Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

Recently, AleoMagus started a thread on this forum about the strategy to beat the 10+1 SnG's at party. Many other forum members contributed to what I thought was an excellent seminar on basic SnG strategy. I summarized that thread in outline form, and AleoMagus took the time to review and comment on my work. We present it here for your further review and comments.

PRE-FLOP STRATEGY

LEVELS 1-3

EARLY POSITION (Seats 1-7), play only a pair or AK 1. With JJ or lower, limp in.
--for tighter play, fold 66 or lower.
--for more aggressive play, limp only on Level 1; after that, raise or fold with 77 or better
--If re-raised up to 3BBs, call2. Open-raise 3BBs with AA, KK, QQ, AK; more if several limpers
--for more aggressive play, bet 200-300. When playing aggressively, you need to be prepared to also play the flop aggressively as you are investing more of your stack.
--If re-raised, go all-in (OK to raise all-in with AKo, AKs, but don’t call an all-in with it unless significant portion of stack already invested and one opponent only)

LATE POSITION
1. Raise at least 3BBs with 77 or better, 200-300 for more aggressiveness (limping with 77-JJ is always a good option)
2. also limp in with AQs, AQ, AJs, ATs, KQs, QJs, JTs if there are calls ahead of you, raise if there are not.
--Fold if reraised.
--AQs is marginal in early position but strong later
3. On the button, limping with hands like T9s, 98s, 87s, AJ, and KQ is an option, but requires experience.

Early rounds: AJo, KQo, ATo, KJo, QJo, JTo (and worse) are generally big trouble.

LEVELS 4-6
Open-raise (at least 3BBs, more if limpers ahead of you) from all positions with:
1. 77-AA, AK, AQ
2. AKs-ATs, KQs-KJs, QJs, JTs

LATE POSITION
Raise with KTs, QTs, KQ, AJ, if you are first in the pot
Raise with 2 cards J-A, T9s, 98s, or 87s if you have a good stack, LP, and no raisers already in pot.
Limp if there are already lots of limpers

DOWN TO 4 PLAYERS
Never enter a raised pot without AA, KK, QQ, AK unless raiser has ½ your stack or less.
If a small raise to you, go all-in with these hands and call with a few others (AQ, JJ, TT,)
-experienced players can enter pots with less, but good judgment is necessary
-If short stacked on bubble, you want to be first in the pot; bet big or all-in
-If shortstacked, push (if first in) with Axs, A7+, pairs
-When calling down shortstack all-ins, you want to have AT-AK and pairs 77-AA.
-If shortstack has 2BB or less, it is worth calling from BB with almost anything
-When playing with a huge stack, be careful of other huge stacks even with AK, KQs, JJ, etc….

General Prefop Considerations
-When calling a raise, you need a better hand than you needed to raise in the first place
-When a raise has already been called, you need an even better hand
-When in the small blind, you can limp with slightly worse hands than normal
-When calling min raises once already in for one bet, almost any calling hand is still playable


ON THE FLOP

EARLY STAGES
On the flop, raise the amount of the pot with the following, otherwise fold:
1. top pair with a good kicker
2. 2 pair (no pair on board), set, or boat
3. 4 flush with overcards or other possibilities (bottom/middle pairs, straight draws, etc…)
4. open-ended straight with lots of outs (3-flush, 2 overcards, etc.)

Open ended straights are highly overrated.

Play drawing hands aggressively (you need to have good stack to play a draw)
1. best to act last: bet the pot
2. consider semi-bluff in LP
3. if bet to you on flop is ½ the pot or less, raise to size of pot if you have large stack
--If re-raised, fold Do not slowplay monster hands, especially when draws are on the board.

Post-flop, all bets should be size of pot.
If any recommended bet (3BBs, pot, etc.) is 40% or more of stack, go all-in.

LATE STAGES
If short stacked, Level 5 and later, go all in or fold.
--Play only with pocket pairs, AK-AT, or KQs
--On button, aim to steal about 25% of blinds with hands like A7s-A9s, KTs-KJs.
--Play very tight with 4 left, much looser when in money.
--Don’t worry about second place: gamble for 1st, settle for 3rd.
--Don’t worry about attacking the short stacks. Quickly increasing blinds and their own loose play will take them out.
--With three players left, any piece of the flop becomes valuable. Do not be afraid to bet middle pairs if there is no reason to believe opponent has stronger hand. If there is a raise preflop and an ace or king comes on flop play cautiously

TURN AND RIVER
--The turn and river should be more easily played. The flop is where your most crucial decisions are made
--When you think you are beaten on the river, a fold to a small bet is usually a mistake unless you have no hand at all

