Passing up small edges early (revisted yet again)

[woodguy]

Hello All,

We all know the debate between the "survialists" and the "accumulators" when it comes to small edes early in a tourney.

I fall solidly on the "accumulator" side of that equation, espcially in regards to online tourneys with 15min-20 min levels.

To quickly re-cap:
The accumulators say you cannot pass up any edge as you have to accumulate chips to win.

The survivalist say you should pass up these edges because you will get a greater edge later, and you may go broke chasing the small edge.

The survialist often quote DS from TPFAP when stating their case.

I was re-reading TPFAP again this weekend, and I came accross the oft quoted part of the book about passing up early edges (p19-20)

I have added bold in the key parts (and I wanted to feel like Doyle Brunson)

[ QUOTE ]
But there is another reason to eschew close gambles even early on. This reason has nothing to do with the prize structure, and in fact is something you should be aware of even if the tournament paid only one winner. What I am speaking of involves the presumption that you are one of the best players in the tournament. That being the case, you should avoid close gambles, especially for large portions of your chips.


[/ QUOTE ]

So, you should pass up slight edges ONLY if you are the best player there. I can safely assume I am never the best player in the tourney, so I will not pass up these edges.

I don't know any poster that can confidently say they are the best players in any tourney, online or live.

The ones that probably come closest also happen to be the ones who need no convincing to take every edge offered (hmmmm....may be a corelation there)

After quoting DS to back up their reason for weak-tight play early, the "survivalist" then usually ends the conversation.

But to make this matter clear, DS brings it up again on page 25

[ QUOTE ]
Thus, it is quite common to see a player who is notorious for his looseness in normal games playing significantly tighter when he has a small or moderate tack in a poker tournament. Ironically, these players are probably making a mistake. Only the very best players should be avoiding slightly positive gamles to allow their bigger edges time to accumulate. The typical tournament player should not ever turn down any situation with the smallest of edges. You could even argue that he should gamble in situations where he has slightly the worst of it. But that is not the way the vast majority of mediocre tournament players operate.


[/ QUOTE ]

So, we cannot forget who DS is talking about when he mentions passing up small edges.

Its not us.

Regards,
Woodguy

[fnord_too]

Just to add a little fuel to the fire, either Sklansky or Mason sais in one essay that you should accept more varriance early in a tournament to lessen varriance later.

Personally, I think in cases of very small edges, the margin of error of for assumptions and at the table calculations will be greater than the edge (or lack there of!) in the situation. I will typically gamble early for a lot of reasons (but time does not allow me to really go into them all right now). Later, the situations become pretty extreme due to the blind sizes and payout structure, so decisions get easier (for me) later in tournaments.

[IgorSmiles]

A quick question about this. Let's say that you knowingly put all your money in as a 53%/47% favorite four times in the first hour of a tourny. What are the odds you will see the second hour? I'm not saying you should fold as a favorite, but it makes me wonder then, is tournament poker any better than shooting dice?

[suited_ace]

Well, first of all, I don't think Sklansky wrote this with online tournaments in mind. Avoiding close gambles early on with t10k is very different from doing the same thing with t1.5k.

Secondly, I don't think his point should be taken so literally. It is an utopic situation to remind ring game players of the adaptations they need to bring into their play.

If you don't take it literally, the concept can be used for live play. Online play is a whole different ball game.

[jackdaniels]

Good point woodguy. A few days ago there was a poster asking about calling a push on the first hand of the WSOP and what holding's you'd have to have in order to do so. While non of the options was AA (on which there is plenty of discussion already - as to whether you should fold it pre-flop on the first hand to an all in bet), my thinking then, and now, (if you are holding KK) is that unless you feel your opponent has AA, you HAVE TO CALL. To fold one would have to be -
1. VERY good in tournament play (one of the best)
2. Not really interested in winning, but rather "staying alive" as long as possible.

There simply aren't any hands aside from AA that you are worried about and taking a chance early (first hand) is MUCH better than taking it later.

My advice - take any edge you can get early (and often) - if you bust, play another tourney. If you win, you are MUCH more likely to make some real cash at the final table. Now I don't recommend playing a LAG game, but if you are fairly certain you have the best of it and it is early enough in the tourney - go ahead and gamble it up. You will get the chip edge you need to weather the inevitable bad beats that will follow.

