Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

OK kids. Same deal, Part 2.

Rules
[ QUOTE ]
* 1) No flaming Collin, or anyone else. Save the flaming of Collin for the Official STTF SNG Book Review Thread and your general flaming for the Castro Street Fair.
* 2) No unsubstantiated useless answers, even if they're right. If you say something, support it with something else. To phrase that differently: no one-word answers in the vending machine please.
* 3) No posting copyrighted material. Just assume everyone has the book and say things like "In hand 1-x, I think..." rather than posting the entire hand. My understanding is that posting a few sentences is OK. Posting an entire paragraph or hand is not.
* 4) No being a jerk. This is thread for beginners so there might be a lot of questions that seem stupid to more advanced players. If the stupidity of the questions is making you mad, stop reading the thread and go chat-berate some fish for a while until you feel calmer.

[/ QUOTE ]


My initial review is in the Official STTF book review thread. In the 2+2 Magazine forum, DevinLake's thread shows good analysis of several hands. I'd like to use Hand 2-32 as an example since ([img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]) I've already worked through it to some extent. The discussion here will be more complex than Part 1. If you're not sure about the mechanics of STT prize pool equity calculations, check out the Part 1 study group thread for a good example. Hand 2-4 has effectively been discussed in STTF here.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

Devin's link to the hands in his post is not working [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] Do you know where to find them??

I got the jist of what was happening from Devin's Post tho. I generally if re-stealing like to have atleast 4-6 times there bet meaning 12-18BB's.

As my stack approaches 10, my range tightens considerably. Also I'm assuming as this is referring to Mid Blind play ante's have not kicked in yet, yo? Or does MBP still include the 100/200/25 level?

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

[ QUOTE ]
No being a jerk. This is thread for beginners so there might be a lot of questions that seem stupid to more advanced players.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's one of these questions: I think I play good during low levels and pretty good late on the bubble or close to it. I'm having trouble bridging the gap between these two stages though. I know when to steal and am learning when and against who to resteal, but when technically does the mid-blind phase start and end? It's obvious on Stars it's when the BB reaches T100, but I play on FT where the blinds increase more smoothly. Where does it start at FT? Still at T100? Also does the high blind phase auto-start when either my stack or the other stacks reach 10BB?

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

[ QUOTE ]
Devin's link to the hands in his post is not working [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] Do you know where to find them??

[/ QUOTE ]

google cache

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No being a jerk. This is thread for beginners so there might be a lot of questions that seem stupid to more advanced players.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's one of these questions: I think I play good during low levels and pretty good late on the bubble or close to it. I'm having trouble bridging the gap between these two stages though. I know when to steal and am learning when and against who to resteal, but when technically does the mid-blind phase start and end? It's obvious on Stars it's when the BB reaches T100, but I play on FT where the blinds increase more smoothly. Where does it start at FT? Still at T100? Also does the high blind phase auto-start when either my stack or the other stacks reach 10BB?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd say "high blinds" start when your effective stack is less than 10BB, either because that's where your stack is already, or if everyone left to act has less than 10BB because then your effective stack is less than 10BB.

Mid-blind is, in fact, a quite tricky and read-based segment of the game.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

Slim maybe worth posting this at the start of the thread so we don't have the same discussion from last one.

In a 9 handed SNG with t1500 start bank

[ QUOTE ]
How I view blind levels,

Early: 10/20 + 15/30
Middle: 25/50 - 100/200/25
Big: 200/400+

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

[ QUOTE ]
Slim maybe worth posting this at the start of the thread so we don't have the same discussion from last one.

In a 9 handed SNG with t1500 start bank

[ QUOTE ]
How I view blind levels,

Early: 10/20 + 15/30
Middle: 25/50 - 100/200/25
Big: 200/400+

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I don't think it's that simple. You always have to be thinking about your effective stack IMHO.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

What's the most common mistakes the more experienced players out there see amongst the fish that we should learn to avoid during these stages?

1. I often see people making thin calls for a large portion of their stack that will often cripple them if they lose.
2. Playing Speculative hands badly and overcommitting with them.
3. Mistaking chip EV for Tournament EV.


