Testing Sklansky Strategy

I have seen several posts recently concerning the use of Sklansky's all-in or fold tournament strategy, but I have not seen any numbers backing the validity of the strategy. There has been several small samples but nothing definitive.

I have decided to take a $50 BR on stars and evaluate the merits of this style. Here are the ground rules:

1. I will only be playing $1 MTT's. I am doing this because of the BR and I do not see it having merit at higher buy-ins (more people looking to pick-off all-ins). I will be playing both the large fields and MTT SNG's.

2. I will be using this strategy until the first break of each tournament. After that I will let my stack and table situations decide my betting patterns. Here I will actually use some post flop play. This item has been changed (All hands will be played according to the theory).


I will try to post the results as often as possible, and discuss how anything past the second hour was played. If you want further information concerning a tournie let me know and I will get you the and histories.

I'm sorry but, unless you use the strategy throughout the whole tournament regardless of the first hour, I don't see this as a test of Sklansky's strategy. Using it for only a portion of the tournament and then reassessing whether or not it suits that game will not put it to a true test. He states that a player can win using this strategy alone. If you deviate from it after the first hour how can you come to an accurate conclusion about whether or not it works?

You are right. To truelly test the strategy I must use it throughout the tournament. All hands will be played with the Sklansky strategy regardless of the time in the tournie.

I used the system in a 1000 player freeroll a few days ago,ended up around 80th.

I tried a modified system in a $2 MTT and found it quite successful. The system was this:
Whenever you have the chance, open the pot with a 4x BB raise with any two cards. Call a re-raise (if just 4x BB or more) or fold.
If you get called, make a stab at the pot at 75% pot whether you like the flop or not. Fold to any subsequent show of strength.
This seemed like madness. More often than not I was open-raising from early position with stuff like 83o and I was folding nice cards in late position because of earlier action.
However, the system was wildly effective for about an hour. It doesn't cost too much to see the flop, you don't ofetn get re-raised, you steal a lot of blinds and steal a lot of pots on the flop. Every so often you'll take people all-in because your J5 hits a flop J5K when someone else has AK and somebody else has q10s.
In the end, though, the chip leader sussed and called me three times in a row and knocked me out. It was only then I noticed the chat and how much I'd pissed everybody off with 'maniacal' play that I realised I should have changed gears as soon as I'd had to show two very dodgy hands (as the poster suggested - once you're nearing the bubble, change strategy)
Nevertheless, I think the system has merit although I wouldn't want to go through my banroll trying it too many times.

Don,

I think you're missing the point of Sklansky's strategy. The whole point of a "move-in or fold" strategy like this is to eliminate the skill needed for post-flop decision making. Sklansky is not saying that this is an optimal strategy for winning tournaments. What he's saying is that a beginner can use this kind of strategy against more experienced players in order to lessen their edge.

Using a strategy like this doesn't teach you anything about how to play NLHE tournaments. I don't know what your current skill level or bankroll are, but I can pretty much guarantee that you will not become a better player (or get better results) by adhering to such a mindless system.

Best of luck in your experiment,
KP

The point of this experiment was not to make me a better player, but rather to help others understand the merits or lack of merits in the system. I have seen several new players try or ask about the system, and I wanted to provide a real look at the system's merits on-line.

I thought I might learn a small amount by playing this system, but I am finding that it is completely mindless and will have you making decisions that do not make sense (see my 1st results page. Also, the robotic nature of the system will not let you develop a feel for the table or a feel for the game in general.

[prana]

i don't think your reason for only playing $1 buyins is correct. These people aren't scared because it is only $1(plus they suck). This strategy relies alot on folding equity as its essence if I am not mistaken and we all know what kind of calls to expect in a $1 buyin tourney.

Sklansky states that the system wouldn't be used in the first 2-3 levels, since the blinds were too small. For the first 2-3 levels anything but AA gets mucked.

KK gets mucked? Surely the advantage of some donkey calling you with AJo or KQs, let along a good player with QQ or JJ makes a push better than a fold.