GENERAL STRATEGY
-Top pair, top kicker is usually considered risky in NL, but Party’s structure forces aggressive play.
-Experienced players; if flop is rags and pot not raised ahead of you preflop, bet the pot.-AKo, AKs are good for an all-in bet, but not to call an all-in. AK or AKs all-in bets work best pre-flop so hand has full board to work with.
-If any recommended bet is 40% or more of your stack, go all-in.
-When holding middle pair, if flop is checked all around and turn brings no scare cards (3-flush on board, 3 straight on board, cards higher than your middle pair, etc…) play that pair aggressively on the turn. When raised, be prepared to abandon if you suspect a trap.
-Anytime you are prepared to check and call, it is better to bet in the first place-If you do decide to expand your play to include more creativity, this plan is tilt protection should you need to fall back on more straightforward play in rocky times.
-Anytime you get a bad beat, simply say “nh” or “gg” as the case may be

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

here is a nice Word document version of this I came up with. It gets it nicely on one page for printing.

Beating the party $10+1 doc

Any comments would be appreciated as I have no doubt many successful players play very differently than this.

Regards,
Brad S

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

I think that's generally very good advice. I play slightly looser preflop (because I'm confident I can stay out of trouble), but otherwise that's pretty close to how I play.

My only real gripe is that you have people open raising with 77-99 in the middle stages. Say you have T1,000 in level 4 (50/100); while it's important to steal the blinds when they go up, I would question the wisdom of putting in 300 with 77 in early position against low stakes PartyPoker players, who are notorious for making bad calls. In that case, shouldn't you revert to standard strategy for 77 (limp and hope for set), and raise all-in with it when you get short-stacked?

If you disagree, I'd be interested in your reasoning.


Regards,
Jer

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

Yes, I think you are right.

I would usually not raise with 77-99 in early position on level 4. I might push with it if I had less than 800 chips but I doubt I'd raise 30% of my stack. This is true also of JTs, QJs.

I guess a good solution would just be to say:

In early position, push with 77-99 if shortstacked,
limp (or raise?)if stack is large,
pass if stack is around 8-12x BB.'

Similar advice would hold for JTs and QJs, but I don't like the idea of pushing shortstacked with less than a PP, Suited ace, or big king/Ace.

In late positions I'd definitely open raise 3xBB with these hands (or push if necessary)

Thanks.
Brad S

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

I've been lurking here for months, but had to register and thank you for these guidelines.

It really helped plug some leaks in my PP play. I deviate from it slightly, but it's been a tremendous help to my bottom line.

Thanks again!

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

[ QUOTE ]
DOWN TO 4 PLAYERS Never enter a raised pot without AA, KK, QQ, AK unless raiser has ½ your stack or less.
If a small raise to you, go all-in with these hands and call with a few others (AQ, JJ, TT,)

[/ QUOTE ]

This is seems dangerous if taken literally. If raised, you would fold 90% of the time.

With high blinds and a 4-handed game, you would be guarenteed to lose to anyone who raised often but folded if reraised.

Does this apply only if you are not in the blinds? If so, that would mean this only applies when you are on the button in a 4 handed game. That's fine, but what do recommend if you are in the blinds?

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

I play a lot tighter than this but I agree with a lot of what you are saying and this is good guide. However players should be very careful with this piece of advice.

"-If shortstacked, push (if first in) with Axs, A7+, pairs"

When shortstacked you do need to push with these hands but since most of the time when you are called it will be by Ax a lot of the time you will be dominated. I would much rather push with KJo than A4s in most spots.

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

How small an ace would you push with?

Perhaps I could just say A7+ and leave it at that? (that's probably all I want personally)

Bigger yet? A9+?

How big would you want a king to be in order to push in these situations?

Regards
Brad S

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

What are everyone's thoughts about Axs? In a passive game, I limp with Axs almost all of the time, but maybe this is a big leak for me. The problem is that I limp with Axs, flop four to a flush and end up folding to an all-in raise. Is this too tight weak or should I not even limp with Axs in passive games?

(For background, I play in home SNGs with $60 buyins and blind structures fairly similar to Party.)

Any help on this would be great. Thanks!

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

You make a good point about this only really applying to it's full extent on the button - and there it makes less sense anyways because you have the best position.

This has been the point which has received more criticism than any other and I am struggling with it a lot. Bubble play is hard and I could probably make a whole strategy guide on this subject alone.

I wanted to make a simple rule but I think it is gonna have to get more complex than that

I don't think that folding to 90% of the raises you get from Big stacks is terribly bad though. After all, you will not always get raised. You will often be the first one in and in Party 10+1, you will even see limpers.

