Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Tournament Poker > Multi-table Tournaments

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-11-2005, 02:43 AM
winky51 winky51 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 122
Default Live Tournaments, when is it not worth while?

I like to play live tournaments but I don't have the big money to enter a bunch of $500+ tournaments. I have to settle for $100-$200 entries. So when is it that a tournament is NOT worth entering because the structure makes it more of a crap shoot?

Usually the tournaments I enter are the following:

4000 chips
25/50 blinds
blinds go up every 20 minutes.
House takes 20% $130+$20 buy in for example.

I usually play tight to build the tight image and try to stay on the table that doesnt get broken up. I want my opponents to fear me. The more chips I have the more I steal and play more hands. Because of my image I get away with a lot. But I find that I basically have to win a bunch of all in hands by the lessor players to survive? Because they just blantently push with crap all the time putting my stack at risk. I find I have to double up quick to play more hands to give myself more chances to win more chips but if I get no cards before the blinds rise I'm screwed. With 20 min blinds you can get SS easy.

Thoughts of if I should play these live tournaments? Could a change of style from conservative be in order? The players suck 90% and only think about their hands not anyone elses.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-11-2005, 02:46 AM
MeanGreenTT MeanGreenTT is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Tampa
Posts: 32
Default Re: Live Tournaments, when is it not worth while?

Local dog track, since re-opening tourney play, $33+12.

T1500. starting at 25/50, increasing every 20 minutes...I no longer play there [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-11-2005, 03:15 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Live Tournaments, when is it not worth while?

[ QUOTE ]

Thoughts of if I should play these live tournaments? Could a change of style from conservative be in order? The players suck 90% and only think about their hands not anyone elses.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think "turbo" tourneys and rebuys are great deals for the house, but suck for 2+2 type players who actually want to use some skill. I never play them.

Sounds like you're better off biding your time and playing that $500 buy in. I'm gonna play one in Feb when the WSOP comes to AC.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-11-2005, 11:14 AM
betgo betgo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 792
Default Re: Live Tournaments, when is it not worth while?

My results are overall negative for live tournaments, perhaps because I haven't hit the real money in the first 3 places.

I do well at turbos online, due to the weak competition and I am good at strategic preflop play. However, I find it hard to get a big edge in typical live daily tournaments. The players are pretty bad, but not as loose or aggressive as online. I find people will always call my preflop reraises when they shouldn't.

I played in a couple of slow structure tournaments and I found it a lot easier. I felt very comfortable in that I could wait to take advantage of situations. I also could easily see some mistakes I was making. I didn't cash in either. In the Harrahs 100+20, I finished 4th with 5 places paying. In the a Taj 300+40 side event with an even slower structure, I finished 40th of 110. Soon I would like to regularly play in those side events, including larger buyin ones, but I want to get some cashes, before I invest the money in that.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-11-2005, 12:21 PM
McMelchior McMelchior is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: New York, New York
Posts: 66
Default Re: Live Tournaments, when is it not worth while?

[ QUOTE ]
4000 chips
25/50 blinds
blinds go up every 20 minutes.

[/ QUOTE ]
How fast is the progression? If level 4 is like 200/400 the "push with crap all the time" is probably a sound strategy, since your tournament basically is over if you haven't at least doubled within the first 30 hands.

These kind of structures favors bold moves and fast play, and "playing tight to build a tight image" is probably a losing strategy. It's not clear from your post whether the opponents push before or after the flop, but the way you descibe yourself makes me guess you're primarily a "pre-flop" player. If I'm right this might be one of the reasons you're not winning - you will not see enough deals to be able to base your success on picking up prime hands.

The fast structure imposes a very high variance and there's little you can do to counteract that - you just have to roll with the punches and capitalize on random luck. Playing tight probably puts your "bad" opponents at an advantage over you.

My suggestion is to experiment with a significantly more LAGgy style, realizing that very often you'll find yourself on the rail within the first 20 minutes of the tournament - but with the chance of building a big stack and being able to dominate once in a while.