Hopefully this should spawn some conversation even if it is flaming of me. Any other prominent mistakes evident in this level.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

I still see a TON of people overplaying things like AJ or KQ here. UTG or UTG+1 is still no place for these hands, and at mid-level we're certainly not in push/fold mode.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

I make the following adjustments during the mid-levels. First, I of course stop limping hands unless I'm in the small blind and it has pretty good implied odds. Second, all those hands like KQ, KJ, QJ, AT, AJo, JTs that I'll open-fold most of the time early on I will now steal with on the button or cutoff. My earlier range stays strictly at about 99+, AQ+, AJs. Finally, I'll observe late position raisers to get reads on rather they are value raises or steals and I'll look for opportunities to resteal from them. Any major leaks here because I feel this stage is the most lacking in my game? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

[ QUOTE ]
Second, all those hands like KQ, KJ, QJ, AT, AJo, JTs that I'll open-fold most of the time early on I will now steal with on the button or cutoff.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm really interested in this as I have pretty much been open folding these late but I could be missing some value here. What do others think?

[ QUOTE ]
My earlier range stays strictly at about 99+, AQ+, AJs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Get AJ out of there and be careful with AQ two I like limping AQ in EP as you iften get value out of hands you beat and can reasonable tell when to get away when ur behind.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

[ QUOTE ]
What's the most common mistakes the more experienced players out there see amongst the fish that we should learn to avoid during these stages?

1. I often see people making thin calls for a large portion of their stack that will often cripple them if they lose.
2. Playing Speculative hands badly and overcommitting with them.
3. Mistaking chip EV for Tournament EV.


Hopefully this should spawn some conversation even if it is flaming of me. Any other prominent mistakes evident in this level.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a good summary I think. You really have to stop playing speculative hands completely because the implied odds aren't there. Reads and position become critical. The blind-to-stack ratio encourages conservative play because your risk-reward is poor when you try to steal (blinds are relatively low compared to your stack, but it is too easy to get committed), but at the same time, you have to try to maintain your chip position. So you have to time your steals well, and ALWAYS know ahead of time what you are going to do if you get flat-called, re-raised, etc. eg don't just say ZOMG I'm in the CO so I'm gonna steal and then you don't know WTF to do if it doesn't work.

You also have to know when to dial way back and let the foolios bust each other out for a while.

So, in summary, you gotta know when to hold em, and know when to fold em. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'd say "high blinds" start when your effective stack is less than 10BB, either because that's where your stack is already, or if everyone left to act has less than 10BB because then your effective stack is less than 10BB.

Mid-blind is, in fact, a quite tricky and read-based segment of the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this. For the most part, "Mid Blind Play" is going to include any situation where all of the players left to act have more than 10 BB, but less than about 18 BB. We're often making a tacit assumption that at least five players are left, although it's possible to apply the same methodology to analyzing 4-handed bubble hands that happen with stacks a little deeper than normal.

"Mid-blind is, in fact, a quite tricky and read-based segment of the game."

It's one of my main goals for this thread to demonstrate how important reads are to this stage of SNGs, and how the accuracy with which you put opponents on hand ranges is the single most important factor in mid-blind play.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'd say "high blinds" start when your effective stack is less than 10BB, either because that's where your stack is already, or if everyone left to act has less than 10BB because then your effective stack is less than 10BB.

Mid-blind is, in fact, a quite tricky and read-based segment of the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this. For the most part, "Mid Blind Play" is going to include any situation where all of the players left to act have more than 10 BB, but less than about 18 BB. We're often making a tacit assumption that at least five players are left, although it's possible to apply the same methodology to analyzing 4-handed bubble hands that happen with stacks a little deeper than normal.

"Mid-blind is, in fact, a quite tricky and read-based segment of the game."

It's one of my main goals for this thread to demonstrate how important reads are to this stage of SNGs, and how the accuracy with which you put opponents on hand ranges is the single most important factor in mid-blind play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Damn it, now I kinda miss STTs. F the UIGEA. [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

????/?

You don't still play pineapple?

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

[ QUOTE ]
????/?

You don't still play pineapple?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not STTs. I just hang out here, like most of the veterans. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

[ QUOTE ]
Also I'm assuming as this is referring to Mid Blind play ante's have not kicked in yet, yo? Or does MBP still include the 100/200/25 level?

[/ QUOTE ]

I started disliking Harrington's M a lot less after working through a bunch of Stars hands at the 100/200/25 level. It's still fairly rare to see a situation where the stacks are even enough that players face a lot of non-push/fold decisions, but it does come up sometimes. With six players, M=6.67 at the 100/200/A25 is a stack of t3000, so that will be an even less common situation than M=6.67 (10 BB or t2000) at 100/200.

