[Dr_Doctr]

Sherman - I never suggested playing passively in tournaments or playing passively on the bubble full-stop. This is what you seem to be attributing to me and you are putting words in my mouth if so. I don't have a 'logic about playing passively on the bubble'. I have have a logic about playing on the bubble in such a way as to maximise your EV - whether that be passively, hyper-aggressively or whateverly. My only point is that how to play cannot be decided simply by playing the same as in a cash game, though that may be close depending on the structure - I don't know. I'm no expert, as you imply, another claim you misattribute to me. The examples you give as exceptions to cash-game style play are fine and I don't want to dispute them. To see why these are exceptions or if they are exceptions in some tournaments and not in others, you need to refer to the structure of the tournament and how that affects optimal strategy for that tournaments or stages within it. That was basically my main point and I can't see anything substantial that we disagree on. My main complaint about Adam's article was that he doesn't seem to make clear that tournament structures influence correct strategy for the tournament. If that wasn't clear from my posts I apologise.

Adam, Sherman, Foucault - I think I may have been harsh in my evaluation of the article. If what Sherman is saying is true - that most or some people think you should play super-passively in tournaments by default, then recommending otherwise - something more in line with generally applicable strategy, cannot hurt. I wasn't aware that this belief was commonplace. But such a belief is just another example of not understanding that, or how, specific tournament structures affect strategy for those tournaments.