hard to believe someone could win doing this.

Not going all in til 100/200? Unless he's playing tons of hands early to build a stack, he'll be blinded down to <600 chips by the time the blinds get this high. Come on. I dare you to tell me that you think this is a winning approach.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

Disagree. He's wrong. This really isn't debatable.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

[ QUOTE ]
are you telling me that would would push all in at a 10+1 in first position with AQ? that's absurd. the play at these tables is so loose, it's not out of the question to be called by J10 and 92. i prefer to be able to see a flop, and outplay people from there, rather then relying on blind luck.

7k = almost 2 years

[/ QUOTE ]

If you don't want JT to call you when you have AQ AT ANY LEVEL OF ANY TOURNAMENT (bubble considerations aside) then you're an idiot.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

Poor examples, misapplied, out of context, whatever...from the 30,000 foot level, the statement - if limited in his ability to elucidate*, does have merit.

A better statement might be worded like this:

[ QUOTE ]
STT poker is all about accumulating chips without showdown. In short stack STTS, FE is king.

That has nothing to do with having all or some of your chips in the middle.

Yugoslav

[/ QUOTE ]


* my word of the day, hope i didn't fugitup [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

Sigh. The 'different approaches' argument has gone too far.

Sure, there are varying styles that can be effective. However, there are certain fundamental aspects of SNG play that are dictated by probability. This probability does not change from game to game. This constant means that there are certain strategies that are correct such a high percentage of the time, that it's horribly non-optimal to ignore them.

I know several stubborn, bad poker players. When I tell them their mistake, their answer is always: "Well, I just don't play the same style as you do."

Right. I play a winning style, and they play a losing style.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

[ QUOTE ]
Not going all in til 100/200? Unless he's playing tons of hands early to build a stack, he'll be blinded down to <600 chips by the time the blinds get this high. Come on. I dare you to tell me that you think this is a winning approach.

[/ QUOTE ]I don't have any experience with PP 800 chips stacks. But, this guy has won $7k over two years (we don't know over how many SNGs). I don't see why we shouldn't believe him. I think there is a tendency in this forum to pooh-pooh any approach that isn't along STTF party lines.

In low stakes PS turbos, I imagine you could beat the game if you never started pushbotting before 100/200 level, but the larger chip stacks must make a big difference.

Please don't misunderstand. I don't think the guy is playing optimally. I just think that there is room at low buy-in SNGs to give up a few % of ROI and still be a winning player. And, the psychology of this approach might fit this player better -- he may not be able to handle the pushing approach -- so it might actually serve him better.

I don't expect he will be as successful if he moves up a few levels. Then the ROI is is giving up might turn him into a losing player.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

[ QUOTE ]
This constant means that there are certain strategies that are correct such a high percentage of the time, that it's horribly non-optimal to ignore them.

[/ QUOTE ]My point is that there is room between "non-optimal" and "losing".

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This constant means that there are certain strategies that are correct such a high percentage of the time, that it's horribly non-optimal to ignore them.

[/ QUOTE ]My point is that there is room between "non-optimal" and "losing".

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course there is. Not a single player in the world plays optimally. That's zero. Are we not posting here, however, to get as close to optimal as possible? An obvious un-optimal play should not be defended under any circumstance.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This constant means that there are certain strategies that are correct such a high percentage of the time, that it's horribly non-optimal to ignore them.

[/ QUOTE ]My point is that there is room between "non-optimal" and "losing".

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course there is. Not a single player in the world plays optimally. That's zero. Are we not posting here, however, to get as close to optimal as possible? An obvious un-optimal play should not be defended under any circumstance.

[/ QUOTE ]

Both make valid points. Hey, if this guy doesn't want to get better, fine with me. We're just here to help one another.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't have any experience with PP 800 chips stacks. But, this guy has won $7k over two years (we don't know over how many SNGs). I don't see why we shouldn't believe him. I think there is a tendency in this forum to pooh-pooh any approach that isn't along STTF party lines.