All of the good analytical techniques are totally independent of whether or not there is an ante in play anyway.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

I don't have the book but here are my thoughts on this stage (up to 20 bb or so).

1) A good way to play is to simply fold every hand that you aren't willing to get AI with. This is basically what I did and it doesn't burn that many chips because the levels are so short. If you pick up something like 99 UTG you should probably just throw it away.

2) You are usually in "your hand doesn't matter" mode. There is very little difference between stealing with ATo and 54s OTB since you won't get called often (and even then you aren't always going to showdown) and you have to fold both to a shove. The trick is to find people that will give away their blinds and steal with whatever your delt. Your hand only matters if you are looking to showdown and this is the stage of the game where you are only looking to hold serve and avoid big pots without the boss hand.

3) Most people raise far too much when trying to steal. Of course this is fine when you have something but since your cards don't matter (if you decide to play this style) you should be looking for the smallest possible raise that gets it done. Generally you are looking at <= 2.5xbb. Not only does putting in a 4x raise lose more when someone does resteal, but people should resteal more often against larger raises when you aren't pot committed.

4) Restealing is tricky because of the different styles. Some aggressive players will play very few pots in this phase while others will be looking to pick up some easy chips. You have to figure out who is who before you developing a restealing strategy against regular players. Most successful players play a similar style in the push/fold part but those same players will range from TT+/AK to ATC when the stacks are more then 12 bb.

Brad

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't have the book but here are my thoughts on this stage (up to 20 bb or so).

1) A good way to play is to simply fold every hand that you aren't willing to get AI with. This is basically what I did and it doesn't burn that many chips because the levels are so short. If you pick up something like 99 UTG you should probably just throw it away.

2) You are usually in "your hand doesn't matter" mode. There is very little difference between stealing with ATo and 54s OTB since you won't get called often (and even then you aren't always going to showdown) and you have to fold both to a shove. The trick is to find people that will give away their blinds and steal with whatever your delt. Your hand only matters if you are looking to showdown and this is the stage of the game where you are only looking to hold serve and avoid big pots without the boss hand.

3) Most people raise far too much when trying to steal. Of course this is fine when you have something but since your cards don't matter (if you decide to play this style) you should be looking for the smallest possible raise that gets it done. Generally you are looking at <= 2.5xbb. Not only does putting in a 4x raise lose more when someone does resteal, but people should resteal more often against larger raises when you aren't pot committed.

4) Restealing is tricky because of the different styles. Some aggressive players will play very few pots in this phase while others will be looking to pick up some easy chips. You have to figure out who is who before you developing a restealing strategy against regular players. Most successful players play a similar style in the push/fold part but those same players will range from TT+/AK to ATC when the stacks are more then 12 bb.

Brad

[/ QUOTE ]

C'mon people give this thread more love, I think it's great good job Slim.


As far as your post goes I dis agree with a few things.

1. 99 UTG w' 20 BB 5-6 Handed I like a limp, but this is just a difference in style and I personally will sometimes fold given table dynamics or if severely multitabling (16+)

2. [ QUOTE ]
You are usually in "your hand doesn't matter" mode. There is very little difference between stealing with ATo and 54s OTB since you won't get called often (and even then you aren't always going to showdown) and you have to fold both to a shove.

[/ QUOTE ]

I had quite a bit of a problem with this. There was a great discussion of this started by Ryanhall, maybe 1-2 months ago. Whilst assuming stacks are 20 deep and even you will fold those both to a push. I think BB defends with a call more than a push. Sticking in 20BB's there they usually have a pretty premium hand and you need probably 99+ Aqs+ to call. I hate raising here with 54s.

3. [ QUOTE ]
The trick is to find people that will give away their blinds and steal with whatever your delt.

[/ QUOTE ]

I liked this,

TIP: Look for the big Multi-tablers like myself who are in auto muck/push mode.

4. Just keep your raises to a 3xBB +1BB for each limper. Varying ur raise too much gives away the strength of ur hand a lot (not all) of the time. I tend to resteal on people who minraise late quite wide.



Some thoughts??????????? Let's not let this die hopefully the series will become an awesome sticky.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

Hypothetical mid game situation.
7 handed blinds are 50/100
You are on the button with 1500 every one behind you has 1500.
What action do you take with the following hands
QTs?
22?
A2s?
A7o?
How does your range change vs loose passive players?
How does your range change to people who will more or less push/fold to you're raises?