Also, I made the important caveat that this only applies with players who have more than 1/2 your stack. Obviously if you have 2000 chips and the small stack raises the 200 BB with his last 600, you don't want to be letting go of 99.

Still, in the big blind slightly more liberal play might apply as you suggest. I was going to type a guideline here myself, but I'll throw it back at you

How will you play the bubble? Anyone?

Regards
Brad S

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

Personally, I will never play Axs anywhere at any stage less than the final 3.

It just doesn't make any sense to in my opinion. Not with Party's structure anyways

It's 30-1 against making your flush (and chasing a paired ace is just gonna hurt you). At almost no stage is anyone's stack much more than 30x the BB so even if you do manage to bust someone, you are not getting very good return for you risk.

The worst thing that can happen is that you catch a flush draw because you are still 2-1 against making it, and you are bound to flush a lot of money down the drain with a nut flush draw. They look so promising, but they are really not.

If you absolutely can't let go of Axs, try to at least play it in the last 2 or 3 positions. Then you can probably at least outplay your opponents with it on the flop (free cards, semi bluffs, checked aces tell you that you might have the only ace, etc...)

Me, I'm just not playing them (...maybe A9s on the button...And A [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]3 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] of course [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] which I seem to have no willpower to let go of)

Regards
Brad S

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

Depends on the size of my stack and how likely I am to get called really (yeah I know like that helped). I need to do some thinking on the specifics but I will post my thoughts on it later, but if I am short enough to push with any ace I will push with any king as well. But for the guide I think A7+ is fine and feels about right.

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

I play the $10 SnG's too and have been doing pretty well.

I do pretty well with AK. My normal play with this hand if its in the early rounds is to hit it with a raise or open for $125 or $150.

I almost always get one caller. Very rarely do I get 2 callers and very rarely do I get zero callers although it does happen.

80% plus of the time regardless of the flop I come in for 200-250. Most of the time probably 80% plus the person you have isolated down to will lay down now.

If this doesnt work alot of times I will hit them again on 4th street for another $200 and again you will get a fair number of people who lay down here.

I like to give people opportunties to lay down and most of the time they will take one.

One other factor that I think really helps is just being friendly with people at the table. When it gets down to 4 or 5 and you're all in with a medium stack it just seems people are less likely to call you and would prefer to go after the guy who has been a jerk (if there is one at the table) or the guy who got lucky, or the guy who plays to slow.

I am certainly no expert but there things seem to be working pretty well for me.

OPJayhawk

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

It's funny you know. The more I look at this guide, the more I loathe the whole concept of a 'guide' to playing poker

I know that it helps many players, but the answer you just gave:

[ QUOTE ]
Depends on the size of my stack and how likely I am to get called really

[/ QUOTE ]

is just too true in too many instances.

Still, I guess we are really only talking about Party 10+1 here so an algorithim for winning play is entirely possible.

Regards
Brad S

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

[ QUOTE ]
What are everyone's thoughts about Axs? In a passive game, I limp with Axs almost all of the time. . .

[/ QUOTE ]
I think you can do this as long as: (1) like AleoMagus said, you only do it from around back, and (2) you realize that if all you flop is a lone Ace, you've missed your hand.

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

[ QUOTE ]
Bubble play is hard and I could probably make a whole strategy guide on this subject alone.

[/ QUOTE ]

I totally agree, but it would be worth the effort. Getting to the final 4 or 5 is simple. We can argue about how to play 66 at the 10/15 level, but seriously....if you have brain you are going to make the final 5 most of the time.

Once you are in the top 3, the blinds are so high that it really comes down to getting good cards. Other than saying to play aggressively, there's not much to add.

The real question is what to do when there are 4 or 5 left.

If you want know how I play the bubble, here is my plan....
Stealing the Blinds - Once I get to the final 4-5, I will immediately start raising 3xBB when I'm on the button or sb and it was folded to me. I want to figure out ASAP how easy people will give up their blinds. If they keep folding immediately, I'll drop down to 2xBB.

If they reraise, I'll probably call if its small. If I have a premium hand, of course I would move all-in.

I'll bet the flop if it hits me at all or if there's an Ace on the flop (since I raised, they'll think I have an ace). I'll usually bet the same amount as pre-flop (ie 2-3xBB). Most people would always bet the pot, but that's probably a lot of $. Just like pre-flop, you want to bet the minimum that will get them to fold. Most players will call any bet if they hit the flop, and fold to any if they didnt.

I will usually check it down on the turn and river, unless I have a monster. Since they called my bet on the flop, they have something and may well be trapping me.

