[BigAlK]

[ QUOTE ]
Sure, it might be good regardless of the speed, but if the speed is high, it seems to be essential. Seeing as many flops as possible as cheaply as possible in order to flop a monster is like running the river twice in cash games -> it should reduce variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it will actually increase variance, but potentially increase ROI. Mason's essay says that this style will cause you to bust out early more often. The idea is to give yourself a chance to "get lucky early." When it doesn't work you could easily find yourself knocked out. However when it does work you're able to play big stack poker which, when done right, will get you to the final table with a much better chance at finishing in the the big money.

I now get Mason's point that this can be a valid strategy even when deep stacked. Therefore the speed of the tournament isn't the reason why it can be right. However I agree with you that it is more essential with a faster tournament. In a slow tournament you've got the option of waiting for big hands, one way of getting lucky, or playing loosely early hoping to get lucky. Both of these approachs are used successfully by different people. In a fast tournament Snyder's point is that the tight early approach is much less likely to work because the odds of you getting lucky with good cards is less.

And of course there is more to the book than loose plays like calling on the button with virtually any 2. I need to re-read and ponder whether some of the plays might make sense in slower tournaments as well.