STT basic strategy checklist

[raptor517]

[ QUOTE ]
A good player is able to do this without putting their whole stack at risk. I don't understand when 2+2 players are afraid to play hands like AJ in position because they don't want to get into trouble with it. Who says you have to get in trouble with it? If the flop comes, A54 there's no law saying that you have to put all your chips in when someone raises you.

[/ QUOTE ]

in this situation, you are only going to get action when you are beat. period. thats why people dont put themselves in this situation. so how do you play your aj in position? limp? say someone limps with 55 and slowplays. check call the flop, check raise the turn, now you have 700 chips instead of 1000. things like that is why in a SNG you dont waste your chips early. the advantage better players have is very small with 1k chips and the escalating blinds. that is why survival is key. you make it down to the final 5, you are splitting 2 grand between 5 people. i think people give way too much credit to outplaying people on the early rounds. survive, then make money.

[Phil Van Sexton]

Let me say first that I can't speak to the play at the $200s. I only play up to 50/5.

Anyway, you say that I'll only get action if beat. This may be mostly true, though you'd certainly get called down by Ax or draws.

However, that's exactly my point. If you raise to 60, get 2 callers. Now the pot is 180. I'll bet 100 on the flop and anyone with 66, KQ, etc will give it up immediately. That's all I'm looking for. I don't want to get paid off. I want to win small-medium pots with minimal risk.

If called, I'll slow down. I'll often check behind on the turn and call a small bet on on the river. This depends on a lot of factors.

At the 200/15 level, maybe players won't let you get away with this, but at the lower levels players will just fit-or-fold on the flop without putting up a fight.

[Scuba Chuck]

I hope this discussion continues.

I often wonder which strategy is better
1) Tight, survive - play strong poker at the bubble
2) Play early, aim to have a larger chipstack at the bubble, where you can do some damage.

I wonder what the probabilities are of ending up with 1000+ chips playing more "loose."

I have been experimenting with this strategy a little the last 3 days. Frankly, I don't think I'm very good anymore. I just don't think there's enough chips to play with (PP - 800 starting chips) to give you the folding equity required later on.

That being said, my hand selection could leave a lot to be desired. I aim to continue this idea - offset by some tight play in other games to maintain some bankroll. Perhaps reading Harrington on Hold'em would help...

IMO, tight play early gives you the credibility that you need to make that one blind steal that you need to have on that 100/200 level which ensures your survival. With the vast number of players multi-tabling, I'm just not sure if this is true. Any opinions?

If I play tight, and get to the 50/100 level with 650 chips I have found that I need to steal once this round, and twice the following round to make it in the money. If I am not successful at these three attempts then I will be OTM for sure.

Phil, how can I really open up the game more, and feel confident I'll be in the money as high as I currently doing? 40%.

Scuba

[Mr_J]

I don't usually double up early, but maybe win a couple of pots that are enough to keep me even until it's time to make a move. I usually steal my way to the bubble and have enough to pick my battle. I face my 'coinflip' and am either OTM or ITM.

When I double up early I feel like it doesn't makes that big a difference. Just a bit more of a buffer if I need it.

I'm also not usually a big stack (not until HU anyway).

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]
tight play early gives you the credibility that you need to make that one blind steal that you need to have on that 100/200 level which ensures your survival.

[/ QUOTE ]

Blind steals and playing loosely in late position are 2 different things. Opponents who are aware will still respect a blind steal even if you called with JTo or raised with A9 earlier.

Be aware that I'm not talking about playing lots of hands, just a few more. I'm really talking about late position on the first 3 levels in an unraised pot. That's only 5-7 hands, and you'll still fold garbage like T2o, so you'll play even fewer than that.

As for your image, playing like this will help your chances of doubling up with AA or KK. If you play super tight, then raise big, you may not get paid off, even at party.

Most SnG players are terrible post flop. Other than check-raise traps, they really have nothing to offer. Take advantage of this.

