"fast structure" SNG betting

[smbruin22]

i've been thinking about this for awhile recently.....

alot of people are saying that kill phil is far too simplistic. only relevent to beginner/lower intermediate...

anyhow, i've been playing some SNG's recently and trying to use more expert strategies like harrington suggests. continuation betting would be #1 by far.

but i'm finding it's pretty hard on the old chip count even at the marginal comfort zone..... if i raise to 4X BB, get a caller from BB, then that's 9X BB in the pot. if i bet half the pot or the whole pot on the next bet that's another 4.5-9.9BB, then what i do if i want to continuation bet again on the turn? that's another 6.5-10BB's and i have pretty much nothing left. if i don't bet on the turn, am i not asking my opponent to take the pot?

i know harrington talks about his different zones and is looking to get pretty aggressive in the M = 10-15 and 5-10 range (would translate to 15-22 and 7.5-15 BB's without antes).

i know that harrington isn't so much focussed on SNG's, but shouldn't an SNG have some similarities to a final table and have many similar characteristics.....

i think harrington probably doesn't see as many calling stations as the rest of us do.... more first-in vigorish where he plays...

interesting that chris ferguson suggested that if your raise takes 25% of your stack, just go all-in. so if you raise to 3.5BB, may as well go all-in with 14BB stack. and with standard antes, i that all-in level would become about 4BB and 16BB (SNG, i'm almost always at or below 16BB)

anyhow my general point is that fancy expert moves seem to take up alot of chips. and i seem like i'm often being pressured by the blinds in SNG's and many MTT's.... i guess all the more reason to target certain players in the big blind as the whole idea is that you don't want any action.

sorry, that was a little disjointed.. any comments appreciated.... sorry if wrong forum, but i think the posters in here are excellent and i did reference three authors.

[benfranklin]

First, there is nothing in print that will teach you optimal SnG strategy. State of the art discussion of this topic is available at the STT forum. Be warned that the material is there, but the noise to signal ratio is growing over time.

[ QUOTE ]

alot of people are saying that kill phil is far too simplistic. only relevent to beginner/lower intermediate...

[/ QUOTE ]

Old joke:

First guy: "How's your wife?"

Second guy: "Better than nothing."

Kill Phil is better than nothing for SnGs, then see the first paragraph above.

[ QUOTE ]

i know that harrington isn't so much focussed on SNG's, but shouldn't an SNG have some similarities to a final table and have many similar characteristics.....

[/ QUOTE ]

No. The early levels of a SnG can be played as per Harrington's recommend strategy for the early levels of a MTT. Late play in a SnG, especially from the bubble on, does not resemble anything in HOH. Forget "M". SnGs and MTTs are two entirely different games, requiring different strategies.

[ QUOTE ]
interesting that chris ferguson suggested that if your raise takes 25% of your stack, just go all-in.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is hard to evaluate this statement without context. It might or might not hold true, depending on the situation. I have great respect for the talent of both Chris and Dan, but I suspect either would be in trouble against a bunch of good SnG players.

The key to correct SnG strategy, especially in the late stages, is the ICM (Independent Chip Model): see the first paragraph above.

[smbruin22]

ben, thanks for the feedback.... only thing i would add to what you said is that there barely is any early stage to a SNG. those blinds seem to be on you pretty fast....

also, i don't necessarily understand why very late MTT doesn't have a fair number of similar attributes to last half of a SNG.... is the prize money breakdown the biggest difference? in that you don't get in the money until it's very shorthanded in SNG.

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]
ben, thanks for the feedback.... only thing i would add to what you said is that there barely is any early stage to a SNG. those blinds seem to be on you pretty fast....



[/ QUOTE ]

It depends on the blind structure, but even in a Stars Turbo with the blinds going up every 5 minutes, HOH is generally appropriate for at least the first 4 levels.

[ QUOTE ]
also, i don't necessarily understand why very late MTT doesn't have a fair number of similar attributes to last half of a SNG....

[/ QUOTE ]

It depends on the blind structure, but in general, final table MTT play is deep stack and SnG play from the bubble on is very short stack. These are two entirely different games. I am not aware of any books out there that deal with the extreme short stack game. ICM does deal with it.

[ QUOTE ]
is the prize money breakdown the biggest difference? in that you don't get in the money until it's very shorthanded in SNG.

[/ QUOTE ]

Quite the contrary. In MTTs, typically 10% of the players finish in the money. In SnGs, 30-33% finish ITM.

[Big Bend]

Buy SNG Power Tools, analyze 1000 SNGs you've played in, learn how to handle yourself when your M is < 10.

Problem solved. Good luck... The 1 table tournament forum has tons of great info on all this.

BB