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

I am going to put a hypotherical reply to all these and I think we should discuss whether you believe whether they ar good or bad.

1. QTs: Raise to 250-300, with the intention of folding to a push. If flopped checked to bet 300-400, then evaluate.


2. 22: Fold


3. A2s: Same as 1


4. A7o: Push



TBH in game I play a very nitty game early and probably will be folding all of these the majority of the time. However especially QTs I was wondering how you guys think of a play like that.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

[ QUOTE ]
Hypothetical mid game situation.
7 handed blinds are 50/100
You are on the button with 1500 every one behind you has 1500.
What action do you take with the following hands
QTs?
22?
A2s?
A7o?
How does your range change vs loose passive players?
How does your range change to people who will more or less push/fold to you're raises?

[/ QUOTE ]

I like this sample hand and I think there's something to it that deserves it's own thread.

EDIT: Have fun.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

Hi Pudge, I want to reply not because I know a good answer, but because I think the criticism will be useful:

1. All depends on reads I have on SB & BB;

QTs, 22, I will steal with if I don't think SB & BB will resteal. I don't like stealing with the low As because if I'm flat called, then I don't like the risk of being dominated and probably have to throw away my hand if it hits. With 2 players left to speak, there is a 90ish% chance my 22 is the only pair and so I am happy to c-bet a neutral flop if I'm called and it checks to me. In fact, I probably shove a non-scary flop in this situation. With QTs, I'm done with the hand unless I hit a pair or a decent draw, in which case I shove if checked to me, and fold if he donkbets.

If SB and BB have very low aggro stats <1ish, I will call 2 or more limpers with QTs, 22, A2s. Not 100%, but fairly often depending on the quality of the limpers(!). I need a very good flop to stay in thereafter. eg FD with two overs, two pair or my set. I'm not convinced this is cEV+, but when the hand does hit, it's pretty much a double up and a guaranteed ITM finish, so I think it adds maybe 1 ITM finish in 30.

With aggressive SB/BB, I'm tightening up my range for the steals and not calling limpers. If I get in the pot with 3 limpers, I'm going all-in PF, and so I will tighten my range substantially, 99+, AQ+.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

I've only skimmed through about 1/3rd of the posts, but I have to say with 10-15BB the biggest improvement I've had is just shoving based on the Skalnsky-Chubakov(sp?) numbers from, I think, NLTAP.

You're usually short handed at this point, so you're in the SB or Button alot.

From the SB, it's simple, either it's a profitable shove or not. No ranges required, just look up the number.

From the Button I usually double the number. I think the book actually doesn't double it, but it's close enough so far.

For calling shoves or reshoving I'm usually following a similar formula. I figure if the BB is shoving double, I want to call with 3-4x the SC number. Calling is waaaaay more read dependent though.

I've found this makes me look really aggressive as I may shove in the SB multiple times in a row with things like Q3o because the SC number says it can't be a -cEV play. This tends to make them think I'm loose and they'll call more lightly than they should, or they'll reshove lightly and I'll end up with K8 vs QJ or some such, which is an advantage I'm happy to have.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

[ QUOTE ]
I've only skimmed through about 1/3rd of the posts, but I have to say with 10-15BB the biggest improvement I've had is just shoving based on the Skalnsky-Chubakov(sp?) numbers from, I think, NLTAP.

You're usually short handed at this point, so you're in the SB or Button alot.

From the SB, it's simple, either it's a profitable shove or not. No ranges required, just look up the number.

From the Button I usually double the number. I think the book actually doesn't double it, but it's close enough so far.

For calling shoves or reshoving I'm usually following a similar formula. I figure if the BB is shoving double, I want to call with 3-4x the SC number. Calling is waaaaay more read dependent though.

I've found this makes me look really aggressive as I may shove in the SB multiple times in a row with things like Q3o because the SC number says it can't be a -cEV play. This tends to make them think I'm loose and they'll call more lightly than they should, or they'll reshove lightly and I'll end up with K8 vs QJ or some such, which is an advantage I'm happy to have.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't really like anything that's going on here. Sorry. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

[ QUOTE ]

I don't really like anything that's going on here. Sorry. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

*shrug*, that's fine. Just my .02. I think trying to figure out complicated or deep strategies involving short stacks at small stakes is looking for something that just doesn't exist. You can run some trickery with limp/re-raise or shoving over weak players, but not much.

