Anyone used "The System" discussed in TPFAP??

[boomboomjr]

If anyone has used the All-In system as discussed in TPFAP please share your results and feelings about it when you are at a tough table. Anyone use it the whole tournament regardless of skill level? I appreciate any responses.

[shadow29]

I used the modified one. I entered into an MTT at UltimateBet and busted out in 245/1000.

[boomboomjr]

How many times would you say you were called? Just seems that it would be a difficult way to build a stack unless you were called often and I wouldn't want to have that many coin flip decisions. If I was sitting at the table with the big boys I may do it but otherwise i think it is better to stay with normal strategy.

[Navers]

with so many chances to go bust during the tournament with the system I'm surprised if people who adhere to it throughout the tournament can still make money

[shadow29]

I was not called many times. It really started to kick in once we got to 50/100 blinds. Then my stack rose, after dropping due to posting blinds and not getting the math to push. What sucks was I got AA twice and won nothing but the blinds (t30 once!). I eventually started to get called and I won my fare share of coin flips. With my last hand I ran into AA with QQ, just like it predicts I believe.

[SlyR]

While preparing for a tourney at the Orleans, a friend and I coached a guy with almost no poker experience in the System and fronted him his entry fee, just as an experiment. We then discovered one weakness in the System: He never once got a chance to go all-in, and was blinded out shortly after the first break.

[Eclypse]

You might be interested in this article by Daniel Negraneau which appeard in Card Player. He mentions "The System" in Sklansky's book:

"So, what is this going to do to the no-limit tournament world? It’s going to make it a lot tougher for the skilled players, that’s for sure. Normally, I wouldn’t be sharing this with you, as it will have a direct financial impact on me personally. Unfortunately, David Sklansky recently decided to write a tournament poker book that reveals some of these things that top players don’t want anyone to know — strategies that will dramatically shrink the gap between the greatest of players and the average player. So, now you can expect to see a whole new army of MISs [Move-In Specialists] who will help turn a beautiful, classy chess match that poker should be into a boring, methodical card-catching contest."

The full article can be found here:

http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_maga...es/?a_id=12550

[Monty Cantsin]

[ QUOTE ]
So, now you can expect to see a whole new army of MISs [Move-In Specialists] who will help turn a beautiful, classy chess match that poker should be into a boring, methodical card-catching contest."

[/ QUOTE ]

Spoken like a true scrub.

"A common call of the scrub is to cry that the kind of play in which ones tries to win at all costs is “boring” or “not fun.” Let’s consider two groups of players: a group of good players and a group of scrubs. The scrubs will play “for fun” and not explore the extremities of the game. They won’t find the most effective tactics and abuse them mercilessly. The good players will. The good players will find incredibly overpowering tactics and patterns. As they play the game more, they’ll be forced to find counters to those tactics. The vast majority of tactics that at first appear unbeatable end up having counters, though they are often quite esoteric and difficult to discover. The counter tactic prevents the first player from doing the tactic, but the first player can then use a counter to the counter. The second player is now afraid to use his counter and he’s again vulnerable to the original overpowering tactic.

Notice that the good players are reaching higher and higher levels of play. They found the “cheap stuff” and abused it. They know how to stop the cheap stuff. They know how to stop the other guy from stopping it so they can keep doing it. And as is quite common in competitive games, many new tactics will later be discovered that make the original cheap tactic look wholesome and fair. Often in fighting games, one character will have something so good it’s unfair. Fine, let him have that. As time goes on, it will be discovered that other characters have even more powerful and unfair tactics. Each player will attempt to steer the game in the direction of his own advantages, much how grandmaster chess players attempt to steer opponents into situations in which their opponents are weak."

/mc

[TobDog]

[ QUOTE ]
While preparing for a tourney at the Orleans, a friend and I coached a guy with almost no poker experience in the System and fronted him his entry fee, just as an experiment. We then discovered one weakness in the System: He never once got a chance to go all-in, and was blinded out shortly after the first break.

[/ QUOTE ]
How fast were the blinds going up? first break? seems quite fast.

BTW I haven't seen this addressed lately but I think that after the 'poker expolsion' many pros I have seen in print say that bluffing is much more difficult now and thhus shovin gin a big stack is more likely to get called by this new breed of player(whatever skill level you think they are) and will result more often in busting out, when Sklansky wrote and published his system, you had more pros and tight players that would not risk their tournament on one decision, from what it sounds like now there are many players that would love to gamble in that spot, jmho, I think the game has changed and rendered his method less effective, which he was concerned about when he wrote it.

[Ghazban]

I tried out the modified system twice for freerolls on Ultimate Bet (800 entries-- top 25 got an entry into another tourney). The first time, I stopped using it once antes were added as I didn't have time to figure out how that would change the numbers. The second time, I added the antes in with the sum of the blinds, which seemed to work pretty well. Both times, I made the top 25 and got the entry to the other tourney but I sucked out at least 3 times with dominated hands per tourney (pair vs. overpair, KQs vs. AQo, stuff like that). I got called by worse hands early on far more than I would've expected (KK vs. ATo, for example) but I suspect that's due to the freeroll nature of the tournament and people either want a big stack early or to quit and do something else.

Approaching the bubble, I abandoned the adjusted system both times and pushed with AA only. I reasoned that, given that 1-25 all paid the same, there was no reason to take chances on getting knocked out when I was in no danger of getting blinded out (had an average stack both times).