LBB sng question

jdefoe · #1 10-30-2006, 09:20 PM

on page 310 of Phil Gordon's little blue book in the sng section, he says his sit and go strategy doesn't change much from his MTT strategy. This is the thing that really popped out at me:

"when we're on the bubble play hyperaggressively and steal lots of pots"

and he also says when the bubble bursts (3 players left) to tighten up if you're the big stack and wait for profitable situations while you let the short stacks battle.

In HOH volume 3, Harrington said that you should play very tightly on the bubble because of the 20% for 3rd and 0 for 4th and due to the structure you should try to make the money then play very aggressively when you're in. Harrington do advise playing aggressive in MTT's on the bubble since the payout structure is quite different and players will tighten up, letting you accumulate lots of chips and gain better position with aggressive play.

Who is right or what am i missing here?

JSH06 · #2 10-30-2006, 09:25 PM

These guys are world class players but they don't play many SNGs. Read this forumn, play a lot, & study SNGPT & you'll figure out how to play the bubble. I think what PG was trying to say is that his strategy doesn't change much in that he still plays tight early & then starts stealing late. However, I'm sure he takes the prize pool into consideration when he plays a SNG, as opposed to an MTT.

Poker_Ace · #3 10-30-2006, 09:52 PM

I noticed the same thing when I read that part of the Little Blue Book. Harrington is right and Gordon is wrong. You can see mathematical basis for this in the "Mind the Gap" tutorial that is free when you download the trial version of SNG Power Tools. Scott Fischman makes the same argument as Gordon, by the way, in more detail in his book. Fischman basically argues that by being super aggressive on the bubble of a SNG, you will come in 1st more often such that it justifies coming in 4th more often. I don't buy it.

BHokie1 · #4 10-30-2006, 11:23 PM

It really all depends on the stacks on the bubble

Obviously study SNGPT bubble situation - but this is a good general guide.
Bubble strategy

futuredoc85 · #5 10-30-2006, 11:26 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I noticed the same thing when I read that part of the Little Blue Book. Harrington is right and Gordon is wrong. You can see mathematical basis for this in the "Mind the Gap" tutorial that is free when you download the trial version of SNG Power Tools. Scott Fischman makes the same argument as Gordon, by the way, in more detail in his book. Fischman basically argues that by being super aggressive on the bubble of a SNG, you will come in 1st more often such that it justifies coming in 4th more often. I don't buy it.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

flyty86 · #6 10-31-2006, 12:24 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I noticed the same thing when I read that part of the Little Blue Book. Harrington is right and Gordon is wrong. You can see mathematical basis for this in the "Mind the Gap" tutorial that is free when you download the trial version of SNG Power Tools. Scott Fischman makes the same argument as Gordon, by the way, in more detail in his book. Fischman basically argues that by being super aggressive on the bubble of a SNG, you will come in 1st more often such that it justifies coming in 4th more often. I don't buy it.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

futuredoc85 · #7 10-31-2006, 12:40 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I noticed the same thing when I read that part of the Little Blue Book. Harrington is right and Gordon is wrong. You can see mathematical basis for this in the "Mind the Gap" tutorial that is free when you download the trial version of SNG Power Tools. Scott Fischman makes the same argument as Gordon, by the way, in more detail in his book. Fischman basically argues that by being super aggressive on the bubble of a SNG, you will come in 1st more often such that it justifies coming in 4th more often. I don't buy it.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

[/ QUOTE ]

so are you laughing at me, with me, at both of us, or at him but not with me?

benfranklin · #8 10-31-2006, 12:08 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I noticed the same thing when I read that part of the Little Blue Book. Harrington is right and Gordon is wrong. You can see mathematical basis for this in the "Mind the Gap" tutorial that is free when you download the trial version of SNG Power Tools. Scott Fischman makes the same argument as Gordon, by the way, in more detail in his book. Fischman basically argues that by being super aggressive on the bubble of a SNG, you will come in 1st more often such that it justifies coming in 4th more often. I don't buy it.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

[/ QUOTE ]

so are you laughing at me, with me, at both of us, or at him but not with me?

[/ QUOTE ]

His "lol" was just as ambiguous and meaningless as yours. Both reference a complex quote without clearly expressing an opinion, let alone adding to the discussion by saying why the quote was right or wrong.

futuredoc85 · #9 10-31-2006, 12:15 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I noticed the same thing when I read that part of the Little Blue Book. Harrington is right and Gordon is wrong. You can see mathematical basis for this in the "Mind the Gap" tutorial that is free when you download the trial version of SNG Power Tools. Scott Fischman makes the same argument as Gordon, by the way, in more detail in his book. Fischman basically argues that by being super aggressive on the bubble of a SNG, you will come in 1st more often such that it justifies coming in 4th more often. I don't buy it.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

[/ QUOTE ]

so are you laughing at me, with me, at both of us, or at him but not with me?

[/ QUOTE ]

His "lol" was just as ambiguous and meaningless as yours. Both reference a complex quote without clearly expressing an opinion, let alone adding to the discussion by saying why the quote was right or wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

ok, some context for my "lol".

1) [ QUOTE ]
Harrington is right

[/ QUOTE ]
no he's not. tightening up on the bubble is the worst possible strategy, and people who do it are the reason other people make money in sngs. So you see, the quoted poster gave such a definitive answer and sounded as if he was positive, but he was very very wrong. I found this mildly humorous, but not quite funny enough gor a "LMAO" or a "ROFL". Hence, "LOL"

2) Quoted Poster has SNGPT, and cites it as a source for tightening up on the bubble, yet sngpt is the tool that was responsible for many winning players learning about pushes with any two cards and other wide ranges. The humor is in the irony.

better?

djj6835 · #10 10-31-2006, 01:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
no he's not. tightening up on the bubble is the worst possible strategy, and people who do it are the reason other people make money in sngs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Considering he mentioned some tutorial called "Minding the Gap", I'm pretty sure he was talking about tightening up your calling requirements in certain situations compared to your raising/pushing requirements.