The Poker Tournament Formula by Arnold Snyder...

[SplawnDarts]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You think? While that might be a winning approach under certain circumstances with expert postflop skills, his book devalues expert postflop skills.

[/ QUOTE ]

His book doesn't devalue postflop skills. It changes the focus of them from one form to another due to the basic structure of the tournament.

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone who followed his advice without substantial outside info would be in serious danger of going bust.

[/ QUOTE ]

He came right out and told you you're in serious danger of going bust. You're in serious danger of going bust every time you sit down at a fast tournament. Did you not read that part of the book? In fact, he said you're much better off in terms of EV by putting yourself at risk of going broke to give you a higher chance of finishing deep in the money.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your post made me chuckle. That is all [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[springb0ks]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You think? While that might be a winning approach under certain circumstances with expert postflop skills, his book devalues expert postflop skills.

[/ QUOTE ]

His book doesn't devalue postflop skills. It changes the focus of them from one form to another due to the basic structure of the tournament.

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone who followed his advice without substantial outside info would be in serious danger of going bust.

[/ QUOTE ]

He came right out and told you you're in serious danger of going bust. You're in serious danger of going bust every time you sit down at a fast tournament. Did you not read that part of the book? In fact, he said you're much better off in terms of EV by putting yourself at risk of going broke to give you a higher chance of finishing deep in the money.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your post made me chuckle. That is all [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you ever posted a helpful message on this forum before? Because from what i've seen you are a serial troll.

[SplawnDarts]

I would say I'm sorry my posts aren't "helping" you, but I'm really not because I didn't know you were in need of help. It there some sort you specifically need?

[smbruin22]

guys, in fast tournaments, after about 30 minutes there is no notion whatsoever of post-flop play...

arnold's book is good for fast tournaments, and i'd say the faster end of his range.... dan's books (I and II, III is irrelevent to discussion i think) are good for very long tournaments.... in between (which is most tournaments), you have to come up with your own strategy, taking some from each of them (and other sources)

i love dan harrington's books, but i also think they are pretty lacking in terms of advice for 7<M<15, which is where we seem to live much of our tournament existence (unless you're playing the really high buy-in events.... or online has longer cheaper ones sometimes)... and how much of HOH1 and HOH2 is post-flop play?

[SplawnDarts]

[ QUOTE ]
guys, in fast tournaments, after about 30 minutes there is no notion whatsoever of post-flop play...


[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure I agree with this - even fast tourneys often have Ms in the 8 range at the final table, and that implies the possibility of postflop play. It's not STANDARD postflop play because you've only got one bullet left, but it's postflop play none the less.

[DrDonk]

[ QUOTE ]
Finished reading a couple more chapters today. Maybe I'm overlooking some things but in his one little table he has 4-flush listed as 4.2 to 1 for pot odds. That's fine, but they why in the same table and rest of his talk he lists a gut-shot at 11 to 1? If the former is so accurate, shouldn't the later be as well? Then again I'm confused later when a full-house draw from a set is listed as 8 outs. Scratched my head on this a few times, then realized maybe he is taking the 7 for turn, combining this from 10 on river, then averaging it to give 8.5 which.. is close to 8?

Anyhow, maybe I'm just nit-picking far too much on the accuracy here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi. New guy. I've read both and believe that both, like any poker manual, have their positive attributes and their drawbacks in certain respects.

Here's my guess: The idea behind generalizing 8 to 1 and 11 to 1 is that those odds are normally so high that calling or limping is not advised except in extreme circumstances, i.e. being on the SB and everyone limping in. He itemizes 4.2 to 1 because at that level, a call can still be reasonable for the pot odds in many circumstances.

And yes, 8 to 1 is close to the average of 7 to 1 and 10 to 1. And again, those odds are so high that calling is rarely, if ever, advised. They're there to serve as an illustration of the long shot circumstances.

These aren't inaccuracies so much as generalizations in the name of brevity to make the point, which usually is, "Don't call a bet here."

[New York Jet]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I disagree and think this book is a good read with some helpful advice for fast online tournaments such as the SnG.

[/ QUOTE ]


I really hope you don't mean one-table SnG's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not? I have used the position system in single table sng's to great effect, and have finished in the money very often.

[/ QUOTE ]
PTF does not work well in STT. Quite frankly, it is close to the opposite strategy you should use. Try Kill Phil for STT (not optimal, but closer to optimal than PTF). Use PTF for online MTT.

[New York Jet]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't mean to overstate the obvious, but at a STSS doesn't EVERYONE have a decent chance to finish in the money very often?

Anyhow, very busy as of late so I haven't read much further, I suspect I am roughly halfway through the book at this point. I will be looking forward to going through the rest of it very soon. I am actualy busy finishing off Stud for advanced players, but perhaps I should be going over Kill Phil instead so I can compare these two as they sort of run along the same paths.

[/ QUOTE ]
Kill Phil and PTF run along very different paths. KP is for when you are one of the worst players in the tournament. PTF is for when you are one of the better players (i.e. Casino nightly tourney or online MTT).

[springb0ks]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I disagree and think this book is a good read with some helpful advice for fast online tournaments such as the SnG.

[/ QUOTE ]


I really hope you don't mean one-table SnG's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not? I have used the position system in single table sng's to great effect, and have finished in the money very often.

[/ QUOTE ]
PTF does not work well in STT. Quite frankly, it is close to the opposite strategy you should use. Try Kill Phil for STT (not optimal, but closer to optimal than PTF). Use PTF for online MTT.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have adapted it successfully for a sng tourneys and it has become very profitable. The general sng strat out there is to play ultra tight early playing premium hands, but this just doesn't work for me. it simply means a lot of bubble bursting, and getting to a point where you are the short stack all tournament and are looking for an all in oppurtunity. Playing position every now and then in a sng, often keeps me ahead and with enough chips to play with, so that when i get dealt a premium hand, i can play it hard and fast.

[jordiepop]

harringtons books are amazing, period. Snyder has even said that he isnt looking to rewrite what is already out there. he is simply adding on to the great works. I firmly believe that tournament speed has a lot to do with your decisions.






If your M is 20 in a tournament with 90 min levels, and then you have an M of 20 in a tournament with 15 min levels, your stratagy will have to change completly. You can not say well i have an m of 20 so i do this, your m will drop at a greater rate and you need to take greater risks in the faster tournament even if you have a high m. That is all the man is trying to get across, I can not belive it has caused so much commotion.