|
|
 I´ll give SnG's a try.
Yesterday I decided to give sit and go tournaments a try. I have been playing some 5 player SnG's where player 3 won his money back, but I didn´t get much money out of it as the rake was so high (25%). 10 players table I had only played occasionally with small success, but back then I was a very unexperienced player.
So I sat down in three 10 player SnG's. Before that, I read an article about SnG strategy at http://teamfu.freeshell.org/tourname...limit_sng.html.
It had some good thoughts, so I thought I´d try to play like the advice, in a nutshell: Tight in the beginning especially postflop, trying to steal blinds in the middle of the tourney and get really aggressive in the end.
The thing is that this tactic worked out very differently depending of the table I was playing. I wasn´t getting very bad or very good cards in any of the tourneys, but the table texture made the whole difference.
If the long posts makes you not want to read, here is a SUMMARY:
Tourney 1: Got starved out to about half initial stack size, then went all-in and came in forth place, just outside the money.
Tourney 2: Really hard, the blinds got really high before people busted out. Aggressive preflop play. My strategy didn´t work out very well.
Tourney 3: Managing some nice pot stealing. Very cautious table, easy to be somewhat tight/aggressive. Finished second.
I think Tourney 2 was the hardest game to play with this tactic, tourney 3 was the easiest and tourney 1 was somewhere between those two.
MY QUESTION IS:
In a tourney like the second one, how can I change my strategy to a winning one?
Below is a more extensive description of the tournaments.
Tourney one: Played tight, didn´t hit many flops and my stack slowly decreased until I had to make a move. with 480 in my stack and mlinds meing 80/160 I went allin with AQ, just to get called by KK. I didn´t get an ace on the board so I busted out in forth place, just outside the money.
At this table, blind stealing was often transparent, at least I felt like that. I couldn´t sneak into many pots. Three people busted out in the two first hands which led to some people having large stacks, but the money didn´t concentrate to one person as I prefer. If there had been an ace on that board though, I might well have been in the money and then anything can happen.
Tourney two: This was a really hard one. Very few busted out and when the tourney was at level 5 or 6 there were still 8 players in the game. Blind stealing was out of the question, since there was almost always a raise preflop. I didn´t get much of a hand and I busted out in sixth place with AJ all-in, beaten by a pocket pair.
Tourney 3: This table was really passive. Once I figured that out, I could steal many limper's money at the flop. When I play ring games, I usually think "If there is a 50 % chance that everybody will fold to a pot-sized bet, it´s a correct bet." But in this case, a min bet was often enough to make everybody fold! In some cases there was one caller and when I min bet on the turn, he also folded. This gave me great odds to bet even when I didn´t have a hand and I built up I stack size big enough to not get desperate, without risking any significant money. There was a concentration of money in one stack, which I figure is always good. The passive play continued until there were just the three of us. The other two guys (mr large stack and mr smallest stack) seemed really afraid of me and folded a lot of times preflop when I raised. The funniest part was when mr smallest stack had folded 5-6 hands in a row (the blinds were quite high) and then suddenly reraised me all-in preflop. Guess if I folded? This guy soon busted out and heads up I managed to stole mr large stack´s money until I was in the lead, but then when the blinds were like 1000/2000 he reraised me allin when I held KQ. I called, he had A9 and I realized how much better that hand is heads up. I finished second.
[/b]
|
Reply With Quote