[/ QUOTE ]
You probably think I'm just discarding his approach without putting any thought into it. I'm not. I really do think this is a truely terrible way to play.

And I do have reason to not believe he's made 7k over 2 years. My reason is that he told us how he plays. If someone told you they made 5k over 2 years by going all in every hand, would you believe them? Of course not.

[ QUOTE ]
In low stakes PS turbos, I imagine you could beat the game if you never started pushbotting before 100/200 level, but the larger chip stacks must make a big difference.

[/ QUOTE ]
I've played a few hundred stars turbos and the bigger stack size would make a huge difference. As far as making a parallel to this situation, it would be closer to waiting til the blinds get to 200/400 before going all in.

[ QUOTE ]
Please don't misunderstand. I don't think the guy is playing optimally. I just think that there is room at low buy-in SNGs to give up a few % of ROI and still be a winning player.

[/ QUOTE ]
And I agree. But this guy is clearly missing some fundamental concepts. If he doesn't understand this, I'd assume he has other leaks as well.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This constant means that there are certain strategies that are correct such a high percentage of the time, that it's horribly non-optimal to ignore them.

[/ QUOTE ]My point is that there is room between "non-optimal" and "losing".

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course there is. Not a single player in the world plays optimally. That's zero. Are we not posting here, however, to get as close to optimal as possible? An obvious un-optimal play should not be defended under any circumstance.

[/ QUOTE ]I was responding to the statement:
[ QUOTE ]
Your friend can't be winning if he doesn't do this.

[/ QUOTE ]
which left no room for middle ground.

I agree that most of us are here in an attempt to move our games toward optimal. But, telling a player who is playing non-optimally that he can't be a winning player isn't helping. I think we would do better to acknowledge that there are other (non-optimal) winning approaches.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

There are a lot of opportunites to play hands differently in SnGs. Raise or call with TT after two limpers in level 1 etc. And in games with deeper stacks or slower structure, the more we will see two strategies being close to equal. I know I play many hands and situations differently than the majority here. But I still have a high profitability. That is because I have the same approach to the single most important concept of SnGs: to exploit the tendency of my opponents to fold too often when blinds are high.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

[ QUOTE ]
There are a lot of opportunites to play hands differently in SnGs. Raise or call with TT after two limpers in level 1 etc. And in games with deeper stacks or slower structure, the more we will see two strategies being close to equal. I know I play many hands and situations differently than the majority here. But I still have a high profitability. That is because I have the same approach to the single most important concept of SnGs: to exploit the tendency of my opponents to fold too often when blinds are high.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's as if you read nothing I wrote.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

Fair enough.

Though I will add that I don't think knowledge about optimal pushing strategy is at all common. Because everyone here has some familiarity with the approach, I think we assume most SNG players do also. I doubt that is the case. This is sort of an advanced topic that very few players use. I see players who have less than 10BB in chips making an opening raise of 1/3-1/2 their chips all the time. And, this is when we're down to 3, 4 or 5 players.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

[ QUOTE ]
Fair enough.

Though I will add that I don't think knowledge about optimal pushing strategy is at all common. Because everyone here has some familiarity with the approach, I think we assume most SNG players do also. I doubt that is the case. This is sort of an advanced topic that very few players use. I see players who have less than 10BB in chips making an opening raise of 1/3-1/2 their chips all the time. And, this is when we're down to 3, 4 or 5 players.

[/ QUOTE ]

Likewise, and you see people with 6xBB open-limping on the button and all sorts, although saying that I'm playing at the $5's ATM to build a BR and tune up my SNG play, so I wouldn't expect anything different.

The guy ISN'T playing optimally if he fears being called by JT, when he holds AQ. End of. YES he may still be winning, but not as much as he could.

Re: Agree/Disagree
 

Your friend sucks at SNGs, then.

7 k over 2 years?

lol, yeah, impressive stats bud.

There are guys that pull that in a week here.