Strategic Theory

[Tailgunner]

I'd like some input on a line of thinking I tend to apply in tournament play. When in or near the chip lead, and occasionally on mid-small stacks, I sometimes find myself willing to invest a good portion (even up to 1/2 or more) of my stack in situations that will either provide valuable insight into the thinking of my opponents, or lay the groundwork for an image that I can capitalize on later.

I figure I will then be in a position to better determine the correct line to take in future hands and that it will be profitable in the long run. So far, it has worked well for me. That's not to say I make these plays indiscriminately, but that I am willing to give away an edge in the expectation that the returns will be greater than the sacrifice. Part of the logic going into this is the fact that goes against the grain for most people, and thus tends to be overlooked for what it really is. No one expects you to deliberately lose money at the tables.

Note that I seldom try something like this in SNGs where the stacks make more of a difference, and almost never in ring games where I can't reasonably assume my opponents will still be at the table even beyond the current hand.

I would like to know what others think of this. Do you believe it is sound strategy, or that am I developing habits that I may regret as I move to the upper limits? Do you think I am overestimating the risk:reward ratio? Should I feel confident that my success is a result of having the instinct/knowledge/discipline to run it at the right time, or just that I have been lucky/skilled enough to turn those losses around irrespective of any perceived gain from the play?

Thanks [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

"Promise. Promise me you will train the boy. He... is the chosen one... he will bring balance. Train him."

Do you have an example?

[A_PLUS]

I cant imagine any situation where giving away half your stack would be a good idea.

[schwza]

this is a really bad idea.

[Tailgunner]

I don't want to give the impression that I deliberately throw away chips all the time... I'm not (always) reckless, and when I do make a move it always has some expectation of a return. Half a stack is also on the radical end of the spectrum, but I mention it because I will risk that much from time to time. However, I don't throw chips to a calling station, I practice careful target selection.

For example, I've just switched tables and find myself chip leader. I immediately chase down a couple bad hands. I know this is going to lose money (though I may get lucky) and in a short time I've given up my chip lead. The first thing the table is going to think is that I'm a maniac and got lucky to acquire my stack. Chances are very good that *someone* will start taking shots at me, and before you know it I have my lead back and then some. It places the control of the table in my hands, and as they start adjusting to me I'm still one step ahead.

Another example I'm sure I've mentioned is a bluff/steal in an unorthodox position. Leading UTG and running a stop'n'go for 1/2 my stack that would take me out of the money. Why, because my opponent is a little weak, I've been tight and there's no way they'd believe I could make such a "stupid" move.

Rather than playing my cards, I'm playing counterintuitive psychology. This is why I asked for input, since it's really hard to tell if my recoveries are a direct result of the risks I've taken, or if I would have actually made even more profit had I chosen a "sounder" strategy.

The reason I include it here rather than in the psych folder is because it's specific to multi-table tournament play, and because I'm curious how valid these techniques will be for me as I work my way up to even higher levels.

[MonkeeMan]

Don't intentionally pay to advertise. Play a solid game with reasoned bluffs and the advetising takes care of itself.

[vicpanic]

Wheres JJ? "ABC."

[Tailgunner]

[ QUOTE ]
Don't intentionally pay to advertise.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll keep this in mind as I reevaluate my play.


[ QUOTE ]
Play a solid game with reasoned bluffs and the advertising takes care of itself.

[/ QUOTE ]

This leads into another facet of what I was talking about. Less paying to advertise than paying for information. I don't have a system whereby I say "I'll play this in this situation." More often it'll be an impulse where I'll choose the "wrong" play because even though it hurts my stack, it leads to other rewards that are likely to make up for it.

It's fluid, a complicated analysis based on observation. What I'm interested in knowing is whether folks think this is brilliance and bravado, or sheer recklessness (flame away if you must.) Just because it happens to be working doesn't mean I'm not sticking my neck into dangerous FPS territory, and all I ask is for honest feedback.

What I may be thinking is something like.. I'll continue this blind steal as a bluff that puts more than half my stack in jeopardy because A) There'a chance it will hold up. B) Even if it fails, it tells me exactly what he/she/they think(s) of my current image, which leaves them vulnerable to a counterattack. C) I am comfortable that my remaining stack, should I lose, is sufficient to work with. D) No matter what the outcome I know the image it will leave me with, and I intend to use that to my advantage.

Reasoned bluff, perhaps.. it can also be difficult to determine when combinations of good strategy only appear to be something else. No matter what it may be, an outside perspective can help improve my game, and I appreciate the input.

"Where the fool is defeated, the wise see an opportunity for victory."

[A_PLUS]

The problem with these image creating plays is that 90% of the time the image you create is of a loose or weak player. For this image to be profitable you need to be dealt good hands.

against low limit bad competition, your image is often in your mind only. I always have lower limit players (dont think I am big time, but I just dabble enough in higher limits to understand the difference) tell me the story of a hand. They mention how this player paid off their AK with A3 'because I have been playing super aggressive, he thought I was bluffing'. Well, that might have had something to do with it. That, or he hasnt noticed a thing you have done and thinks a pair of Aces is a great hand. We tend to attribite the bad calls our opponents make to our carefully crafted image, when truth be told, calling and bluffing too much the is the primary mistake bad players make. So you give up 20% of your chips to ensure that you can double up on your good hands, when there is a 99% chance you would have doubled up anyway.

Secondly, the images you can easily create make your future play very card dependent. Nothing is worse than having a loose idiot image and get a cold stretch of cards.


Thirdly if you are playing against higher level competition, giving away chips with the structure of online events is bad poker. The blinds move too fast, and people change table too quickly to have advertising plays work IMO.

Next time you play, try the same plays you normally wait until you have a 'wild' image to attempt. You may be suprised how often they work anyway.

[Tailgunner]

Great advice, that's exactly what I was afraid of. Not that I'm ever gonna entirely give up my psychotic plays, but I've got some more information to factor in when considering them [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

So now I'm spending money to create an image that may or may not be working, and then spending more to find out/make sure it's working... and praying for the right cards to hold it all together. I never though of it that way.

Sometimes it helps to have another point of view to ground ya in reality, and knowing ahead of time that you're headed for trouble can be invaluable. Thanks. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]