Protecting the Blinds - I must admit I'm not the best here. I rarely try to protect my SB. I only have 1/2 a bet committed, and the BB is yet to act. It really depends on the raiser. If they keep trying to steal, you should try to reraise and steal their bet and the BB. I might do this with AA-88, AK-A9, KQ-KT, and possibly others if I had enough chips. If successful, this will discourage them from stealing...which will allow you to steal the BB yourself.

If you are in the BB, you cannot allow people to min raise you. If they min-raise, you must re-raise if at all possible. Once they get the message, they will have to bet at least 3xBB.

If I had to summarize....
- Try to steal as cheaply as possible. Try 3xbb right away, then drop to 2xbb if the blinds keep folding.
- Steal with any pair, any A, any 2 cards T or higher, and any suited connector. Add hands like K9, T9o, and occasional garbage if it's working well.
- If you raised pre-flop, bet the same amount on the flop if it hits you at all or an A flops. Then check the turn/river to avoid traps.
- Don't defend too much from SB, but be ready to reraise if people are stealing a lot with small raises and the BB isn't doing anything about it.
- Don't allow people to min-raise your BB. Reraise with any A, K, QJ, QT, JT, pair, or suited connector.
- Try to reraise rather than call. Calling doesnt really discourage blind stealers.
- If you are short stack, just try to get ahead of the other short stacks and stay there. You don't need to double or triple up.

What Kx is your pal when you push (long, rambling)
 

[ QUOTE ]
It's funny you know. The more I look at this guide, the more I loathe the whole concept of a 'guide' to playing poker

I know that it helps many players, but the answer you just gave:

[ QUOTE ]
Depends on the size of my stack and how likely I am to get called really

[/ QUOTE ]

is just too true in too many instances.

Still, I guess we are really only talking about Party 10+1 here so an algorithim for winning play is entirely possible.

Regards
Brad S

[/ QUOTE ]


Brad,

Agree 100%. Poker is a game of situations and the outline provided will give a new player a great start towards being a winning player. But when it comes down to short handed play in a SnG it becomes more art than science, and the only way a new player is going to get comfortable in these situations is by playing them over and over.

Regarding the weak aces and pushing here is the reason Im more willing to push with kings sometimes. One of the things that can happen is that the opponent will fold so it doesnt matter what you have so lets ignore that. But when the opponent calls what does he have most of the time? Almost always from what I have seen an ace or a pair.

If he has a pair and you have overcards you are likely to be a small dog so there is really no difference if you hodl Ax or Kx.

If you both have an acesomeone is dominted and the smaller the ace is a huge dog. When pushing with a king you are unlikely to be dominated which means you are likely in a coinflip against hands that will call. The downside of course of pushing with a king is you are unlikely to be called by a hand that is dominated, so you do lose a little there.


Im not saying that Kx is better that Ax but given the range of hands you are likely to be called by a lot of times you are better off with a king. And FWIW I think I would like my kicker to be at least an 8 to get some protection from small pairs that will call. Hope this didn't ramble too much.

Q for Eastbay
 

I was talking a bit about this recently in a thread started by eastbay. He was running heads up hand rankings but not the usual hand ranking vs Random hand that you usually see

He ran this sim vs what he called the 'push hands'
He originally ran vs Any Ace and any PP

I realized immediately that this had something important to say about calling down shortstacked all-in on the bubble

I suggested he also run rankings vs Any Axs,A7+,PP, and suited broadway cards. They results were similar but slightly different

Generally, the only hands that are a favorite against a random 'push hand' are Pocket pairs 66+, and AT+

What this says about which hands you should actually be pushing with, I'm not sure exactly

I suppose I should get him to run a sim vs what I will call 'call down hands'. These will be exactly the cards he determined to be typical favorites

66+, AT+

Here is the thread I'm talking about if anyone wants to check it out.Personally, I think it is one of the best I've seen on this forum.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...mp;sb=5&o=

So, If eastbay sees this and is gracious enough to answer with some results, maybe we'll get a better idea

Regards,
Brad S

Re: Q for Eastbay
 

In thinking about this myself, a couple things come to mind.

First, I suspect that the only hands which will have a positive expectation against 66+ and AT+ will be even better than these hands. Probably AQ,AK and TT+

This is not to suggest that we should wait for those hands to push when shortstacked. After all, we are usually hoping to not get called. A huge chunk of profit comes from stealing in these situations.

