Gap Concept and winning SNGs

[texasrattlers]

[ QUOTE ]
a weaker player is less likely to know what TGC means, therefore IMHO, they are less likely to notice or care whether it's being employed.

[/ QUOTE ]

What does it matter if a weaker player knows what it is or whether it's being employed? As long as it's effective this statement has no relevance to the discussion.

[lastchance]

Against very loose players, the gap narrows due to you not being able to steal as much, and you expecting to win more money than you call.

The gap concept is a game of chicken. You don't want callers.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
Against very loose players, the gap narrows due to you not being able to steal as much, and you expecting to win more money than you call.

The gap concept is a game of chicken. You don't want callers.

[/ QUOTE ]

None of which contradicts my reply to Desdia.

But the gap concept is not a game. It's a concept, and it applies no matter what kind of opponent you face, whether or not they happen to understand it as well.

eastbay

[lastchance]

The game of chicken reflects the situation that happens in no-limit hold'em SNGs on the bubble. Neither of you want to call or get called, but both of you want to take the blinds. If you ever study the game of chicken, this is the very basic thing that happens in lategame SNGs, which changes based on the quality of each hand, of course.

However, you are right, the gap concept should still be taken into account, though it's effect is much less when people don't fold, and they start pushing with tons of hands.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
Neither of you want to call or get called, but both of you want to take the blinds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course. And?

eastbay

[ThorGoT]

Is there any theoretical literature on the game of "chicken"? Or is it all merely couched in terms of poker? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Gar Pike]

I think your opponents' understanding of their hand strength will have a large effect on their willingness to call a bet. Somebody who doesn't "get it" that A2o isn't a very good holding will be a lot more likely to call a raise than someone who does.

Their willingness to gamble will affect the holdings they are willing to call a raise with, as well. Your 'grinder' types, who are out to make 1.5BB/hr, will be a lot less willing to gamble than your 'action junkie' types.

Good reasons why you want to understand your opponents, and not just dismiss them as weak', or 'donkeys'

As long as you understand that there is a phenomenon that can be described loosely as "The Gap Concept", and that people have a different "Coefficient of Gap", you can adjust your play to take advantage of it.

Regards,

Gar

[e_fermat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
or, instead of making random statements about all sngs based on your experience at the $5 sngs, you could try to take into account that at say, the $200 level, the bulk of people are aware of the gap concept, even if they do not know it by name.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

the statement is'nt random nor does it matter that the majority of my experience is in $5 SNGs. a weaker player is less likely to know that TGC exist. with that being said, a weaker player is less likely to know what TGC means, therefore IMHO, they are less likely to notice or care whether it's being employed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whether they are aware of it or not doesn't affect it's application or effectiveness. An analogy would be a gambit play in chess where a player intentionally sets himself up to lose a piece because it gives them positional advantage on their opponent. A weak opponent may not even know or recognize what gambit is being played against them but the move will work just the same or better than against a stronger opponent.

[binions]

There is a "gap" in the range of hands you can open raise with compared to the hands you can call a raise with.

For example, you might open raise with KT suited in late position, but you can't cold call an early raiser with it.

What's interesting is the closer you get to the money in a tourney, the wider the gap grows.

[SpeakEasy]

[ QUOTE ]
explain how this concept is applied in practice as part of a winning SNG strategy?

[/ QUOTE ]

My general “SNG-Modified Gap Rules” which has proven to be a solid winning strategy for me:

1. Full table through 7 players -- normal “Gap” concept applies. You’re trying to ride through the initial wave of silly all-in bets. Hopefully, you can gain some chips on a key hand or two.

2. At 6 players -- my "gap" widens drastically. If I am an average to large stack, my gap rule:
--open raise with much weaker hands than normal and
--call a raise with only the strongest hands.
This results in a much wider “gap” between my open-raise hands and my call-a-raise hands.

Why? From my experience, the first raiser generally has a significant advantage from six players down to bubble play because, given an average SNG table, the first raiser typically is given respect from most SNG players for having the best hand.

My call-a-raise hand quality tightens because I don't yet need to press with what could be a significantly inferior hand. If play lingers for a significant amount of time and 5-6 players are still left while blinds get very high, my call-a-raise standards will drop to keep up with the effect of rising blinds.

There are always exceptions, but I’ve found this to be the general rule that works well most of the time. If you get a call to your open-raise, proceed cautiously post-flop.

Warning for this play: if there is at least one calling station that acts after you (the guy that is just calling every 3xBB bet), tighten up your open-raising hands (thus closing your “gap”) and wait until he gets eliminated (which usually happens before its down to 3 players). If I’m the one to bust him with a solid hand, great. If someone else busts this guy, fine -- that wild card is out.

3. Bubble play and 3 players -- AGGRESSION. Constant raises in position. Even fewer flops are seen. Gap concept is virtually gone at this point of the game. I will play position over cards and keep raising and stealing until someone pops me back. On the button -- raise. Button folds and I’m the SB -- raise. Button folds and SB limps -- raise in the BB. Fewer flops are seen at these levels, and I want to be the one collecting the chips. Ultra-aggressive play at this point can generate a big stack in just a few orbits. Again, exceptions apply, and if someone else is using this strategy, position (rather than your hole cards) becomes even more critical.

4. Heads-up play -- gap concept is thrown out of whack and generally does not apply. Other rules govern. See other threads for lengthy discussions.