The Freakonomics of Tournaments: A Preview (74s UTG at final table)

[nath]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm just saying that all the people saying that your strategy is brilliant because your image lets you steal more and get paid off on your big hands are talking crazy. YOU CAN'T HAVE BOTH. If they start playing back at you more, then stealing becomes less effective but your big hands are more likely to be paid off. End of story.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, okay. I'm just getting frustrated. Obviously I'm going to adjust one way or the other to how the table adjusts to me, and probably faster and better.
Some times they play back, some times they don't-- either way I'll adjust my strategy accordingly to continue to gather chips.

[ QUOTE ]
(and Nath, you could turn down "I'm the new Doyle Brunson" routine).

[/ QUOTE ]

Look, when people write things that express surprise at ideas THAT I COULD HAVE COPIED WORD FOR FORD FROM SUPER/SYSTEM, I find it a little ridiculous. Here are proven winning no-limit strategies that are very applicable to MTTs that have been around for thirty years and people act like they're ridiculous crazy talk.

same with this idea:

[ QUOTE ]
He just does it, and because he has good instincts, it generally works out for him.

[/ QUOTE ]

I play by my instincts because my instincts are sharp from all the time I've spent playing tournaments! Again, instinctual play, Super/System, subconscious translates all the information you've gathered from experience blah blah blah.
I'm doing my best to translate the things I've learned and incorporated into a form that others can understand and hopefully use to improve their game, and I don't think I'm being taken seriously, because my math and logic isn't perfect. I feel like i'm not even getting a "This is intriguing, but..." response so much as a "This is stupid" one.
I'm really frustrated because I've found some things that work for me that almost no one else seems to use, understand, or even consider, and I'm trying to share those ideas. And I'm being dismissed as a crackpot.

[ QUOTE ]
And what I noticed in his replies was this lack of critical self-evaluation which is necessary for moving up to the next level.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's true. I never evaluate my own game at all which is why I've been stuck in a rut for the last year.

If you've ever played with me in a cash game you'll see that I do make some rather wild preflop decisions but I make up for it with good decisions and aggressive play on later streets, in addition to the sheer confusion about my holdings that it brings to my opponents. Tournaments don't quite afford the same opportunities for profit, since you're never playing as deep, but aggression and confusion still lead to larger mistakes in your opponents. Add in the fact that the way to be a profitable tournament player is to shoot for first place every time, and the pace at which online tournaments progress, and you might realize that I have adjusted my strategy in a way that makes a loose and wild style profitable.
I have simply accepted the fact that as long as structures are fast a wilder style more willing to take chances is going to get the big money more often. Occasionally this style results in plays that individually are not +EV or mathematically perfect but have contributed to my overall winning strategy.
I'm winning for a reason, and I think it's because there's more to tournament strategy than many people think-- the "hidden side", hence the title of my original post.
I'm trying to uncover that; maybe I should go back to doing it on my own time.