Still, hands like A4s will probably do much worse against these 'call down hands' than KJ (just as you suggest)

Regards,
Brad S

Re: Q for Eastbay
 

[ QUOTE ]
I was talking a bit about this recently in a thread started by eastbay. He was running heads up hand rankings but not the usual hand ranking vs Random hand that you usually see

He ran this sim vs what he called the 'push hands'
He originally ran vs Any Ace and any PP

I realized immediately that this had something important to say about calling down shortstacked all-in on the bubble

I suggested he also run rankings vs Any Axs,A7+,PP, and suited broadway cards. They results were similar but slightly different

Generally, the only hands that are a favorite against a random 'push hand' are Pocket pairs 66+, and AT+

What this says about which hands you should actually be pushing with, I'm not sure exactly

I suppose I should get him to run a sim vs what I will call 'call down hands'. These will be exactly the cards he determined to be typical favorites

66+, AT+

Here is the thread I'm talking about if anyone wants to check it out.Personally, I think it is one of the best I've seen on this forum.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...mp;sb=5&o=

So, If eastbay sees this and is gracious enough to answer with some results, maybe we'll get a better idea

Regards,
Brad S

[/ QUOTE ]

Brad,

You're asking a question I've been thinking about for some time now. Of course, being a math geek I've thought about it in a slightly different way.

The question I wanted to ask was: what happens if you choose a top % of the list, and feed it back into itself? what happens if you keep repeating that process? Does it settle into a stable list, or does it cycle around as hands which do well against the current top move up, and then hands which do well against those move up, etc.

One way to try this is to pick the top% that you want to feed back into the calculation. So let's say you start with the "vs random hand" rankings, then you pick the top half of those, and re-rank according to how well each hand matches up to that select list. Pick the top half again and repeat.

It's something I'll see if I can automate and try soon. I'll post the results in a new thread if I can make it work.

eastbay

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

I will definately try this out in my next 10+1 as my SNG results lately havent been to my liking.

Re: Q for Eastbay
 

[ QUOTE ]

The question I wanted to ask was: what happens if you choose a top % of the list, and feed it back into itself? what happens if you keep repeating that process? Does it settle into a stable list, or does it cycle around as hands which do well against the current top move up, and then hands which do well against those move up, etc.

One way to try this is to pick the top% that you want to feed back into the calculation. So let's say you start with the "vs random hand" rankings, then you pick the top half of those, and re-rank according to how well each hand matches up to that select list. Pick the top half again and repeat.


[/ QUOTE ]

Dammit, eastbay, you keep beating me to the punch! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] (But I guess I can't complain, since it was your post which got me thinking about this stuff in the first place.)

I was wondering about the exact same question (but I have been too busy lately to work on my poker code and answer it for myself). I.e., do things converge if you keep re-ranking the hands against the top 50% in the prior iteration? And if they do, what does the final ranking even mean? Is this question just of interest to math geeks, or are there any practical implications?

In a heads-up all-in-or-fold match, I think the right way to think about hand rankings is this:

From the SB, since you are first to act and have no knowledge of what the BB has, you should choose to push with the top X% of hands as ranked against a random hand. From the BB, if your opponent has pushed, you should choose to call with the top Y% of hands as ranked against the hands he would push with. (X and Y will vary depending on the size of the blinds relative to the stacks and your opponent's specific strategy.)

For example, if you know that your opponent pushes with the top 50% of hands (vs a random hand), then you should choose your calling hands according to how they rank against these. If you know he's too tight and only pushes with pairs, then you should rank your calling hands against pairs. And so on.

Does this make sense?

Re: Q for Eastbay
 

[ QUOTE ]

In a heads-up all-in-or-fold match, I think the right way to think about hand rankings is this:

From the SB, since you are first to act and have no knowledge of what the BB has, you should choose to push with the top X% of hands as ranked against a random hand. From the BB, if your opponent has pushed, you should choose to call with the top Y% of hands as ranked against the hands he would push with. (X and Y will vary depending on the size of the blinds relative to the stacks and your opponent's specific strategy.)

For example, if you know that your opponent pushes with the top 50% of hands (vs a random hand), then you should choose your calling hands according to how they rank against these. If you know he's too tight and only pushes with pairs, then you should rank your calling hands against pairs. And so on.

Does this make sense?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've thought along the same lines, but I'm not convinced it makes sense.

If your opponent folds, he folds, and it doesn't matter what hand you held.

The only times it matters what cards you selected was when he calls. And when he does call, you want to be holding something which does well against his calling hands. His calling hands aren't random. Therefore, pushing against random hands doesn't make sense, I don't think.

eastbay

Re: Q for Eastbay
 

[ QUOTE ]
If your opponent folds, he folds, and it doesn't matter what hand you held.

The only times it matters what cards you selected was when he calls. And when he does call, you want to be holding something which does well against his calling hands. His calling hands aren't random. Therefore, pushing against random hands doesn't make sense, I don't think.


