Early Tournament Strategy?

[Jeff76]

[ QUOTE ]
It also depends on if you are playing a standard 1500 chip structure or a double stack with 2500 or 3000. I find that even in the early levels of the standard 1500 chip structure when you have 50-75 Big Blinds, you implied odds aren't there and playing speculative hands is unprofitable.

[/ QUOTE ]On UB you start with 1500 chips but 5/10 blinds, so you are actually deeper than in a lot of online structures.

I play on UB a lot. If I am at a loose table where people will go too far after the flop I will play a lot of speculative hands. If they are tight and weak then I will raise more in position. If they are tight agressive then I will wait for big hands and play carefully. Bottom line is adapt to the table you are at.

The structure at UB gives you a lot of room to play and be creative, but this means you have to be comfortable having room to play and being creative [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[mornelth]

In a micro I ALMOST ALWAYS play lots of various holdings BECAUSE nobody can fold TPTK there no matter how apparent it is that they are beat. I have good implied odds - I play the hand. I prefer to limp or call a standard raise with small PP's and suited connectors IN POSITION, since it allows you to extract more money when you hit and to take a free card when you need to if your opponent(s) check the flop. Also you need to do some careful analysis to determine whether or not you DO extract enough with those hands when you DO hit the flop - if you do not, you should not be playing them. Simple enough.

In a higher buyin tournaments - you need to REALLY get a feel for the table before you decide how you should play, as people will not stack off as easily to your flopped straight or whatever.

[fasteddy1970]

Soulman: You make a good point. I didn't "really" read the Harrinton books until I had read all of them at least three times. That may be a commentary on my reading comprehension [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] but I also believe that these are text books to be studied and read several times. I do a partial re-read of books 2 and 3 approximately every 25,000 hands or when I'm running very good or very bad.

[Soulman]

[ QUOTE ]
Soulman: You make a good point. I didn't "really" read the Harrinton books until I had read all of them at least three times. That may be a commentary on my reading comprehension [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] but I also believe that these are text books to be studied and read several times. I do a partial re-read of books 2 and 3 approximately every 25,000 hands or when I'm running very good or very bad.

[/ QUOTE ]
That was my point, yeah. And I very much doubt it has to do with your reading comprehension [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

On a related topic, I remember reading most of the threads in the MTT Anthology and not really understanding too much when I first found 2+2...re-reading them half a year later, however, was very much worth it and highly recommended.

[fasteddy1970]

That reminds me of an old saying by Mark Twain: " When I was fifteen, my father was a real idiot but when I reached 18, I was amazed at how much smarter he had gotten in three short years."