| Posted by: skd1337 at October 20, 2007, 2:21 am | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by ChuckTs
It's tough to put in numbers like that since you won't be making 3rd all the time playing your style, nor will you be making 1st every time playing aggro on the bubble.
Put ery generally:
If you play 10 $10 games with an ITM of %30 with only 1st place finishes, you'd make $150 ignoring the fee.
If you played the same number of games, but only made 3rd every time you cashed, you'd need to cash %80 of the time to make $160.
While winning %30 of your games is unsustainable, it's much more possible than cashing ITM %80.
Ok, I can see that side of the argument but if you play for first you have a big chance of going bust on the bubble, which means no profit at all. But if you eek in to third you lock up 20% and there is an extra 30% to play for.
I dont think this argument is particularly going to be solved because it comes down to play styles, situations and personal goals. I agree the big stack sho... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: pantin007 at October 20, 2007, 12:17 am | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
100 sngs = total of 1100$
10 wins = total of 450$
20 2nd places=total of 540$
30 3rd places=total of 540$
40 no cashs=0$
total = 450$+540$+540$-1100$=430$ profit
this is the highest pssible profit for 100sngs at 10+1$ in my opinion
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: ChuckTs at October 19, 2007, 11:02 pm | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
It's tough to put in numbers like that since you won't be making 3rd all the time playing your style, nor will you be making 1st every time playing aggro on the bubble.
Put ery generally:
If you play 10 $10 games with an ITM of %30 with only 1st place finishes, you'd make $150 ignoring the fee.
If you played the same number of games, but only made 3rd every time you cashed, you'd need to cash %80 of the time to make $160.
While winning %30 of your games is unsustainable, it's much more possible than cashing ITM %80.
I'm not doing ery good with explaining why it's better to shoot for first...if you really want some good info, search some of the posts from players who have played in the tens of thousands of STTs on the larger sites (2+2, p5s etc) to see why it is better.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: skd1337 at October 19, 2007, 10:48 pm | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by Bentheman87
It's much better to bust out on the bubble two or three games in a row but get first place in one of four games than to always place third.
No it isn't.
If you play 4 x $10 SnG.
If you win 1 and lose 3 then your net gain is $1 =
4 x ($10+$1) = $44 payed out
1 x win ($45) = $45 Payed In
If you come 3rd in all 4 your net gain is $30
4 x ($10 + $1) = $44 Payed Out
4 x 3rd ($18) = $74 Payed In
Even if you only came 3rd in 3 your net gain is $12
4 x ($10 + $1) = $44 Payed Out
3 x 3rd ($18) = $56 Payed In
Now re-think your argument.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Bentheman87 at October 19, 2007, 10:10 pm | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
I think it's best to always play for first place. If I'm on the bubble and I know if I call a players all in and it will be a coinflip, I will still call, you have to get in there and gamble. It's much better to bust out on the bubble two or three games in a row but get first place in one of four games than to always place third. I always take risks in the middle to late stages of a sit and go to try to get a big stack, because you can really bully all the small stacks.
Say there are only four players left and you are the big stack on the button. No one want to be the next one out, so they will all be playing conservatively. If the blinds are ery big, I will go all in with any two cards and 90% of the time both the blinds will fold, you'd be amazed at how rarely you will be called.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Makwa at October 19, 2007, 8:15 pm | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
Although I understand the 'always play for 1st' argument, to a point, I am now focusing on just making bubbles, meaning I have made some incredible laydowns recently.
BUT... I see it this way: I am cashing in some 50% of SNGs I play, so I at least double my money (say a buck) half the time, I am playing for free. My first and second finishes are pure gravy.
Also, psychologically, it helps every time you make the bubble and chalk up another 'win.'
Not sure of my ROI at this point, but is certainly way above 7% in tourneys and SNGs combined.
My problem recently has been pushing marginal situations when getting near the money Gotta stop doin that.
Good thread.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: pigpen02 at October 19, 2007, 7:32 pm | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by skd1337
Originally Posted by Howard Lederer
The payout structure rewards tight play. Most SNG's pay 50% to first, 30% to second, and 20% to third. This payout structure dictates that you play for third. Why? Looking at the payout structure another way might help. Basically, the payout means that 60% gets awarded once you are down to three players, 20% gets awarded when you get down to two players, and the final 20% gets awarded to the winner. If you can just get to third, you get at least one-third of 60% of the prize pool, or 20%. You've locked up a profit, and you have a chance to win up to 30% more. It's only now that you're in the top three that your strategy should take an abrupt turn. Now it pays to gamble for the win.
I miss those percentages big time. How does the 60% being awarded to the top three affect you? YOU get 20% for third, another 10% for second, and another 20% for first. However, if you take out the entry amount (not the fee)... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: Genso Hikki at October 19, 2007, 1:19 pm | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
I just want to say I used your "on the bubble" tips in a $3, 45 person sit-n-go this morning. I was mid-stacked stacked when we got down to 10 (it paid out 7 places). I shut it down and managed to make the money. Once we got down to 7 I turned it back on and managed to finish 4th. I will say that although I think staying out of the action may have prevented me from being knocked out out of the money, it also made it almost impossible for me to win. By the time we got down to 5 players I was impossibly short stacked, forced all in with every halfway decent hand.
