Discussion on Satellite Bubble Theory and play (fairly long)

[whynot?]

Guys

Been reading at a bunch of posts that talk about satellite strategy and when to push/call near the bubble. Given it’s the time of year for satellites, I thought I’d document what I try to do in an effort to better crystallize my play. I’d love any inputs to help hone my satellite game and hopefully it will help a few of you as well.

As starters, probably 75% of my poker playing is in SNGs with reasonable success at the 55’s. I say this cus the satellite bubble scenario is very similar to bubble play in an SNG. The big difference is the payoffs in satellites is even more of a step function then in a SNG. That drives play and should significantly drive behavior of any rationale player.

So let’s first define what we mean by bubble – I’d say for arguments sake, bubble behavior starts in earnest when there’s 20% - 30% more players left then earn seats. If there’s 25 seats available, that means bubble philosophy starts when there’s 30-35 left, If 10 seats it starts when there’s 12 (or maybe 13 ). Obviously game conditions will drive the behaviors but as rule of thumb think this applies.
Obviously the tightness of play and how to act whether your above, at or below average changes the closer you get to the final bubble.

The relevance of this is up to a certain point in the satellite, you’re playing your typical TAG/LAG game and adjusting it based on all the conditions we know – stack size, table conditions, your image, players +/-2 around you, etc. Once you hit “THAT” certain point in a satellite, the chances of you winning a seat versus the chances of winning the hand and the percent increase those chips will have in landing you a seat needs to become the overarching driver.

What I try to do is assess my chances of winning a seat at the start of each hand when at the bubble.
If I’m an average stack (+/- 20% usually and not in the bottom 1/3) I believe I have an 80% chance of winning a seat. That means
• I call no all ins unless its from a very short stack pushing into me and I have a premium. Even with one to the seat, fold unless you’re putting in less then 1 bb.
• If I make a bet, its very aggressive, almost always all-in. . No more of the 3 times blinds. Otherwise what do you do post flop against a big stack. Only play premiums from EP/MP
• Identifying those players who get satellite strategy and pick on the mid-size stacks to stay as average is key. Avoid the guys who think its there job to bust everyone and avoid the short stacks as most all recognize they need to double up to win


If I’m an above average stack (=20% above average) I believe I have 90% + chance of winning a seat. That means
• I call no all ins unless its from a very short stack pushing into me.
• If I make a bet, its very aggressive, usually all in. As an above average stack you can mix in a 3 bb bet occasionally but know what you’re going to do if someone pushes over you. If you’re going to fold, then theres no reason to risk the chips in the first place. In most instances its best just to fold then put chips at risk you don’t intend to defend. In many instances those chips will drive you from above average to average. Only play premiums from EP/MP More apt to play a few hands from MP then if I’m average though
• Play extra tight on the final bubble – you don’t have to be the one to the final deed and putting chips at risk that get you to average or below just isn’t worth it. If there’s still potentially several rounds (esp in a turbo) identify those players who get satellite strategy and pick on the mid-size stacks to stay above average. Avoid the guys who think its there job to bust everyone and avoid the short stacks as most all recognize they need to double up to win.

If I’m below average it’s both the most tricky and the most familiar. In general you’re any where from a 40-60% chance of winning a seat and as such you need to take a few more risks. That is so dependent though on understanding the other tables, where the blinds are, when they’re going through the short stacks, when they’ll be blinded off, etc which all become critical components in how aggressively to play and pick up blinds in particular.

Having said that, short stack satellite play is the most like its equivalent in a regular MTT and even more closely aligned to short stack play on the bubble of a sng. Pushing in the red zone in LP, playing smart and looking for opportunities in the yellow zone, and just playing good TAG poker in the green zone.
Near the satellite bubble, being short is the only time “M” really comes into play. To me the balancing act is you want to be aggressive and get to the “safety zone where you’re a 60% or better chance of getting the seat by playing more conservative. That means being safely inside the “pay zone” at least as many spots left to the bubble given the future play – in other words, if there’s 30 left, and 27 pay – you want to get yourself to 23rd or better when factoring in the play for the next 4 hands (assuming you don’t play one). If you’re there, then fold almost any 2. If not, play smart aggressive poker as you’re probably just better then 50/50 to get the seat. That means playing based on your M not going crazy.

I’d love some discussion here. I don’t play as much poker nor am I as good as many of you, but do hope the above provides some useful discussion