If that's not your game you might consider focussing on playing one-table sats for the $500 buy-in (or bigger) tourneys, where the structure favors your style.

Best,

McMelchior (Johan)
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-11-2005, 12:51 PM
betgo betgo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 792
Default Re: Live Tournaments, when is it not worth while?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
4000 chips
25/50 blinds
blinds go up every 20 minutes.

[/ QUOTE ]
How fast is the progression? If level 4 is like 200/400 the "push with crap all the time" is probably a sound strategy, since your tournament basically is over if you haven't at least doubled within the first 30 hands.

These kind of structures favors bold moves and fast play, and "playing tight to build a tight image" is probably a losing strategy. It's not clear from your post whether the opponents push before or after the flop, but the way you descibe yourself makes me guess you're primarily a "pre-flop" player. If I'm right this might be one of the reasons you're not winning - you will not see enough deals to be able to base your success on picking up prime hands.

The fast structure imposes a very high variance and there's little you can do to counteract that - you just have to roll with the punches and capitalize on random luck. Playing tight probably puts your "bad" opponents at an advantage over you.

My suggestion is to experiment with a significantly more LAGgy style, realizing the very often you'll find yourself on the rail within the first 20 minutes of the tournament - but with the chance of building a big stack and being able to dominate once in a while.

If that's not your game you might consider focussing on playing one-table sats for the $500 buy-in (or bigger) tourneys, where the structure favors your style.

Best,

McMelchior (Johan)

[/ QUOTE ]

Playing tight early on is OK. Usually the early play is too loose, but not as loose as some online tournaments. Sometimes you bust out in the first 20 minutes, but if you are in the habit of busting out in round 1 with deep money, you are probably playing like a maniac.

However, when the blinds get huge, particularly with a big ante, you have to play aggressive. Sometimes real short stacked, you need to push with anything. This is discussed in HOH2, as well as Sklansky, McEvoy, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-11-2005, 03:12 PM
erc007 erc007 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 33
Default Re: Live Tournaments, when is it not worth while?

While I realize what you are saying, I feel that you should be able to beat these small buy-in, fast-paced tourneys before you move up to thye larger buy-ins (where a slower blind escalation might help a player of your style.)
A good player can always profit from bad players making mistakes. It's true that (when the blinds increase) you will have to risk your whole stack when you have only a small statistical edge (ie: 3 to 2; or 2 to 1) but there is an advantage to this that you are not recognizing.
If you are playing better starting hands than your opponents, you have an even larger advantage if you are all-in, since all-in bets guarantee that you will see all 5 (board) cards. This advantage is very significant and it works in YOUR favor! As a good player you will know the winning probabilities of most starting hands, and you can use your reads and pot-odds calculations to make better decisions. My advice to you is that these tourneys are easy to beat, but you have to give yourself a chance and realize that if you play enough of them, and make the right decisions you will bust-out a lot, but you will eventually have some good cashes that will more than make up for the inherent variance that comes with these tourneys.
Don't be so eager to move up to the bigger buy-in tourneys, where there is much more post-flop play. Whenever the buy-ins get above $500, you're going to be going against very good players that will read your tight style and exploit it. You're going to have to learn to mix-up your play if you want to move up. Use these $100 buy-in tourneys to get comfortable doing this and you will have an easier transition when you do move up.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-11-2005, 03:15 PM
surfinillini surfinillini is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5
Default Re: Live Tournaments, when is it not worth while?