[hurlyburly]

I'm a survivalist working hard to find out how to be an accumulator. Some questions/thoughts for you:

What classifies "one of the best players"? I think you're a better player than I am, and I see myself as a top 10% player in most games (but rarely do I feel like the best player at my table, until proven otherwise). I interpreted Sklansky's statement to mean that we should split the tourny into 2 pieces (in the money, out of the money). Making it into the money is our first goal (when the "real" tournament begins), so IMO top 10% is one of the best players.

Next question, what constitutes a "small edge"? In the early stages of a rebuy tourny, how happy are you when you've got AA and 4 people all-in ahead of you (VERY f'in happy)? You're usually going to be about 37-54% to win the hand, which is higher than everyone else, but on average you are going to lose that hand more often than you win it, so calling that all-in becomes a "small-edge" (FFS CALL here people, this is not THAT post again). The chips you pull back from that 1 hand are only significant for a short time before you need to win more, so every pot you win is a "small edge" for the overall tournament until you are holding a significant portion of the chips in play.

Does OESD+flush draw w/a medium suited connector = small edge or laydown to a big raise? I tend to play these like the nuts but I also take down others who think that way on a regular basis, so it sure seems like a perspective thing.

Re-reading TPAFP this weekend had me doing a lot of thinking about this.

I'm learning to stop thinking that I need to win with every premium hand and toss all the marginals and judge each hand entirely on odds and merits. It's a lot more math than I'm used to, and I'm putting more money into pots on the turn and river in a way that feels Omaha-esque, which definitely takes getting used to. My average hands/played jumped from 11-13% to about 19% and I'm winning more big pots (while as a %/played, losing more often). Showing down more hands has a disastrous effect on the image though, and finding a solid mix is crucial to avoid getting run out early on every draw. I'm still trying to find that mix. After a year of practicing ways to take down pots with no showdowns by pushing the draw, it's VERY difficult to wait for it, then strike when I hit hard enough to make up for the misses while still getting the call.

Anyway, great post, I'm sure it got everyone thinking.

[IgorSmiles]

[ QUOTE ]
2. Not really interested in winning, but rather "staying alive" as long as possible.


[/ QUOTE ]

I hear this arguement all the time and I dont buy it. Every player is interested in winning and the only way to win a tournament is to stay alive as long as possible, or in fact, to stay alive until the very end.

[jackdaniels]

You are absolutely right - you have to survive till the end to make money. If you want to make the real money though (spots 1-3), you need to:

1. Get cards
2. Get lucky (most winners got lucky at least once as an underdog is what I hear)
3. Play GOOD poker.

Not necessarily in that order.

Now, if you get some good cards early on and have the chance to capitalize on someone elses reckless play - giving up that positive EV, waiting for a "better spot" is counter productive - you are unlikely to be THAT much more of a favorite anytime down the road, and will be facing a much more precarious position (as it always is the longer you have been playing and closer you get to the money).

Taking risks, when you have the best of it, EARLY in a tournament - is the best chance a good (read, top 10%) player has to win, unless the deck hits him/her in the face.

[hurlyburly]

I don't know, that early "bubble" time (20-25% left) has always been my best accumulation period. Every final table I've ever made I'd been on the shortstack (bottom 20%) and made the money in the top 30. I go back to the old SnG adage that you can lose a tourny in the early levels, but you can never win one there.

You are spot on with the 3 requirements though.

[jackdaniels]

Yes, accumulating chips is best done early bubble stage and after the antes have been introduced (thanks eMarkM!). However, if you reach this stage with below average chips, even 1 bad steal (or bad beat) can put you out. Often, if you play good poker, this is the normal situation you face - you don't always get KK and have a player willing to push it all in pre-flop... Now, if you get a great opportunity to double up/accumulate a lot of chips early on, it is much easier to play good poker and take advantage of the low stacks later. Getting to the blind stealing phase with an above average chip stack and a tight image does wonders for winning a tourney.

To stress a point - I am not advocating getting it all in there with pocket fours vs. AK every chance you get. What I am saying is unless you are a top player (say top 1%), you should not pass +EV situations early in an MTT - there simply may not be a better time later on and more importantly, even if you DO get a better spot later on, any bad beat and you don't have enough chips to recover.