[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmm... I guess I was confining myself to "level 1" thinking. It seems you could get into an endless cycle of measures and counter-measures here. That is, you will rank your push hands against the hands he will call with. But he knows that, so he will rank his calling hands against the hands you will push with. But you know that he knows that, so you will re-rank your push hands against the hands he will call with based on his previous assessment of the hands you will push with. And so on.

Based on this, I'm all the more interested to see if there is any convergence of this process to a stable or semi-stable set of hand rankings.

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

Wow, this is a very good thread, thank you.

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

Hi Ben Franklin and AleoMagus,

Great summary. This will work at 10+1 and higher levels(certainly 30+3, that play almost exactly like 10+1). It is a good starting point for any level, from what I can see.

The reason for my post is to second AleoMagus' thoughts on Axs. This is a great hand in low limit ring games because you frequently get 2+ callers. In NL, this hand is only playable in two circumstances.
The first circumstance is very early on a very loose passive table. There are not too many of those, but if you find one, this hand has some value.
The second is late where the real value of the hand is the A. Being suited is just a little icing on the cake.

Pitcher

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

Hi Phil Van Sexton,

I like your post on bubble play
The point about stealing the blinds cheaply should be put in highlights. Many players defending their blinds do not differentiate between raise sizes, other than all in. If they play back at you, it is frequently alot easier to back off of a 2x raise than a 3x raise. (of course, that depends on stack size....)
I want to add a bit to this concerning defending the small blind. If you are going to defend your SB, re-raise to at least 3x or at least double the raiser, whichever is larger. The reasoning behind this is to completely discourage the BB from coming into the hand. If this bet takes it down you get their raise and the BB (a substantial pot this late in the tourney!). The value in this case is in this specific hand....although it may help you steal the BB's on future hands. At this point in the tourney, you are mainly playing for this hand because there might not be a future hand to worry about. I would not do this with less than KQ, or A-10 or better (and 88-AA)

Pitcher

Pitcher

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

[ QUOTE ]
Most people would always bet the pot, but that's probably a lot of $. Just like pre-flop, you want to bet the minimum that will get them to fold. Most players will call any bet if they hit the flop, and fold to any if they didnt.



[/ QUOTE ]

Man I think this is an EXCELLENT point that you never hear anyone mention. Why bet the size of the pot when you're pretty much trying to steal? A typical player during bubble plaly won't call a 1/2 pot sized bet but fold to a pot sized bet.

There are a lot of times where I'll have like AT or something on the button with 4 players left and the BB that called my PF raise will check to me when the board is 3 ragged undercards. Here I'll be tempted to bet the pot, but I usually stop myself and remind myself that the reason why I'm betting is to get my opponent to fold so I only need to bet the MINIMUM amount that will get this guy to lay it down, anything more and I have made a mistake.

I think pot sized bets are good when you have a strong hand and want to protect or get a loose call. But when you're trying to pick up a heads up raised pot on the flop with 4 or 5 people left and big blinds its usually not necessary, or wise.

What do others think about this? I think the whole "bet the pot" idea is pretty pervasive and I'd imagine a lot of people disagree with this approach.

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

tried this out yesterday, 3 tourneys, 6th, 4th, and second were my results. don't really blame the guide for them though.

the 6th place was bad luck, i was gettin lowstacked from sittin tight until the end, hole cards are 99 so i go all in from early, BB calls with AA.

4th place was an idiotic play by me which i deserved to lose on. free play from BB, flop top pair 8 with jack kicker. lose to a set.

2nd place, eh i shoulda took down first but i took a tough one headsup. hole cards AK. guy raised into me, i go all in. he calls Q7. i'm ahead on the flop kings vs queens, but he hits runner 7s to bust me with a boat.



i'm gonna keep tryin to use this because it did seem pretty effective, but i'll mix in some of my own play (hopefully smarter than my 4th place finish f up). seems pretty good so far.

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

I'm trying to understand what exactly your betting pattern is. Are you saying that you make a pot-sized bet when you have the goods and a 1/2 pot-sized bet or 3xBB bet when you don't? Wouldn't that make your hand fairly readable to your opponents?

The advantage to always making a pot-sized bet is that it will be large enough that if someone raises you or even if they just call, you are likely beaten. Also, raising the same amount each time disguises your hand: your opponents will never know when you're bluffing and when your really have it.

But I am intrigued by your point about how you should only bet the "minimum" amount needed to get your opponents to fold. I'm just not sure that's wise because of the danger of giving away too much information about your hand. Of course, you could randomize your bets between two levels, I suppose, but that seems like a bit of work. Poker's already tough enough! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

I'm saying I would usually only bet this amount when its bubble/steal time for the most part. However, this is also usually the time when I'm doing the most bluffing.