Assigning hand ranges is great...but very hard to do on the fly and small stakes donks can be erratic. I've seem them start wild, then go tight for what seems no reason and vice versa. I tried running lots of SNGPT hand ranges on hands, and it's useful for long term training, but for on the spot you've got to pick something and SC numbers are quick and mathematically correct (outside the bubble situation I mention below).

Most players are way to loose or way to too tight at the smaller stakes. In both cases, they're making significant errors against plain SC play.

That's not to say SC is optimal. The deeper you are the less optimal it is. Bubble factors depend as well. Inside or way outside the bubble, SC is pretty useful. Right on the bubble you can't rely on it because cEV and $EV aren't the same.

I've got 25% ROI over nearly 1000 games at the $35 level. I'm sure there's better players, but I'm pretty happy with what using SC has done for me at the short stack stages.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

I believe sklansky/chubanov is based on the fact that your opponent knows your hand. Since this never really comes along in any facet of poker, are these numbers meaningful at all, or are they a math experiment by 2 guys who love math a little too much....

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

[ QUOTE ]
I believe sklansky/chubanov is based on the fact that your opponent knows your hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all. The SC number is the point at which it's a profitable shove even if they knew your hand and played perfectly. The fact they don't know your means they can't play perfectly which is futher +EV.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I believe sklansky/chubanov is based on the fact that your opponent knows your hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all. The SC number is the point at which it's a profitable shove even if they knew your hand and played perfectly. The fact they don't know your means they can't play perfectly which is futher +EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

The S-C rankings and numbers were determined using a cash game model: that your single opponent knows your hand and will only call if it is profitable to do so. This makes for a nice limiting case in cash games but not so much in SNGs. There are a few elements of SNGs that make them less applicable. The most important of these is that it is possible for your opponent to make a bad call that hurts both you and him. What you are looking for in a SNG is the Nash Equilibrium if you want to not care about your opponents' ranges. The NE is a much more complicated problem to solve.

There are a lot of good uses for the S-C rankings in SNGs, which will show up a lot more in Part 3: High Blind Play.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

Deleted, made irrelevant by Slim's previous post.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

[ QUOTE ]
The S-C rankings and numbers were determined using a cash game model: that your single opponent knows your hand and will only call if it is profitable to do so. This makes for a nice limiting case in cash games but not so much in SNGs. There are a few elements of SNGs that make them less applicable. The most important of these is that it is possible for your opponent to make a bad call that hurts both you and him. What you are looking for in a SNG is the Nash Equilibrium if you want to not care about your opponents' ranges. The NE is a much more complicated problem to solve.

There are a lot of good uses for the S-C rankings in SNGs, which will show up a lot more in Part 3: High Blind Play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very true. Like I said, it's useful inside the bubble and reasonably far away from it where more cash game like situations exist. Bubble play is a different beast and I don't use SC as much on the bubble. Bubble play is also one of the most profitable areas.

I do, however, see horrendous errors heads up where there's a lot of profit to be made (6 person SNGs) where just plain SC play is worth buckets of money.

I also see a lot of errors with limp/folding mediocre, but SC shovable, hands at the mid-blind levels when we're still 1 or 2 people from being at the bubble.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

I think you're getting ahead of me here. In these sorts of situations 6-handed opening from the SB, I would imagine the S-C numbers do a decent job of valuing hands. I'm trying to get people away from thinking about push/fold tables since we've got a way to explain everything at all stages of a tournament using the same method.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

For general infoon SC numbers:

http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/...te_id/1#import

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

In Full Tilt Poker Strategy guide page 98-99 Andy Bloch has a table with hand rankings which differ from the S-C-numbers. The table is used for determining where its profitable to shove from SB and when one should call in BB. Its called the jam or fold game - limiting the actions to either jamming or folding.

They are for tournament play and also for when the opponent don't know the others hands. Notice that the hands are given with a stack size when its profitable to play them -it says at which stack size should one jam or fold for it to be optimal play for a given hand.

The number of big blinds to shove in SB and call in BB are:
Hand SB BB
QTs 103 22
22 52 15
A2s 48 24
A7o 40 29

Notice how its much more profitable to shove with a certain hand than to call - thats the gap concept in play. Also notice how A2s are stronger than A7o because A2 is easier to get a straight or flush and even if a 7 is higher than a 2 both kickers are so low that often neither of them play.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

[ QUOTE ]
In Full Tilt Poker Strategy guide page 98-99 Andy Bloch has a table with hand rankings which differ from the S-C-numbers.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
If you see the Sklansky-Chubukov numbers online or in Sklansky and Miller and compare to [Bloch's table], you need to double [Bloch's] number and subtract 1 so it equates to Sklansky's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

OK, let's get this trainwreck moving again. Hand 2-32... go!

