The Fine Line Between FPS and Being a Robot

[FUJItheFISH]

pudge

players usually stay away from playing early when multitabling because when they play early pots they play it all the same.

they always play ak to the felt. they cbet 100% of the time for near pot etc etc.

[Scotty_12]

There is a huge difference between Darinvgs hand and Dannyoceans hand. We are talking $6.5 and $225. At the $6.5s I would estimate you might see people having wider reraising / 'restealing' raises and that makes it spew when you have to fold to the reraise.

I think alot of the advice given on this forum are to people playing the low buyins and they need a leak free TAG game with good postflop ability before they can loosen their PF standards.

8TA is a reasonable flop for QJ btw [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I dont think raising light ruins your image for future stages, vs observant opponents it might increase the action you get - but what % of opponents are really observant, and of these - which ones will we see again? (At the higher levels, the % increases to both questions obv.) I will also add that I think doing it with position is the most important thing to keep in mind

I will come back to this thread later for hopefully stimulating discussion

[lacky]

god dammit, i just wrote a really long reply that disapeard. i hate typing, but ill try to summerize anyway.

I always played sng's with a much more open, gambling style early. stealing from the nits and playing big pots with the lagdonkdorks that would pay off light. You weren't around then, but you may have seen reference to my playing weird. I played em pretty much the same as I play mtt's, or looser.

so, my opinions are from playing 1000's of sng's in the way your talking about.

The style works very well (higher than normal roi's) as long as you have lagdonkdorks at the table. Just stealing small pots from the nits isnt enough to make it worth the chips you bleed when the steals dont work out. you also need those double ups. the nits will rarely double you up early, as they wont risk chips when behind. easy to steal small pots from, but no big ones. the laggy poor players are where the double ups come from, and to have a meaningful advantage at the bubble you need lots of chips. In the early bubble if you have a larger than average stack you cant play hands as easily (too many chips to shove profitably, and a normal raise is vulnerable to resteals from smaller stacks) amd you still cant priftably call the short stack shoves, so the stacks tend to equalize some during this stage. a 300 chips advantage at this point is essentailly meaningless, but a 2000 chip advantage isnt.

in the old 10 hand per round regulars (turbo's hadn't been invented yet) the style worked very well up to 55's. after that the really poor players i would take advantage off start disapearing. You cant steal enough chips from a table full of nit's to make the risk worth the chips acuired. at 109's my roi dropped off sharply, at 215's I'm sure ima lifetime loser.

also, playing this way is highly read dependent. you have to know who the nits are, and you have to know who is playing like a dork. alot of the dorks are occational players, so to know they are playing bad early enough to take advantage of it you have to see it.

I could play this style well 8 tabling, but beyond that you really do start to lose the feel for the different players. hud's help, but not enough to play 20 tables at a time. remeber, when we first started all this, 3 tables was all you were allowed to play.

so, yes, playing a looser style does work, as long as there are people willing to payoff when you hit a hand. The style works much better in mtt's though, and even better in deepstack cash games. the main reason I think most people move up and out of sng's is the better at postflop poker you get,the better off you are playing where you can use it best. In high stake sng nitty tables (at least then) it's very hard to play a loose style and accumulate enough extra chips to offset the risk involved.

[donkraft]

Very interesting discussion. My own take on the matter is much like lacky, and I think failing to exploit bad players early is giving up a lot of $EV.

The tradeoff is basicly: How much $EV do we gain by doubling up early vs. not - and how often do we lose all the $EV when we get stacked trying to double up early.


Knowing the results of these two queries, would be helpful:

Query 1 - Doubling up early:

What is my ROI on SNG's, where I at some point have double the starting-chips at some time during levels 1-2-3?

Query 2 - NOT doubling up early:

What is my ROI on SNG's, where I at NO point have double the starting-chips at some time during levels 1-2-3?


Also knowing how often we get stacked trying to double up early with less that premium hands would be nice, but is much harder to get an accurate number for.

I'll try to get the good people over at the pokertracker Postgres forum to help with the query.

[Buckk Dich]

In moshman's book he explains why doubling up early and taking risks doesn't work.

The reason is that doubling up early does not double your tournement equity.

He gave an example of two other guys in your sng being all in, one eliminated, and one doubling up. And he stated that in the long run BOTH lose from the situation, compared to the player that avoided the all in.

[Scotty_12]

[ QUOTE ]
In moshman's book

[/ QUOTE ]

No.

[Scotty_12]

[ QUOTE ]
The reason is that doubling up early does not double your tournement equity.

He gave an example of two other guys in your sng being all in, one eliminated, and one doubling up. And he stated that in the long run BOTH lose from the situation, compared to the player that avoided the all in.

[/ QUOTE ]

So if I have AA and my opponent has KK or AK, we get it aipf, and I beat the odds and actually hold - I lose from this in the long run?

This is a rhetorical question, please dont answer this and ruin what could be a good thread started by pudge. I couldnt resist though

[Insty]

[ QUOTE ]
The reason is that doubling up early does not double your tournement equity.


[/ QUOTE ]

It does increase your tournament equity though.

[BHokie1]

Pudge good stuff as always, and Lacky nice response.

[donkraft]

[ QUOTE ]
In moshman's book he explains why doubling up early and taking risks doesn't work.

The reason is that doubling up early does not double your tournement equity.

He gave an example of two other guys in your sng being all in, one eliminated, and one doubling up. And he stated that in the long run BOTH lose from the situation, compared to the player that avoided the all in.

[/ QUOTE ]

I read the book, and the example is about taking a coinflip early.

Please re-read what I wrote in my post. Doubling up early does not double your $EV, but it does INCREASE your $EV. Finding the right balance between risk/reward is the key.