Winner-Take-All strategy
 

It's rare to find a WTA tourney online or in a B&M, but a lot of home games play only this way. I typically avoid them like the plague unless I feel I have a serious serious edge over my opponents. My thinking is that it takes a fair amount of luck to actually take down first place, as opposed to finishing in the top-three.

I'm wondering what kind of strategy you should employ to turn a profit at these games, if its even possible.

Re: Winner-Take-All strategy
 

Although it's always tough to give general advice for these sort of things, as a rule, I'd take more small edges early and try to build a big stack. I'd like to get enough chips early that I can take a bad beat and keep on rolling. If I finish 10th, so be it -- it'd be the same as finishing 2nd.

So yeah, I guess just loosen up early. Take the sort of edges you would normally take in an SNG with like 5-6 players left when there are still 10 left.

Re: Winner-Take-All strategy
 

Essentially, you have to take every edge and play each hand to maximize your equity. Kind of like in the early stages of an MTT. Although, you might want to pass on very small edges if you think your opponents suck and you can exploit a bigger edge later.

Re: Winner-Take-All strategy
 

How big an edge do I need to turn a profit? I need to win 1 out of every 9 tournaments. Does this mean I need a significant edge over 8 of the other players??

Re: Winner-Take-All strategy
 

You are thinking about it the wrong way. If you are better then them (or at least most of them) you will win in the long run. You will just have longer dry spells without winning anything. It just increases variance a little.

Re: Winner-Take-All strategy
 

u need to win one out of 10 (expected if all even skill) to break even...so u can win 100/999 and make a profit (only 1 buy-in tho, so small)

anyway, point is u don't have to win a full 1/9...that's 10% roi which is nice, but if u win 1/9.5 u are still making money (not much tho unless big buyin)

u will have higher variance with this tourney, but if u are any better than the average player at that table, u will make a profit in the long run

Re: Winner-Take-All strategy
 

[ QUOTE ]
How big an edge do I need to turn a profit? I need to win 1 out of every 9 tournaments. Does this mean I need a significant edge over 8 of the other players??

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course not, you just need to play better poker then the average player and win the thing more then your fair share If there is a vig. you need to play a little better then that still to cover it. You could easily be the 5th or 6th best player in a 10 man tournament and still be beating the thing as long as there are a few weak players who rarely win.

Re: Winner-Take-All strategy
 

In the long run, assuming you're a good STT player, it shouldn't make any difference. You're variance will be higher because you'll make the money less, but your payout will be higher when you do.

Re: Winner-Take-All strategy
 

The strategy is pretty much that of a cash game because chips do not change value (chipEV = $EV). The only difference its like being in a cash game where you can't reload and therefore the risk of gambler's ruin is high for a particular session.

Re: Winner-Take-All strategy
 

[ QUOTE ]
The strategy is pretty much that of a cash game because chips do not change value (chipEV = $EV).

[/ QUOTE ]

That is a very important point in understanding the difference and similarities between chipEV and $EV using an ICM calculation. For a WTA game, your $EV is directly proportional to the number of chips you have regardless of the number of players left. For a game where there is more than one place ITM, it does give you a +$EV boost to take a person out (i.e. the chips change value).

Therefore, in a WTA game, don't make -(chip EV) moves to take someone out thinking that it will be +($EV). If you want to strictly follow the ICM model, it doesn't help you to knock people out in a WTA game, only to take their chips.