building a Tourney bankroll - from pscrew.com

[whiskeytown]

I am comfortable and won't freak with going broke.

I'll tell you something though - It's something I felt too stupid posting in a strategy post, but I'll say it here.

I've been doing better - I think I'm overbetting my hands a bit - but I feel like poker the way I used to play it was a series of coin-flips - try to have the most money in on the best of them - whether 33/66 or 47/53 -

But now I realize that the fewer showdowns I see, the better, and if I have the position and chips to take it down or force a surrender before it gets to that point, I have guaranteed myself a stack of chips - and doing this fairly regularly not only gets you a lot of free steals, but makes a re-raise easier to read and get out of the way on.

so I'm trying some different stuff - wider gap in my gap concept - more aggression at various stages and cutting back at spots...

times when you need a 5xbb bet and times when a 2.5xbb bet will tell you if it's a freebie or a monster you need to lay down to.

Times when you need to flip the coin and times when you just wait him out. And you learn NEVER to click the check/fold option early cause even though it's 7/2, IF everyone folds up to you a nice placed reraise will pay off 80 percent of the time.

Things like that are coming to me... - personally - I haven't gone off on my "poker as wargaming" analogy yet because it's sorta known I like to toke occasionally and it all sorta reads like a stoner dream. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

But it's obvious to me now why I got so drawn into poker tournaments - they're so close to Advanced Squad Leader and all the board games I used to play.

RB

[REL18]

Maybe u missing what people are writting but i guess you are ok with going broke

[stevepa]

[ QUOTE ]

But now I realize that the fewer showdowns I see, the better, and if I have the position and chips to take it down or force a surrender before it gets to that point, I have guaranteed myself a stack of chips - and doing this fairly regularly not only gets you a lot of free steals, but makes a re-raise easier to read and get out of the way on.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think I replied to one of your other posts where you said this but I still feel like you're misunderstanding something here. You're not guaranteed anything. Those raises have a certain probability of winning the pot, just like you have a certain chance of winning an all-in preflop. Especially online, where it's difficult to have very reliable reads, there is no "guaranteed stack of chips". I'm not saying you shouldn't be making those raises, obviously if they're +EV you should. But you should be pushing (basically) every edge, whether it's a bluff raise, a value raise, or an all-in preflop coinflip with some dead money. It doesn't matter, they're really all the same in the end.

Steve

[good2cu]

This is one of the wrost theards, maybe the wrost, I've ever read on 2+2. Anyone who has ever ran a montecarlo simulator on SNGs knows that even for a SNG player with a 20% ROI (WHICH IS ABOSULTLY CRUSHING THE GAME), no sng player has over a 20% longterm ROI, a 40 buy-in downswing is common. Also the fancy no-showdown plays you are describing are extactly the way NOT to play at SNGs, espically at the long limits, and id surpised if its possible to beat the game playing that way.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
This is one of the wrost theards, maybe the wrost, I've ever read on 2+2.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps you should read more, it looks like it might do you some good.

[good2cu]

[ QUOTE ]

Perhaps you should read more, it looks like it might do you some good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Granted, I didn't read most of the replies to the OP. But following this bankroll plan and making fancy plays in the early rounds, is a sure way to go broke, fast. SNGs are meant to be played, weak-tight early, and agressivly late and like any form of poker, have a fairly high varaince.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
This is one of the wrost theards, maybe the wrost, I've ever read on 2+2. Anyone who has ever ran a montecarlo simulator on SNGs knows that even for a SNG player with a 20% ROI (WHICH IS ABOSULTLY CRUSHING THE GAME), no sng player has over a 20% longterm ROI, a 40 buy-in downswing is common. Also the fancy no-showdown plays you are describing are extactly the way NOT to play at SNGs, espically at the long limits, and id surpised if its possible to beat the game playing that way.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont know how your simulator takes into account the fishy play at low buy in SnGs, but I assure you, 20% ROI is not "crushing the game".

[applejuicekid]

[ QUOTE ]
20% ROI is not "crushing the game"

[/ QUOTE ]

This is incorrect. I think the number of people with an ROI higher than 20% is very very low.

[The Don]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
20% ROI is not "crushing the game"

[/ QUOTE ]

This is incorrect. I think the number of people with an ROI higher than 20% is very very low.

[/ QUOTE ]

True. The percentage of winning players above 20% is in the single digits in my estimation. Assuming we are talking about party of course. Much higher percentages are possiblee on the slow-structured Stars SNGs.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
20% ROI is not "crushing the game"

[/ QUOTE ]

This is incorrect. I think the number of people with an ROI higher than 20% is very very low.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess that depends on what you define as "crushing the game" but I know 4 people including myself with an ROI of 20%+ for over a year, and mine is just over 30% for 15 months. I certainly don't think I'm an exceptional player overall, straightfoward HoH pretty much. However my shortstack and HU play is extremely good. If I'm close to the money I almost always make it, and if I get to HU, even with a substantial chip deficit, I win well more than my share.

Those are the two weakest areas of low buy in SnG players, and getting close to the money is a no brainer. If it werent for the occasional suck outs (which I define as a dominated hand after the flop) my ROI would be much higher, because those are the times I go out early.