[Vorlin]

DVault1:

First, the post is not about any collection of beats and I'm tiring of people trying to hijack the thread and take it in that direction. It's about an idea for an MTT format that attempts to collect the best facets of NLHE and limit into one MTT.

Enough whining about the two small sections that describe EXAMPLES and more focus on the idea of how structures could be set up to keep all the best characteristics and get rid of some of the things that many people feel are ruining the MTT's... please!

Regarding PF mechanics:

"The notion that PF all-in maniacs aren't exploitable is ridiculous, ESPECIALLY in the situations you cite!"

In any *single* occurance, I totally agree with you. But if you get someone into an AI PF where you're a 66% favorite three times in a row then guess what? Odds are that you will not survive one of those three.

It seems as if everyone keeps saying: "Oh, but they MUST be advantageous for a good player because they're correct according to PF mechanics!"

This is an example of people becoming so enamoured by percentages and numbers that they loose sight of the real goal... TO BEAT THE BUBBLE AND GET PAID.

The fact is that doing it once in a while is perfectly correct, but people are literally AI PF nearly every third hand for the first 30 minutes and that is nothing but some wierd form of bingo with cards.

No matter how much of a favorite you may be, going AI 12x before first break is no way to play in an MTT, regardless of PF mechanics... because the idea of a tourney is to survive long enough to make the bubble.

You want to put *your opponent* AI when you're ahead every chance you can get! However, you also need to do so while giving them as few chances as reasonably possible to knock you out!

Most of the times that I cash or make a final table in a 1400+ person MTT, I've been all in myself perhaps 3x from the first hand to my elimination. I've put others AI many times, certainly... but **not while risking my own survival**.

The other times, the ones where I don't do well, are the times where my being a 60% or better favorite didn't help because the flop went the other way. In those times I was either killed off right there or left too crippled to do anything.

The idea of this thread is to discuss a possible middle ground. One where wild luck against truly maniacal all-ins won't kill someone off the first or second time that they get the short end of the stick, as long as this occurs very early. Once mid MTT is reached, the people using AI are using them very well... and this is something that we all agree should stay the way it is.

But this first round "demolition derby" stuff is off the wall... and it's getting more common. That tells me that people aren't learning from thier mistakes but, rather, are just hoping to get lucky early on and then tighten up.

If you want to play Russian Roulette with your buy ins, be my guest. But my money will go where my decisions have more to do with my results than anything else. I'm basically posting and folding thre first hour in NLHE MTT's and then playing small ball to work my way up. It's a tactic that works about half the time but sometimes you just can't get momentum going because you're starting with about 80% of a normal starting stack.

For those who still disagree, think about this:

Phil H. always shows up nearly an hour late to any MTT, even the WSOP. You can't seriously think he's forgetting to set his watch or just being lazy, can you? He's using the RRR... Risk Reward Ratio. The risk of being involved during the first 60 minutes just isn't worth the reward... so he sleeps in or goes and gets someting to eat, then shows up late.