How bad would it be to fold every hand on levels 1-3 in a 10+1?

jeffraider · #1 01-10-2005, 12:18 AM

Just like the title says, folding every single hand including monsters for levels 1-3 of your typical Party 10+1? How much would you be costing yourself in the long run, do you think?

Mons · #2 01-10-2005, 12:27 AM

First I'm really not sure how much it would 'cost' you. Frequently I am dealt cold cards for most of levels 1-3 and I can usually do fine as long as at least am able to get a hand to double up with.

However I think the reason you may be asking this question is that you have had some bad experiences with monsters against the loose $10+1 players. If this is the case, avoid such results oriented thinking. Be happy that you are getting your money in with the best of it w/ AA-QQ and AK. If you run into a bigger hand or get sucked out on, so be it.

Just my thoughts, flawed as they may be.

---
Mons

stanky · #3 01-10-2005, 12:32 AM

I've finished ITM several times without winning a hand till round 4 so I imagine it wouldn't hurt me much since I play extremely tight in the first couple of rounds. Don't ask me to do an experiment though since I don't make it a habit to fold monsters.

-Pete

jeffraider · #4 01-10-2005, 12:33 AM

[ QUOTE ]
First I'm really not sure how much it would 'cost' you. Frequently I am dealt cold cards for most of levels 1-3 and I can usually do fine as long as at least am able to get a hand to double up with.

However I think the reason you may be asking this question is that you have had some bad experiences with monsters against the loose $10+1 players. If this is the case, avoid such results oriented thinking. Be happy that you are getting your money in with the best of it w/ AA-QQ and AK. If you run into a bigger hand or get sucked out on, so be it.

Just my thoughts, flawed as they may be.

---
Mons

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's not out of frustration or anything. It just seems like 10+1s would be just about as beatable if you folded levels 1-3 without regard for your cards, and I was just curious if I was very far off the mark.

David100 · #5 01-10-2005, 12:36 AM

not sure about 10, but was playing in a $200 sng the other day, and 3rd place did not enter into one hand! so he won $400.

David

floppy · #6 01-10-2005, 01:15 AM

Phil Van Sexton was recommending raising to 100-125 PF for this very reason. You'll either pick up the blinds (an improvement over folding) or have a very good chance of winning a good sized pot. There's still some risk, but it seems better than tangling with maniacs post-flop when they're getting implied odds on a 3xBB bet at BB=T$10

Mons · #7 01-10-2005, 01:21 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Phil Van Sexton was recommending raising to 100-125 PF for this very reason. You'll either pick up the blinds (an improvement over folding) or have a very good chance of winning a good sized pot. There's still some risk, but it seems better than tangling with maniacs post-flop when they're getting implied odds on a 3xBB bet at BB=T$10

[/ QUOTE ]

I usually do something similar to this. It works well considering most of the $10+1 players can't get away from AQ and AJ.

wadea · #8 01-10-2005, 01:31 AM

I basically play nothing but AA, KK, QQ or AK in the first three rounds anyway. I sometimes limp in with PPs. Even when I make a hand with those cards, I usually make sure to shut out all the cheesy draws and end up not winning much with them. Most of the time, though, I probably don't enter a pot in the first three rounds anyway, so you probably wouldn't be giving up much...

If you multi-table, you could actually "Sit Out" for the first three rounds (or so) and thus play more tables/hour. Thus, in this case, you could actually GET something for not playing hands early.

-wadea

The Yugoslavian · #9 01-10-2005, 01:35 AM

You'd be fine. I'd imagine for many players it could actually improve their ITM and ROI.

Feel free to start up some SNGs, click the away button and go take a shower/bang a hot chick/make some food/etc -- it'll still be all good when you show up in time for level 4.

Hmmm, now this has me thinking. This could be a viable way to increase one's $/hr rate when multitabling tons of table. Instead of even having to click 'fold' one could simply stagger waves of ~4 SNGs and only play them when it gets to level 4.

Thoughts anyone?

Yugoslav

illab · #10 01-10-2005, 02:08 AM

I disagree with this idea, and I'm usually the one plays the least amount of hands on my tables. But that's usually because the $20+2s are pretty loose. Why not play a few hands like AJ,KQs, or pocket pairs if you can limp in and have position. If no one raises (on a typical table where some people raise with A7, level 1) then your AJ or KQ will probably hold up against calling stations who play like they don't know what a kicker is. Just make sure to bet away the people on draws or make them pay for them. I guess its about having the confidence that you can outplay people after the flop.

Sometimes I cant get a hand for the 1st three levels and only five or six people are left by level 3. I'm missed my chance to double up on one of the idiots and now I'm probably going to have to go allin in and get lucky in a overcards vs. pocket pair matchup to have a chance to place. Even if you miss the flop on the two or three extra hands you play its not going kill you. It not that different have 720 or 660 chips.