2plus2 MTT "Top Ten" list

[mcteecho]

You amuse me too.

[CardSharpCook]

[ QUOTE ]
I think that as a whole, the top players in some of the other forums (mid/high limit, mid/high NL/PL) are light years ahead of the top players in the MTT forum in terms of having a deep understanding of their 'chosen field'. For all the coverage that MTTs get, there are still many aspects of tournament play that smart people completely disagree on. It's not so much true in cash games.

-sossman

[/ QUOTE ]

there are several threads I could site in the M/H limit forum which contain hotly debated topics. FI, "J8s: cap it up?" or "AK in a family pot". Also the always present debate concerning 3-betting TT or lower. Indeed, I think the debates there are better. Someone give me a list of our great debates? the AK vs TT was a good one. But I can't think of any others off the top of my head. I think the difference is the ability to discuss specific hands without having "tourney strategy" affecting so many hands.

CSC

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the difference is the ability to discuss specific hands without having "tourney strategy" affecting so many hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Tourney strategy" imo usually simplifies the discussion rather than making it more complex. I am not aware of any strong high-limit NL players who have any problem properly taking into account "tourney strategy" considerations when making their decisions.

I would much rather be at a tourney table facing a lot of "tourney pros" as opposed to facing a tournament table filled with guys like Gabe Thaler, Sam Batshon, Bobby Hoff, Prahlad Friedman, and others who dominate big NL games.

I don't think it's any surprise that the guys who play in the big games (both the big NL games and the big HE or mixed games, plus of course the big-big mixed games) also do quite well in tournaments, while few of the tourney "names" do very well in the big games.

[SossMan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the difference is the ability to discuss specific hands without having "tourney strategy" affecting so many hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Tourney strategy" imo usually simplifies the discussion rather than making it more complex. I am not aware of any strong high-limit NL players who have any problem properly taking into account "tourney strategy" considerations when making their decisions.

I would much rather be at a tourney table facing a lot of "tourney pros" as opposed to facing a tournament table filled with guys like Gabe Thaler, Sam Batshon, Bobby Hoff, Prahlad Friedman, and others who dominate big NL games.

I don't think it's any surprise that the guys who play in the big games (both the big NL games and the big HE or mixed games, plus of course the big-big mixed games) also do quite well in tournaments, while few of the tourney "names" do very well in the big games.

[/ QUOTE ]

I very much agree. Many times, tournament decisions become no brainers (or the alternatives are close enough EV wise to not make a huge difference) mainly because of stack size.

[PuertoKid]

The fact that I am not on this list is evidence that it is silly. I mean, seriously, I took 1st in a UB $5 MTT one time. And I took 2nd another time. How could I possibly not be rated in the top 5?