A check or min-bet means they have nothing or a monster (usually nothing). Make a bet and be prepared to fold.

Once you get reasonable stack, you can put people to the test. If I have 1400 and I'm in a $200+ pot against someone with 500-600, I'll bet $200 on any flop if he checks. As Doyle and Mike McD said, the key to NL is put your opponent to a decision for all of *HIS* chips. I'm risking $200 to win the $200 pot. He is effectively risking his tournament to play the hand. It's not all about blind stealing.

[t_perkin]

[ QUOTE ]

I don't understand when 2+2 players are afraid to play hands like AJ in position because they don't want to get into trouble with it.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think it is more that people here suggest to new players that these are the kind of hands to steer clear of until they are more confident. They can be profitable but they can also be very costly if played badly.

Tim

[lacky]

I play very much like phil. From my current PT database, I have 5528 level 1 hands and have a tournament amount won of 25167 chips with a VPIP of 18%. At level 2 I have 5325 hands with 9140 chips with a VPIP of 16%. All these are from $55's and $109's. I'm courius what the numbers look like when you play super tight early. I would think they are lower, in which case playing those hands is a good thing. It will be interesting if we can put some numbers to this discussion.

Steve

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it is more that people here suggest to new players that these are the kind of hands to steer clear of until they are more confident. They can be profitable but they can also be very costly if played badly.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a good point, though it's not always clear when people write guidelines that this is the intent.

It seems these guidelines are basically "How to be Profitable at NL SnGs without having to know anything about NL". This isn't bad because they certainly helped me when I was starting out.

The problem is that once people master these strategies, they try to refine the strategies (ie "Should I push with K4 on the bubble?") rather than try to improve their NL games. Then they can't figure out why they don't win above 10/1.

Of course, I played a lot of SnGs and still couldn't play NL to save my life. It's kind of like when you are a bad free throw shooter at basketball. You can play 10,000 games of baskball and your free throw shooting still might not improve. You just don't get that much practice during games. Instead, you need practice shooting 100s of free throws before games.

With NL, it's similiar. There's just not much "play" in these SNGs. Instead, play a couple 1000 hands at the 25NL 6max tables as practice, and you'll gain experience that would've taken forever in SnGs.

[AA suited]

[ QUOTE ]
A check or min-bet means they have nothing or a monster (usually nothing). Make a bet and be prepared to fold.

Once you get reasonable stack, you can put people to the test. If I have 1400 and I'm in a $200+ pot against someone with 500-600, I'll bet $200 on any flop if he checks. As Doyle and Mike McD said, the key to NL is put your opponent to a decision for all of *HIS* chips. I'm risking $200 to win the $200 pot. He is effectively risking his tournament to play the hand. It's not all about blind stealing.

[/ QUOTE ]

hm.. so in position (button, co, co-1), limp in w/top 40%? then if checked/min bet to you on a two tone flop, bet pot?

1) How often do you succeed Phil?
2) And what happens if he calls, then bets 1/2 pot on the turn?
3) or checks on the turn (and you check) and bets 1/2 pot on the river (and you have middle pair)?

[morgan180]

In Harrington on Hold 'em he talks about 3 different styles of play for tournament players.

Conservative
Aggressive
Super Aggressive

It seems to me that the optimal STT strategy is to progress through these styles of play as the tournament progresses. Early levels stick to the premium hands since the risk/reward ratio is not great, in most cases. As the blinds increase you open up to take advantage of tighter players who are squeezing their chips. Then as you get to the bubble you open up to steal as many of the large blinds as possible. You are able to open with many many hands. Optimal STT strategy is not optimal NL strategy and vice versa. Optimal NL strategy from an advanced player can be more successful than ABC STT strategy - I think everyone agrees with that.

Harrington goes on to state that the aggressie style of play requires more skill to play successfully and employing optimal NL strategy in a STT requires more skill as well and will be more successful than any formulaic method.

That being said new players starting out are well-served by the guides and the basic rules.