So I think I have some refining to do - but it was helpful advice, so thanks!
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: zachvac at October 19, 2007, 12:51 pm | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
I agree with the play to money strategy. 20% is a significant profit to the 10%+rake you pay. I'm not an advocate of folding KK to action on the bubble because you might be beat and you want to make the money, but if you have a hand like TT or AJ and see action on the bubble, I throw it away easily. Sure most of the time you probably have them beat, but it goes both ways.
1. Chip leader when it gets down to 3 doesn't always win, or even come in the top 2.
2. Short stack can still win the sng.
3. 3rd place automatically gets at least 20%.
I often find myself either massive chip leader (if I doubled up once or twice early on and am now playing the big stack, amassing chips) or squeaking in on the bubble (and yes, once in a while I don't money ). I've won from both positions, and I've come in 3rd in both. I prefer the conservative approach that irtually guarantees you top 3. If you take a shot and miss you get 0 money and if you take the shot and win, you've still got to knock peo... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: skd1337 at October 19, 2007, 11:48 am | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by Bentheman87
Great topic and some great posts. To the topic creator: You have a ery solid game strategy and it's similar to the one I use. However, even early on in the tournament, I'd be a bit more aggressive with AK or AQ, they are strong hands and and you should put them in the same category as AA KK QQ JJ 10 10 99 88 77. Also, you said you shove all in even in the orange zone (M between 5 and 10). I disagree with that, you are getting desperate, but not so desperate to shove with ace - x or king - x. I usually would wait until my M is bellow 5 to be using the all in preflop strategy.
Maybe I didn't make myself clear about the orange zone plays I make, which wouldn't surprise me with my english skills. It gets to the point around 7M where If I want to play a hand I use the open shove, But I still play fairly tight poker, I look down at KQs I'm all in, same goes for like A9s but I would wait until the 5M mark to open shove with K10os. I just feel th... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: pokerbum at October 19, 2007, 7:52 am | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
I think you can make a case for your iew on the bubble for sng's when you're playing with wildly loose players that are catching cards like crazy, you know like one of those tables that cracks your aces twice in one session with really crazy calls that hit straights!
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Bentheman87 at October 19, 2007, 3:35 am | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
Great topic and some great posts. To the topic creator: You have a ery solid game strategy and it's similar to the one I use. However, even early on in the tournament, I'd be a bit more aggressive with AK or AQ, they are strong hands and and you should put them in the same category as AA KK QQ JJ 10 10 99 88 77. Also, you said you shove all in even in the orange zone (M between 5 and 10). I disagree with that, you are getting desperate, but not so desperate to shove with ace - x or king - x. I usually would wait until my M is bellow 5 to be using the all in preflop strategy.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: aliengenius at October 19, 2007, 2:37 am | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
You have to make a distinction between calling and open shoving when talking about what hands you are willing to "play" on the bubble as the short[er] stack.
Here is an interesting article re bubble play in SNGs.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: philthy at October 17, 2007, 6:09 pm | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
I like to use a Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde type of approach at SnGs and the bubble.
For most of the SnG, especially the earlier rounds, Im Dr. Jekyll. Im playing ery tight-aggressive, playing my position, etc. As the blinds go up and the more players are eliminated, I'll loosen up my game a bit and open my range of hands. Nothing to extreme, Im still in Dr. Jekyll mode. When its the bubble, thats when things change and I become Dr. Jekyll. I'll do a complete 180 and take a more aggressive approach. I'll raising big PF, pushing a lot on the flop with draws, top pair, and really forcing my opponent to make a decision for their chips. If there is a tight/weak player looking to squeeze in, I'll really put the pressure on that opponent as long as they keep on folding and giving up the pot to me. Or until they get fed up and make a stand, but sometimes its with a ery weak hand or their stack is so low I can call with ATC and hope to win.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: skd1337 at October 17, 2007, 2:28 pm | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
yeah pretty much -
A = 11
K, Q, J, = 10
everything is self explanitory. Also see the +EV hands guide from SNGstrategy. I found it this morning after getting a reply on my blog - its pretty cool. I like this system for pushing with a 7M stack.
enjoy
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Insomniac_1006 at October 17, 2007, 2:00 pm | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by skd1337
What I am about to discuss is my general SnG strategy,
I like that you have taken the time, and thought, to formulating a strategy. Maybe someday I will be able to do that...
Question? Is the Blackjack counting system where A-10 = the number on the card, Face cards=10 and Ace high=11?
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: skd1337 at October 17, 2007, 1:15 pm | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by dakota-xx
Nice thread skd - and some good responses as well. I am about to give sng's another run after not playing many for a while so I like this thread and the debates within it.
thanks man, i hope it goes well for you!
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: dakota-xx at October 17, 2007, 12:15 pm | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
Nice thread skd - and some good responses as well. I am about to give sng's another run after not playing many for a while so I like this thread and the debates within it.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: skd1337 at October 17, 2007, 10:57 am | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
OK guys there are some really good discussion points here.
