Live mutlis, poor players, deviation, taking chances

[McMelchior]

[ QUOTE ]
I knew I was a better player than 90% of the field.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm curious how you "knew" that - when you weren't winning?

Tournament poker is poker and tournament. Fearlessly gambling it up can be a very effective tournament strategy. Building a big stack early on with a couple of successful gambles and then having the courage to push it against "better" players is probably a winning strategy for players of lesser experience and little post-flop ability.

If what makes you "better" in your own mind is your knowledge of "appropriate starting hands" and odds you have basically reduced yourself to a pre-flop player (hey, no prejudice, I'm one of them) without much advantage over the more inexperienced participants early on. As opposed to late in the tournament, where you definitively will have the upper hand. Proper adjustment for early play: keep it small. Just call with your big Aces and suited connectors, and let go of your cards if the going gets heated on the flop.

If your perceived skill-advantage is your reading and post-flop abilities, then - again - you should be raising very little pre-flop - at least early on. Instead you should be calling raises and outplaying the opposition after the flop.

But what am I rambling about, you obviously adjusted your strategy to benefit what you're good at.[ QUOTE ]
I basically let them eliminate themselves. Its not my job to do so.

[/ QUOTE ]
Good luck!

Best,

McMelchior (Johan)

[betgo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I knew I was a better player than 90% of the field.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm curious how you "knew" that - when you weren't winning?

Tournament poker is poker and tournament. Fearlessly gambling it up can be a very effective tournament strategy. Building a big stack early on with a couple of successful gambles and then having the courage to push it against "better" players is probably a winning strategy for players of lesser experience and little post-flop ability.

If what makes you "better" in your own mind is your knowledge of "appropriate starting hands" and odds you have basically reduced yourself to a pre-flop player (hey, no prejudice, I'm one of them) without much advantage over the more inexperienced participants early on. As opposed to late in the tournament, where you definitively will have the upper hand. Proper adjustment for early play: keep it small. Just call with your big Aces and suited connectors, and let go of your cards if the going gets heated on the flop.

If your perceived skill-advantage is your reading and post-flop abilities, then - again - you should be raising very little pre-flop - at least early on. Instead you should be calling raises and outplaying the opposition after the flop.

But what am I rambling about, you obviously adjusted your strategy to benefit what you're good at.[ QUOTE ]
I basically let them eliminate themselves. Its not my job to do so.

[/ QUOTE ]
Good luck!

Best,

McMelchior (Johan)

[/ QUOTE ]

It depends on your style, but I think that not raising with AK or something at a bunch of limpers from CO or button is a really bad play. My strengths are more strategic, so I am not looking to outplay people limping with junk postflop. Generally, I think it is good to raise with strong hands and try to outplay postflop in a bigger pot. Sure sometimes you wind up in big coin toss situations, but I don't think it is worth trying to avoid that.

I do agree that OP's viewpoint that he is better than 90% of the players may not be correct. He probably has more book knowledge. There is also a lot of luck in these, so I wouldn't judge skill level by short term results.

[McMelchior]

[ QUOTE ]
I think that not raising with AK or something at a bunch of limpers from CO or button is a really bad play

[/ QUOTE ]I used to agree with you - AK and AQ suited or not should have a superior chance of winning (over the crap people like to play) and thereby of making you a bunch of chips in the long run, and not raising PF was giving up a lot of those chips. But I'm not all that sure today - when it comes to low buy-in tournaments at the early levels.

The problem is the typical scenario: 4 players limp to you for t50 each, you make a close to pot sized raise from the button for t350, and with t1,825 in the pot you, the BB and 3 of the limpers see a flop of A85 rainbow. Holding AK of course you're exhilarated, but before the action makes it to you UTG has put in t1,000 and the CO has moved all-in over the top for his remaining t2,900. You look at your remaining t3,300 and ...

Building big pots preflop with big Aces makes for really unweildy hands after the flop, when everybody is eager to "see the future" even for a substantial part of their chip stack.

So when I - in this kind of tournament and at this point in the tournament - advocate limping the big Aces, it's to make the post flop play more manageable. When you hit for real you know it (QJT boards etc.), but you're probably not going to get much action (actually AQ is much better here, since fewer people will put you on a str8 on a KJT board).

A substantial part of big slick's strengh comes from the folding equity of pushing all-in over the top of a LP raise. If that FE doesn't exist the hand is pretty much a dog until a flop has proved differently.

At these buy-ins and at these early levels small pair and suited connectors are worth gold, simply because reading the hands of a bunch of wild and crazy gamblers on a raggedy flop calls for very advanced skills. When you hit the flop with these hands it's almost always a no-brainer. Compared hereto big aces are tough to play. And I like to keep my investment in tough hands down, and my decissions simple.

Best,

McMelchior (Johan)

[betgo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think that not raising with AK or something at a bunch of limpers from CO or button is a really bad play

[/ QUOTE ]I used to agree with you - AK and AQ suited or not should have a superior chance of winning (over the crap people like to play) and thereby of making you a bunch of chips in the long run, and not raising PF was giving up a lot of those chips. But I'm not all that sure today - when it comes to low buy-in tournaments at the early levels.

The problem is the typical scenario: 4 players limp to you for t50 each, you make a close to pot sized raise from the button for t350, and with t1,825 in the pot you, the BB and 3 of the limpers see a flop of A85 rainbow. Holding AK of course you're exhilarated, but before the action makes it to you UTG has put in t1,000 and the CO has moved all-in over the top for his remaining t2,900. You look at your remaining t3,300 and ...

Building big pots preflop with big Aces makes for really unweildy hands after the flop, when everybody is eager to "see the future" even for a substantial part of their chip stack.

So when I - in this kind of tournament and at this point in the tournament - advocate limping the big Aces, it's to make the post flop play more manageable. When you hit for real you know it (QJT boards etc.), but you're probably not going to get much action (actually AQ is much better here, since fewer people will put you on a str8 on a KJT board).

A substantial part of big slick's strengh comes from the folding equity of pushing all-in over the top of a LP raise. If that FE doesn't exist the hand is pretty much a dog until a flop has proved differently.

At these buy-ins and at these early levels small pair and suited connectors are worth gold, simply because reading the hands of a bunch of wild and crazy gamblers on a raggedy flop calls for very advanced skills. When you hit the flop with these hands it's almost always a no-brainer. Compared hereto big aces are tough to play. And I like to keep my investment in tough hands down, and my decissions simple.

Best,

McMelchior (Johan)

[/ QUOTE ]

I like playing speculative hands against loose fish with deep money too.

However, I think a late position raise with AK/AQ is a good play. A lot of times people will pay you off big with a Ax/Kx. Also, with position and initiative, you can sometimes take the pot when you miss. Sure you can lose a big pot against two pair or a set of something. It is trickier to play than limping with a small pair or something, but if you play well postflop, I think it is very EV+.

[winky51]

I have a friend of mine who has player for over 20 years. He never picked up a book but just because of experience he is really good. He doesnt multi table online, he plays lots of SNGs and wins. He plays the live multis. He says he prefers limping in the AK and trapping weak players that can't possibly conceive of what he has. This guy is pretty good and hard to read. We played a cash NL game for months. It took me about 8 sessions to pick up on some of his tells. It was the toughest NL cash game in Fort Lauderdale. We had 4 good players (not including me I suck) and the rest were fishies.

Not sure if I like limping with AK vs loose players. Its like having aces. the old "they dont know I have TP TK because I limped". I like making the small 2.5x raises in EP and playing there.