Hopefully in any single SNG I haven't played nearly enough hands for my opponents to have a read on my betting patterns. Also, and I think this is important, since the few flop bets I've probably made to this point have been pot sized (or larger) what does an opponent make of a now 1/2 pot sized bet?

It is easy to assume that he would sense it as a weakness, but it could just as easily be interpreted as strength and me trying to "sell" my hand. Add to this the fact that I still believe that a 1/2 pot sized bet (which is still fairly large at the Party level 4 or above) will still almost never be called unless I am behind and still provides me with valuable info for 50% off and it seems to me to be the superior play.

I'm not saying that this is the way to go but I'd like to hear arguments against it which take into account the fact that it is Party 10+1 and most opponents are fairly obvious and not very observant.

Re: Betting 1/2 pot at blind steal time
 

I tried this last night and it seemed to work out for me. Of course it was only two tables, so no broad picture can be painted here. But, like you said, the pots are so big as the blinds rise, it doesn't seem to make much sense to be throwing 500 chips in a blind steal attempt when you could throw 250 and get the same result.

The question is, do you actually get the same result as you would if you had made a pot-sized bet? Are you more likely to get calls or reraises with a 1/2 pot-sized bet? Not sure if there are answers for those questions besides looking at your end results using this strategy and comparing them with your results using the pot-sized bet strategy.

I'm gonna keep trying it and I'll let you know where it takes me.

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

[ QUOTE ]
It's 30-1 against making your flush (and chasing a paired ace is just gonna hurt you). At almost no stage is anyone's stack much more than 30x the BB so even if you do manage to bust someone, you are not getting very good return for you risk.

[/ QUOTE ]

You must mean on the flop, the odds of making a flush by the river are 10-1.


[ QUOTE ]
The worst thing that can happen is that you catch a flush draw because you are still 2-1 against making it, and you are bound to flush a lot of money down the drain with a nut flush draw. They look so promising, but they are really not.

[/ QUOTE ]

I will have to respectfully agree to disagree, to me it depends on how many people are in the pot with you, if it's early on and you have 4 or 5 to the flop, you can stick 100 or so in, and easily get 2 callers (depending on the board). The players I've seen are only to happy to give their stacks away with a worse flush or top pair even.

Regards ML

Re:
 

Aleo, what is your win rate on 10+1's.
And why bet the pot with a monster hand ? is this only because of the type of players at PP ?

Re:
 

With a (huge) monster hand I might not be inclined to actually bet the pot, but with hands like top pair I always bet close to the amount in the pot or more if I figure I have the best hand.

The reason that players tend to bet the pot on the flop is becasue you do not want to give any draws the correct odds to call, and betting the pot will usually do this. Technically, you could determine a more appropriate betting amount based upon any given board and what kinds of draws there are out there but the pot size tends to be a rough and ready answer that is usually correct if you figure yourself for the best hand.

Mike Caro has a good (free) audio lecture on Cardplayer.com about why he thinks players shouldn't bet the pot in big bet hold'em. It is worth listening to. Still, I think while he might be right about ring games, in tourneys survival is key and I just don't want a call with a vulnerable hand.

The reason why you should not check monster hands is that the most likely hands which are going to pay you off are draws of one kind or another and you want to make them pay while they still have hope and unseen cards to come. If you give them a free turn (for example), they will be less inclined to call a bet with only one card yet to come. Furthermore, as the pot gets bigger, players are less and less likely to get away from a hand and if you know that you have a lock, you want to gradually build the pot so that they become committed for all of their chips by the end (or a significant portion anyways)

These answers are (as ever) 'it depends' answers but should suffice as a basic explanation anyways.

My win rate at PP 10+1 after my last 200ish is about
~45% in the money
~19% 1st
~8% 2nd
~18% 3rd

for an ROI of just over 41% and about $4.50/t

My results are largely contingent on how much I play. I was playing 200+ each month at one point and was getting worse results and played less than 50/mo prior to that and was getting better results.

Keep in mind however that the strategy laid out in this thread in NOT how I acheived these results. I do play similar to this (especially in the early rounds) but on the bubble my play is a lot more complicated to describe and very dependent on a lot of other factors.

Followed close to the letter, I suspect that this strategy would be about break even or a small winner. You'd still need some prior ability to not make big mistakes on the bubble though.

Regards
Brad S

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

Yeah, 30-1 is off, but I think we are both wrong about the odds

If you are dealt and two suited cards, the odds of: flopping a flush is 118-1
Flopping a four flush is 8.14-1

If you flop a 4 flush, the odds of completing that flush by the river are 1.86-1

this means that from preflop to river your chances of turning Axs into a flush are about 15-1 against.

