Agree/Disagree

[ QUOTE ]
This constant means that there are certain strategies that are correct such a high percentage of the time, that it's horribly non-optimal to ignore them.

[/ QUOTE ]My point is that there is room between "non-optimal" and "losing".

[Bigwig]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This constant means that there are certain strategies that are correct such a high percentage of the time, that it's horribly non-optimal to ignore them.

[/ QUOTE ]My point is that there is room between "non-optimal" and "losing".

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course there is. Not a single player in the world plays optimally. That's zero. Are we not posting here, however, to get as close to optimal as possible? An obvious un-optimal play should not be defended under any circumstance.

[Hornacek]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This constant means that there are certain strategies that are correct such a high percentage of the time, that it's horribly non-optimal to ignore them.

[/ QUOTE ]My point is that there is room between "non-optimal" and "losing".

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course there is. Not a single player in the world plays optimally. That's zero. Are we not posting here, however, to get as close to optimal as possible? An obvious un-optimal play should not be defended under any circumstance.

[/ QUOTE ]

Both make valid points. Hey, if this guy doesn't want to get better, fine with me. We're just here to help one another.

[splashpot]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't have any experience with PP 800 chips stacks. But, this guy has won $7k over two years (we don't know over how many SNGs). I don't see why we shouldn't believe him. I think there is a tendency in this forum to pooh-pooh any approach that isn't along STTF party lines.

[/ QUOTE ]
You probably think I'm just discarding his approach without putting any thought into it. I'm not. I really do think this is a truely terrible way to play.

And I do have reason to not believe he's made 7k over 2 years. My reason is that he told us how he plays. If someone told you they made 5k over 2 years by going all in every hand, would you believe them? Of course not.

[ QUOTE ]
In low stakes PS turbos, I imagine you could beat the game if you never started pushbotting before 100/200 level, but the larger chip stacks must make a big difference.

[/ QUOTE ]
I've played a few hundred stars turbos and the bigger stack size would make a huge difference. As far as making a parallel to this situation, it would be closer to waiting til the blinds get to 200/400 before going all in.

[ QUOTE ]
Please don't misunderstand. I don't think the guy is playing optimally. I just think that there is room at low buy-in SNGs to give up a few % of ROI and still be a winning player.

[/ QUOTE ]
And I agree. But this guy is clearly missing some fundamental concepts. If he doesn't understand this, I'd assume he has other leaks as well.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This constant means that there are certain strategies that are correct such a high percentage of the time, that it's horribly non-optimal to ignore them.

[/ QUOTE ]My point is that there is room between "non-optimal" and "losing".

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course there is. Not a single player in the world plays optimally. That's zero. Are we not posting here, however, to get as close to optimal as possible? An obvious un-optimal play should not be defended under any circumstance.

[/ QUOTE ]I was responding to the statement:
[ QUOTE ]
Your friend can't be winning if he doesn't do this.

[/ QUOTE ]
which left no room for middle ground.

I agree that most of us are here in an attempt to move our games toward optimal. But, telling a player who is playing non-optimally that he can't be a winning player isn't helping. I think we would do better to acknowledge that there are other (non-optimal) winning approaches.

[Freudian]

There are a lot of opportunites to play hands differently in SnGs. Raise or call with TT after two limpers in level 1 etc. And in games with deeper stacks or slower structure, the more we will see two strategies being close to equal. I know I play many hands and situations differently than the majority here. But I still have a high profitability. That is because I have the same approach to the single most important concept of SnGs: to exploit the tendency of my opponents to fold too often when blinds are high.

[Bigwig]

[ QUOTE ]
There are a lot of opportunites to play hands differently in SnGs. Raise or call with TT after two limpers in level 1 etc. And in games with deeper stacks or slower structure, the more we will see two strategies being close to equal. I know I play many hands and situations differently than the majority here. But I still have a high profitability. That is because I have the same approach to the single most important concept of SnGs: to exploit the tendency of my opponents to fold too often when blinds are high.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's as if you read nothing I wrote.

Fair enough.

Though I will add that I don't think knowledge about optimal pushing strategy is at all common. Because everyone here has some familiarity with the approach, I think we assume most SNG players do also. I doubt that is the case. This is sort of an advanced topic that very few players use. I see players who have less than 10BB in chips making an opening raise of 1/3-1/2 their chips all the time. And, this is when we're down to 3, 4 or 5 players.

[ QUOTE ]
Fair enough.

Though I will add that I don't think knowledge about optimal pushing strategy is at all common. Because everyone here has some familiarity with the approach, I think we assume most SNG players do also. I doubt that is the case. This is sort of an advanced topic that very few players use. I see players who have less than 10BB in chips making an opening raise of 1/3-1/2 their chips all the time. And, this is when we're down to 3, 4 or 5 players.

[/ QUOTE ]

Likewise, and you see people with 6xBB open-limping on the button and all sorts, although saying that I'm playing at the $5's ATM to build a BR and tune up my SNG play, so I wouldn't expect anything different.

The guy ISN'T playing optimally if he fears being called by JT, when he holds AQ. End of. YES he may still be winning, but not as much as he could.

[Karak567]

Your friend sucks at SNGs, then.

7 k over 2 years?

lol, yeah, impressive stats bud.

There are guys that pull that in a week here.