OT: The fallacy of the Lederer argument regarding sng\'s
 

Howard Lederer have often said that playing sng's are a good way to practice for final tables. And I hear that all the time from regular sng players.

I believe that statement to be wrong.

In fact I believe that it is quite catastrophic to implement sng strategies to a final MTT table.

First of all you don't play to get in the top three. All the players have already made a healthy return of their investment. That means that there is no proper use for ICM.
(Maybe you can make the argument that the use of the chip equity model have something to do with sng's?)

Secondly all the players start with different stack sizes. That means that we in theory start the sng late. Many players have a low M, and that of course means that the normal passive approach that usually takes place early in a sng is wrong. But then again... you can't use the same "late" sng strategy either, as the fold equity amongst the remaining players a very different because of the burst bubble.

True, a sitngo does have the same basic similarity of a MTT in regards that you don't get replacements when someone gets knocked out.

But that is about it!

MTT players can't really use sng's as a mean to get better at final tables IMHO. Maybe it will even hurt their game.

In fact I dare to say, that if you try to play a final table using any form of generic sng strategy, you will put yourself at a huge disadvantage.

This is of course very basic knowledge for a lot of you guys. But then again, I hear the "Lederer argument" quite often, and just had an urge to put forth my own point of view.

I am also hoping that I'd stir up a discussion on how to rightly implement some concepts of sng strategy into final tables.

Hence the following question: What do you think a good sng player can take with him to a final MTT table?

Re: OT: The fallacy of the Lederer argument regarding sng\'s
 

darom,

just because the standard icm based on 5-3-2 payout structures doesn't work doesn't mean icm is worthless at mtts. icm is based on the likelyhood of finish positions given chip stacks and weighted with the % payouts. change the weights and its still a very good tool to aid in decision making.

I think the biggest thing a good STT player takes with him to MTT final tables is experience at shorthanded play with short stacks. no where else can you get a ton of practice playing shorthanded with stacks below 10bbs.

Velocity

Re: OT: The fallacy of the Lederer argument regarding sng\'s
 

I would counter the OP's argument by suggesting what other form of poker could better adequately prepare a poker player for dealing with a final table scenario in an MTT.

I would sure as hell rather be bigjoe2003 than someone like aba20 or jason strasser if i were to be reaching a final table at the WSOP.

Re: OT: The fallacy of the Lederer argument regarding sng\'s
 

i honestly just play poker. In a sng my play varies depending on who I'm playing against. mtt final table play is no different. I have vast amounts of fold equity against some players early in a final table, almost none against others.

poker is a game played against people. you can use the math and models etc to help decide things, but the math is only as good as your data, and your data is how that living, breathing soul at the table is going react to it. It's fairly predictable with players that have been there often, but usually most of the players at the final table it is their biggest finish. the key is seeing how it effects them. some players freeze up and do nothing to put it at risk. they just wanna make it last. others get supper excited and get a bit laggy manaic (i'm more prone to this one)

the point is, you get to a larger mtt final table than your used too, which means most people at most final tables, and addrinallin flows like water. when that happens, the players themselves cant totally control the reaction, so you certainly cant predict it from thier prior play. you just have to pay attention and see how everyone plays, then try to make the best decisions you can based on those observasions. at the same time, if it's a big score for you, your sweating, heart and adrinallin is pumping, so, you do your best to play solid. but, sometimes you freeze, even though you KNOW those chips should go in, and sometimes you shove without really thinkin it through as well as you should.

after about 140 final tables, here is the best advice and "plan" i can give for final table play.

1) shut out as many distractions as possible. It's natural to want to share the experience with the world, but have them watch quietly or from another room. same with aim etc.

2) focus on the play, watch every hand, and try to guess each action ahead of time. make your reads and see the results, even when your not in the hand.

3) take slow deep controlled breaths, and try to take 10 seconds or so for EVERY decision you make.

you do all that, and you will be playing as solid as your are capable of. thats really all you can expect or hope for.

Steve

Re: OT: The fallacy of the Lederer argument regarding sng\'s
 

[ QUOTE ]
I would counter the OP's argument by suggesting what other form of poker could better adequately prepare a poker player for dealing with a final table scenario in an MTT.

I would sure as hell rather be bigjoe2003 than someone like aba20 or jason strasser if i were to be reaching a final table at the WSOP.

[/ QUOTE ]

id put my money on strasser, and if you knew what you were talking about, you would too.

strasser was one of the top sng players a few years ago, and has won $100K+ final tables.

im thinking you didnt know that, even though I would think you would. If you do know all that, than your statement makes little sense.

Re: OT: The fallacy of the Lederer argument regarding sng\'s
 

Think of things in terms of BBs comparativley between stacks and it is still very relevant.

Knowing SNGs well will help you more than anything else would, they are very similar.

Re: OT: The fallacy of the Lederer argument regarding sng\'s
 

[ QUOTE ]
Think of things in terms of BBs comparativley between stacks and it is still very relevant.

Knowing SNGs well will help you more than anything else would, they are very similar.

[/ QUOTE ]

But won't many be inclined to take too small edges?

In a sng we are trained to push very small edges because we are used to a certain fold equity, given the prize structure.

A final table is different in that term, and that alone can make for a session of small equity mistakes that can cost you a good finish. If you are not aware of the difference between a sng and a final table, that is.

Or am I reaching?

Re: OT: The fallacy of the Lederer argument regarding sng\'s
 

Darom, you seemed to be talking about the sng player that doesn't understand why a play is +$EV. They just know that SNGPT told them it's good to shove a certain range given certain circumstances.

Anyone that truly understands the affects of the changing pay structure, will be able to adjust their push/fold game accordingly.

Sngs give you great experience in putting players on ranges and adjusting to that range accordingly.

How many times do you see some one shove for like 10-15 BBs from EP and see someone snap call with KQ or even AJ? We know that is a bad call regardless of whether it is an MTT or a sng. The person simply isn't usually pushing wide enough to make those calls.

Re: OT: The fallacy of the Lederer argument regarding sng\'s
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would counter the OP's argument by suggesting what other form of poker could better adequately prepare a poker player for dealing with a final table scenario in an MTT.

I would sure as hell rather be bigjoe2003 than someone like aba20 or jason strasser if i were to be reaching a final table at the WSOP.

[/ QUOTE ]

id put my money on strasser, and if you knew what you were talking about, you would too.

strasser was one of the top sng players a few years ago, and has won $100K+ final tables.

im thinking you didnt know that, even though I would think you would. If you do know all that, than your statement makes little sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

The final table of the wsop isn't nearly as short as he is making it out to be. It isn't push/fold poker.

Re: OT: The fallacy of the Lederer argument regarding sng\'s
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would counter the OP's argument by suggesting what other form of poker could better adequately prepare a poker player for dealing with a final table scenario in an MTT.

I would sure as hell rather be bigjoe2003 than someone like aba20 or jason strasser if i were to be reaching a final table at the WSOP.

[/ QUOTE ]

id put my money on strasser, and if you knew what you were talking about, you would too.

strasser was one of the top sng players a few years ago, and has won $100K+ final tables.

im thinking you didnt know that, even though I would think you would. If you do know all that, than your statement makes little sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ya, Lacky's right, Strassa is a vv easy pick here.


Oh, and he cashed ~300k alone (i think) at last years WCOOP.