I want to stress, this is only a rough guide, I don't stick religiously to it - with the hand guides, I use them as a general guide or starting point if you will. The bubble is play I describe is a basic ideal of what I think to be a good play, but It's not like I play that way regardless of situation. If I get to around 7M im moving in with Q8 s if needs be to stay ahead of the blinds.
Gank jungblood described the bubble as like the tour de france - everyone in the front pack tries to stay together, and as one person drops the others push up and the guy has to fight his way to the front again. So if someone is shorter than me I will think twice about jeopardising my tournament with AQ with a shorter guy about to eat the blinds.
I found I used to bubble alot when I first started as I was too short and had to push once too often and got picked off, So I started to try and accumulate chips when there were 6 or 5 players... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: quads at October 17, 2007, 1:16 am | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
Everything you said sounds good, of course if everything falls into place. You do cover a great deal of ground, and also set the basis for a planned strategy. Yet, many more complicated scenarios can and will occur. In order to cover them all, you would need to write a book.
I agree with tight early. But dislike the idea of folding, limping, or raising, with a pre-determined list of playable cards. (even if it's only early)
After two tight rounds, I believe you should be able to get a good feel for the table. Especially if you played against an opponent or two in the recent past. A tight table, loose table, mixed table, all require an adjusted game. A well played SNG game is usually based on how fast you are able to determine your surroundings, and your play adjustment. Lets say your still in it with five players left, the game and all your opponents play can take a complete 180 degree turn, requiring a new adjustment. Similar to your change of strategy as the game deepens.
A... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: kcanuck at October 17, 2007, 1:01 am | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
Nice post. I have to agree with Chuck though, squeezing into the money is not the way to go. The only it would make sense is if you're playing with money that you can't afford to lose...which is a really bad idea to start with.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: ChuckTs at October 16, 2007, 10:32 pm | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
Well as cocky as this seems, I disagree somewhat with Lederer here
If we're playing weak-tight enough that we're giving ourself a significantly lower chance of taking first, but a significantly better chance of squeeking into 3rd, then I definitely disagree with him.
If we're doing it because we know we can dominate our opponents through aggressive play after we squeek into the money without having to risk bubbling out, well...then, still actually disagree with him. If we're strong enough to be able to do that, then we should be doing it (small-ball style) during the bubble to take advantage of the weak-tight players and building a stack to give us a good chance at actually winning the STT.
Yes we will be busting out on the bubble more often and our ITM will be lower, but our ROI, winrate and profits will be much higher.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: skd1337 at October 16, 2007, 10:15 pm | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
oops connectors were supposed to be 45 and above.
Im not sure about the bubble - what you have described is exactly right in an MTT rapind the blinds on the bubble is correct but in a sit and go it is irresponsible.
Quote: Originally Posted by Howard Lederer
The payout structure rewards tight play. Most SNG's pay 50% to first, 30% to second, and 20% to third. This payout structure dictates that you play for third. Why? Looking at the payout structure another way might help. Basically, the payout means that 60% gets awarded once you are down to three players, 20% gets awarded when you get down to two players, and the final 20% gets awarded to the winner. If you can just get to third, you get at least one-third of 60% of the prize pool, or 20%. You've locked up a profit, and you have a chance to win up to 30% more. It's only now that you're in the top three that your strategy should take an abrupt turn. Now it pays to gamble for the win.
that is my argumen... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: ChuckTs at October 16, 2007, 10:09 pm | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
Well written; I like everything but your points on the bubble.
Squeezing into the money is terrible - we should always always be playing for 1st place, and that means attacking the weak-tight players and the medium-sized stacks with no remorse. I find it almost ironic how your article contains only one or two sentences on what I (and many others) consider to be the most important point in a STT.
The difference between 3rd and 1st is massive and again you should always be shooting for 1st and never trying to squeek into the money.
Quote:
Connectors 7-8 and aboveSemi Suited Connectors 5-7 and above
Just a tidbit; not really sure why you're playing with connectors 78 and better, but you're playing one-gappers down to 57?
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: skd1337 at October 16, 2007, 9:48 pm | | Topic: Sit and Go Strategy Discussion? Forum: Card Chat |
What I am about to discuss is my general SnG strategy, which I am looking to adapt and improve through discussion.
Early Stages:
I generally play UBER tight. Like seriously tight. I am just trying to survive with as many chips as possible for later on in the tournament when I can use my stack to pick up blinds.
Unopened Pot:
In an un-raised pot, when it folds around to me, I will open the pot with only the top 10 hands in hold 'em. Which I consider to be:
AAKKQQAKJJTTAQ998877
In early position, I will just limp with the 7's, 8's, 9's and AQ. In middle position I will open with all 10 hands. In late position, I will open the pot with all these 10 hands as well as a few extra hands like K-Q s and A-J s. I tend to raise 3 to 5BB depending on how many callers I pick up. I am aiming to get to the flop heads up making all post flop decisions easier.
In middle and late positions I will limp in with all other pairs, 2 suited paint cards (A, K, Q, ... | | Read Entire Entry |
|