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

i have one question: what means the Nash Equilibrium exactly?
thanks alot

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

Sorry work has been a little crazy the last week. i will work on it tonight and post.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

Pre Hand
Position Stacks ICM $ Value
UTG 2000 11.16 Fold
UTG+1 2000 11.16 Fold
MP1 2000 11.16 Fold
MP2 1550 8.84 Fold
MP3 2100 11.65 raise t400
CO 2900 15.41 call
Button (hero) 2000 11.16 ?
SB 1450 8.31 ?
BB 2000 11.16 ?
18000 100.00


Push All Fold
Position Stacks ICM $ Value
UTG 2000 11.17
UTG+1 2000 11.17
MP1 2000 11.17
MP2 1550 8.86
MP3 1700 9.64
CO 2500 13.60
Button (hero) 2950 15.65
SB 1400 8.06
BB 1900 10.67
18000 100.00



Push Only hijack Calls all in
Position Stacks ICM $ Value
UTG 2000 11.51
UTG+1 2000 11.51
MP1 2000 11.51
MP2 1550 9.12
MP3 100 0.63
CO 2500 13.99
Button (hero) 4550 22.45
SB 1400 8.30
BB 1900 10.99
18000 100.00

Initial call: 22+,A9s+,KJs+,QJs,ATo+,KJo+ (13.7%)
Call a push: 66+,AJs+,AQo+,KQs,KJo (8.0%)

41.606% 15.65 6.51
58.394% 40.278% 22.45 5.28
58.394% 59.772% 0 0
11.79



Ok I have not gotten very far as corporate tax returns are due on the 17th and it has been hell this week. Anyway sorry for the delay. I need some help on the hand ranges to help finish the calcs.

1. When I put the hand ranges slim showed in part one into poker stove I get a higher % than he does? Is this b/c I have to take into account the cards I have in my hand? If so how do I do that?

2. I assume that the CO need a stronger hand range to call with preflop than hijack needs to bet so I would like some input on the hand ranges to do the calc.

3. The last point is how do we factor in an over call by the CO after hijack calls. What about the blinds?

4. How the f*** do you get a screen shot of excel in here???

If someone can help with the hand ranges I will do the calcs.

Thanks.

Re: Sit \'n Go Strategy study group -- Part 2: Mid Blind Play
 

two possiblities here that usally happens to me,

by now I either chip up to about 2000-3000 from 1500(full tilt) so i make raises preflop with touble hands, but fold on the flop if missed and get betted into for I figure it hit them.
i either try to use powerful preflop betting or small ball,,
but then again that becomes predictable so i combine them by betting the same but like i do for early blinds i keep the aces betting consistent with small pair betting.

I only play speculative hands suited connectors (killer poker author jv and tj cloutier says suited connectors will eat you up after all) on the small blind, or big blind. once in a while on the button if not raised.

basically i got the chips to continue on with my early small blind strategy.

---------------

or i find myself getting short chipped but not reaching the push or fold 10 blinds yet .
I remember making a bet 3 times bb with aces as i didnt' take a hand and everyone immediately folded to my aces.
yet i do not want to limp in with aces for then everyone gets to see the flop and aces go down in value.

instead what I want to do is take a page from the dominator and keep active with speculative hands like king queen, once in a while so when i do have aces i can raise it all in when reraised.

i do notice that a lot of restealing raises go on,, and when i do call them ,, it turns out they had aces to my queens or queens to my big slick and i missed on the flop turn and river for it usally go all in with big slick.

i am now thinking that i should call a raise with big slick and abort if i miss ? . best way to play it in an sit and go ?

restealing from the bb to the button with a decent hand is a techique I starting to use and it helped me out of a jam.
of course it was with specuatative hand and not a bluff so i was saying basically hey i got something back off and meant it instead of "please leave me alone "

and here with a decent hand i will steal reaise the blinds like in the book.
i dont' do it with trash , jack 4 . 92 . 69.

of course somtimes you get a suck out and you end up with 500 or missed with big slick..
so at 500 chips in the middle,, i still find it hard to wiat for the tight person to be in the bb,,
i still push all in with ace big , ace little, suited connector, or small pair.
and pray.

how should i change my game a bit for middle blinds?