NLHE Tournament - Lowering hand requirements as blinds go up?

[AliasMrJones]

I believe the same Sklansky book (TPFAP) that has the all-in formula also says that lowering your starting hand requirements, at least significantly lowering them, until you are almost literally to the felt is a mistake.

[Mike Gallo]

Fossilman,

Excellent response however some posters want to get spoon fed.

[spoody]

Of Course! I did not want to get in to any theoretical discussion, I just wanted a pure list of hands I can play in every situation. I would also like a list of hands I can play heads up...32o ok to play? Then please I would like to be spoonfed a list of hands I can play in the BB that have been 3 bet when I have a big stack in a NL tourney, then the same list in a limit tourney. FEED ME, FEED ME!!!!

Maybe if you hop off your high horse for a sec you may see that my question is a very practical question that most people run into. I was hoping for some lively discussion on the idea of loosening up as you get closer to being put all in. I can accept the fact that there may be no answer, and even Fossil admits his answer was generic...and it was. He also says the best play is usually obvious, I dissagree...when you have to decide to either call off half your chips or move all in with a marginal hand like K9o that sure does not seem like an easy decision for what is best play. Most of the players I have played against in a tourney are total strangers, so to get some great lock on their play is pretty difficult, and add that to the fact that probably half of the players are pretty inexperienced NLHE tourney players...so who knows what they are going to do?? I would say at least 1/4 of the players busted out near the bubble of a tourney have missplayed their hands by either moving all in too early with a marginal hand or just sitting there waiting for aces to come and they end up forced to play 72o in the BB. So were they too tight or too lose? I dont know, thats why I asked.

If there is absolutely no answer please tell me, but I am getting the sense that people are actually afraid to answer this for fear of getting ridiculed...at least Fossil tried (thank you Fossil). Telling me to learn what hands play well through a hot and cold simulation & that I cant see the forest through the trees is quite condescending...Do you have any thoughts on the question? or just going to jab?

In my personal opinion I would think you have to lower your standards gradually as you begin to get under about 30 hands you can play, maybe I am cracked in the head. But if there are antes, every hand is hurting more and more, and the big stacks are taking nearly every blind without a fight, you cannot wait for a great hand. And every hand you wait is another ante down the drain. I would also be tempted (if I was lucky enough to get them) to slowplay AA, KK and maybe even AK to gamble and hope I could maybe triple up instead of moving all in and just grab the blinds and antes without a fight. Higher suited connectors down to about 6 or 7 might begin to interest me too along with any 2 face high cards...but here I am not sure. Why do you think I asked the question?

Spoods

[Mike Gallo]

Spoody,

It all goes by feel.

If you think you have a weak tight player who values his chips steal from him with impunity. You can have any two cards.

If you think he will defend with any two do not attempt a steal.

Maybe if you hop off your high horse for a sec you may see that my question is a very practical question that most people run into

I suppose, however I do not see it that way.

Even playing against strangers you should have a "feel" for their play within a few orbits. You should realize who you can bluff and who you cannot.

No-limit tournaments become difficult to play for this reason. Some people have the willingness to gamble it up others do not.

In an attempt to answer your question, I would raise 3-5x the blinds with a pocket pair and a suited Ace, if the table texture allowed it.

If I could give a simple answer the game would not have a complex game.

[Copernicus]

"I would also be tempted (if I was lucky enough to get them) to slowplay AA, KK and maybe even AK to gamble and hope I could maybe triple up instead of moving all in and just grab the blinds and antes without a fight. Higher suited connectors down to about 6 or 7 might begin to interest me too along with any 2 face high cards."

Again, it is all too dependent on the situation to generalize very much. Some thoughts on these specific situations though (which could be over-ridden by the circumstances they come up in):

Slowplaying AA, KK, AK?. I would prefer call-raising these and still getting it all in pre-flop, especially AK, to slow-playing. In late position I would still take them all-in and hope for a call from a limper.

If you dont get a raise from EP with AA, KK its not a disaster, but it might be for AK. If think there is any chance of no raise with AK, get it all in, and be happy with the blinds. I don't think any of this changes strictly because of chip stack.

When you are into your last orbit or two and the table is full you are going all in. If you are going to do it with middle suited connectors you may as well do it with any middle connectors, because most of the equity is in folds and straights anyway. Suited only adds a few % to your chances of winning. That said, I still wouldnt loosen up that much. I want high cards when I make a desperation all in. You will often be called by low pairs or A-small. Vs an underpair you are a coin-flip, and vs A-small at least you beat the small pair if you both pair up. They also have some straight possibilities.

Anything more than 2 orbits I'm generally not loosening my standards much at all, unless I'm LP, its limped to me, and there is a decent chance of a steal plus some hand value (eg Ax). You'll be dealt a pair every orbit and a half on average, and I think they are worth conserving chips for when they come.

[spoody]

Thx, I dont think my thoughts are that far off of yours. In my last tourney I had 2 huge stacks to my left and 2 or 3 people that were calling everything, so with only 3 orbits to go, I was all in no matter what (3x blinds was my stack). I never got an ace or a pair. The best hand I saw was Q9o with about 14 hands to go, I regret not playing them since I was down nothing pretty quickly..Forced to play 10-2o in BB (previous hand was 63o) with 2 callers KT and KJ - I was pretty much dominated...Jacks won.

Thanks again for giving it a go,
spoody

[spoody]

Thx,

I think slowplay was the wrong description, or maybe I did not describe enough of what I would want out of my AA. I was thinking I would limp and hope for callers if I wanted to actually try to build my stack. If I was not satisfied with just making the money but wanted to have something to play with I could see limping, hoping for 2 or 3 callers and then get all in on the flop and see what happens...just gambling a little more for more chips and accepting the higher risk of busting out. I have done it once before and was able to add 3x to my stack instead of doubling up (at best). At the time I was short stack at the table and was getting pushed around by the big stacks at the table. A double up just was not going to do it for me, so I gambled and won, but I realize the tight rope I was walking (or maybe it was a plank)

Spoody