[ QUOTE ]
While I realize what you are saying, I feel that you should be able to beat these small buy-in, fast-paced tourneys before you move up to thye larger buy-ins (where a slower blind escalation might help a player of your style.)
A good player can always profit from bad players making mistakes. It's true that (when the blinds increase) you will have to risk your whole stack when you have only a small statistical edge (ie: 3 to 2; or 2 to 1) but there is an advantage to this that you are not recognizing.
If you are playing better starting hands than your opponents, you have an even larger advantage if you are all-in, since all-in bets guarantee that you will see all 5 (board) cards. This advantage is very significant and it works in YOUR favor! As a good player you will know the winning probabilities of most starting hands, and you can use your reads and pot-odds calculations to make better decisions. My advice to you is that these tourneys are easy to beat, but you have to give yourself a chance and realize that if you play enough of them, and make the right decisions you will bust-out a lot, but you will eventually have some good cashes that will more than make up for the inherent variance that comes with these tourneys.
Don't be so eager to move up to the bigger buy-in tourneys, where there is much more post-flop play. Whenever the buy-ins get above $500, you're going to be going against very good players that will read your tight style and exploit it. You're going to have to learn to mix-up your play if you want to move up. Use these $100 buy-in tourneys to get comfortable doing this and you will have an easier transition when you do move up.

[/ QUOTE ]

in a turbo tournament against bad players, skill is not much > luck

This is the "short term", and if you don't get hit with the deck you will blind out if all you see is rags, you don't have the luxury to play tight in these and you can't bluff bad players.

And as far as a linear increase in skill as a function of buy in amount as you infer, you have not played that many high buy in tourneys to see that the play is just as bad and in some cases worse than lower buy in tournaments.

have you seen the WSOP fields lately??? and I'm not speaking of the ME
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-13-2005, 11:41 AM
winky51 winky51 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 122
Default Re: Live Tournaments, when is it not worth while?

Well I sat down looking at all my records of tournaments.

I have played 13 live tournaments, placed 3rd, chop top 3, and 7th. About 120-140 players

hate online tournaments, I feel blind.

I did notice a couple things with the live ones.

1. the 30 min round tournaments allowed me to take less risks with my whole stack. I was all in maybe once or twice before the money and 80% of the time with the best hand.

2. The 20 min blinds made me go all in 4-5 times on average before the flop. I bascially had to win 5 times in a row to make the final table. Best hand of course but 5 times in a row.

So this blind structure I like. 30 mins, 4000 chips. It plays well.

As for my style. I am mor like Harrington. But I do like to raise with suited connectors to mix it up. I steal a lot, but just enough to keep my tight image. I play the psychology game very well. My instincts are dead on 95% of the time. I know how to get players to show their hands, get them to talk, give me tells. Thats why I like live tournaments. Now vs a pro I almost have no shot because they dont give tells. But vs the rif-raff at the $200 tournaments they are easy to read.

I usually take my time for everything. Say the same things play the same way, go through counting stacks everytime I am in a hand. If I am the aggressor with the set or a weak hand I talk to my players when faced with a decision. I see many players talk when they are weak and be silent when they are strong. Only time I dont budge is preflop. I think of hot women or something. They ask for a chip count I lay it out and let the dealer count. I find the silent treatment is more ominous. I study my players, their habits, their betting and repeat mental notes on them. The one thing I dont have big enough yet are balls for my instincts in real marginal situations like I have K high and I am sure the other player is only on a draw to a low straight on the turn. But I do make plays and raise with crap. Usually I want my cards mid to low, suited, and somewhat connected so I make something
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-13-2005, 01:48 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Live Tournaments, when is it not worth while?

The card rooms at the local dog tracks and Jai Alai frontons here run MTTs that start with t1500, blinds 50/100 and increasing every 15 minutes. I've made the 2nd to final table in this thing twice and no further. You need to be slapped in the face with the deck and make some pretty bold plays in order to FT these.

Incidentally, Florida law prohibits losing more than $32 on a single poker hand so their $100 buyin tournaments start as 25/25 limit for the first 3 hands, t2500 to start, to bypass the legal problems. Then it's 15 minutes of 25/25 NL before jumping up to 50/100. Amazing how, at the same room, the cheaper structure is a horrible crapshoot and the higher one actually favors solid play.

I no longer play the cheap buyin MTTs there.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.