A lot better than my first statement, but still not good in my opinion. I know a lot of people play draws like these and I know some even do it profitably, but I think it takes good judgement and you need big multi-way pots and position to make it worthwhile.

Regards
Brad S

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

I just saw this thread, which is excellent, but had one question: does the logic here apply equally to the 1-table sitngo tournaments at pokerstars, which I understand starts with more chips and might progress more slowly?

I ask because I play tournaments exclusively at pokerstars, and have never tried party.

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

I guess it depends

This guide is intended not to describe optimal play, but more to keep players out of trouble while making small profits relatively easy.

So, I'd say yeah... if you use this kind of plan at the pokerstars 5+.50 and maybe even at the 10+1, it might make a weak player better. Interestingly, the original recipient of this plan (when I first devised it) is still struggling at Party, but has since become a fairly long term winner at the small buy-in stars tourneys.

The fact is though, with stars structure, I would personally be playing more hands in the early rounds as you can afford to play hands that might pay off big. Hands like 87s which I would usually toss even in late position on Party's 10+1, I will certainly play on Stars. This has a lot to do with implied odds. With the deeper stacks on stars, I can make my hand and bust another player for 100x the cost of limping in. On party, I'm looking at little more than half that and I am already close to shortstacked which means I don't want to be playing speculative hands anyways. Add to this the fact that I will see a lot more hands each round and it means that you can afford to actually 'play poker' more.

Similarly, on stars early, if I flop a four flush and the stacks are still deep relative to the blinds, it's possible that calling a pot sized bet will only cost 45-60 chips. Out of a stack of 1500, I might decide to call if it is this cheap. I know I am not getting proper odds on this call, but if the flop is consistent with a player who will bust himself if I make my hand, those implied odds are too good to pass up. On party, I'm looking at much less payoff for these kinds of gambles and I'll avoid drawing hands a lot more.

Another big and important change would be your own willingness to get all-in with good, but not huge hands. On party, it is not uncommon to raise PF with a hand like AK, hit top pair top kicker on the flop and eventually take that hand to an all-in. Because a pot sized bet will likely be a significant portion of your stack anyways, if you are raised all-in it is probably correct to call unless the flop is overly uniform.

On stars, the really BIG pots in the early stages tend to go a bit more to hands like two pair or trips, so you should be a bit more cautious about taking top pair all the way. This requires some judgement I suppose, but it is definitely an important consideration.

On stars, the really great players will eat you alive if you use a 'plan' as straightforward as this guide is. It is pretty effective even 'as is' at the very small buy ins, but requires major changes the further up you go.

There are a great many players on this forum who could say a lot more about how stars need to be played differently. I myself play Party and the Party skins 90%+ of the time, whereas guys like Praying Mantis, Heyrocker, T Perkin, and many others play a lot more at stars.

If I were you I'd at least consider playing at Party a bit just to see how it is there. You might find that as bad as the structure is, it has a lot more profit potential in the long run. I go back and forth on this issue though. This month I like party I guess.

Regards
Brad S

Re: Beating the Party 10+1, Part 2
 

I read this thread before last week, remembered the advice therein, but did the dirty deed anyways. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

With an above average stack around level 4ish, 5-handed, I had A5s on the button, tried for a steal 3xBB, got called, flopped K44 two of my suit, semi-bluffed ~1/3rd of the pot, got raised ~2/3rd of the pot, called, picked up the gutshot with an offsuit 2 on the turn, I check, he pushed. I thought for a long time, figured he had a K, and hoped my 3, A, and suit outs were good. I don't think I really had the pot odds to call, but with so much in the pot I felt committed; it's either hit and go on to easily win money with a massive stack, or be short-stacked and playing aggressively with the worst of it. So I called and of course I missed. Turns out he called my preflop steal with A4s and hit trips. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

I did manage to double up twice with lucky desparation pushses and actually had a playable amount of chips, but stupidly maintained needless desparation-level aggression (tilt from the A5s mistake), and pushed on the button with KT. I ran into an ace and I was out.

Morale of the story: Don't let yourself get committed with draws. On the flop, consider the reverse-implied-odds of the turn call you'll have to make if you want to see the river!

Short stack strategies - and how to prevent being the short stack?
 

I'm a new poker player - I've played a Party for about 2 weeks. I've done OK with this strategy so far in 10+1 SNGs - but it seems that I'm shortstacked with 4 or 5 players left a very large percentage of the time. What kind of adjustments can I make to prevent this from happening? And, when I am shortstacked - I don't feel that I can wait for cards as good as the ones suggested in this guide - I ended up being forced to go all-in with any A or K by level 5 or 6 - no matter how weak the kicker.