Basic Strategy Tips for Math Heads
Ran across a couple of interesting strategy articles, recently, that highlight elementary tournament concepts. Most people should know about these, but I find that most don’t.
Matt Matros, who finished 3rd at the $25,000 WPT Championship during the show’s second season, writes about a fundamental satellite concept. He encounters one of the few situations where it is mathematically-proper to fold pocket aces pre-flop… and yet he doesn’t. Do things work out for him anyway? (SPOILER ALERT: they do) But the fact that aces is an easy fold in that spot highlights the fact that there are way more hands that are way easier folds. Most people don’t recognize this concept in a satellite, and are still in there mixing it up during the endgame, risking losing their seat while trying to accumulate all the chips for no reason.
Shart-Stacked Shamus took some time to analyze how the new structures for this year’s WSOP (i.e. triple-stacks for your buy-in, some more levels thrown in) should affect just who will be going deep in these tournaments, and the amount of skill it might take. This is essential reading for those Red Clubbers/Red Hotters who’ve won seats to event #54, the $1500 buy-in NL Hold ‘Em tournament. In the past this event was known for having quick play, and rewarding those with a lot of gamble and not much skill (though someone we know had that mixture figured out quite nicely). But it looks like there’ll be a lot more room for patience, post-flop play, and good solid poker. He refers to Arnold Snyder’s “Poker Tournament Formula“, which is an essential tool for figuring out just how to play a tournament. I’ve always said that stack-size-to-blind ratio is the key factor one must use when deciding how to play a hand. Snyder’s formula helps you plan in advance for just when those persky tournament inflection points occur, and when you should start loosening up and getting your gamble on.
Popularity: 70% [?]
Loading ...
Quick Clips
Definitely agree with you there. Different structures force you to change strategies at different spots in the tournament. I actually find that I play poorly deep into deep stack tournaments (especially against home run opponents), while my play tends to improve in more aggressive blind structures.
I’ve definitely shown success on PP’s MTT’s, as well as 180 player turbo SnG’s on PS. Rebuys also seem to be great tourneys for me. Getting to play loose before the break in the hopes of building a high chips stacks without the risk of busting then heading into the post-rebuy period with a deep stack compared to the blinds, is great tournament poker.
In regards to antes vs. blind structure increases, I definitely prefer early antes with the blinds staying low. Less preflop risk with a greater reward.
With PP, definitely have to get into more of a home run approach after the 3rd or 4th blind level, even in the 300k guaranteed. If you haven’t increased your stack by the 1st break, you have to look to get more aggressive and get your chips in more mediocre and scary situation. Getting big stacks early is definitely an advantage there, and the ability to recognize your opponents tendancies very quickly also comes into play.
I’ve noticed that PartyPoker doesn’t add antes as quickly as other sites, which would certainly effect one’s ability to be patient. Not that you’d notice it playing their lower buy-in tourneys, with three-way all-ins on the first hand being the norm.
I think someone who has the ability to play, and win, across several different sites — and several different live event sites, too — is a more well-rounded player. Because they gain the ability to recognize how structure should effect play, and then change gears accordingly.
Really? I don’t think you’re correct there. I’ve played small tournaments and SnG’s on all 3 sites and FTP is by far, the best I’ve played on. Although PS has some nice 90 player ones. They also have deep ones as well, the only difference is, no one on PS wants to play them. FTP gets more action for the deepstackers, and the play is still idiotic.
With PP and PS I find myself having to attempt more dead money grabs (which help my premiums get paid off when I play them the same way) than I do on FTP. I rarely have to attempt a squeeze or DMG on FTP to get chips because the blind structures coupled with the bad play allow me to play TONS of hands.
> I have, and I cried.
So did I! I have to play very differently at the TOC compared to other tournaments I play.
> Have you researched the online communities blind structures?
Yes, see http://www.pokertournamentformula.com/online_poker_tournament_schedule.htm. PartyPoker actually has one of the better-value structures for low buy-in tournaments, including RedClub’s $1-$11 tournaments. They have a Patience Factor of 8.11, which is better than PokerStars’ $11-$530 and Full Tilt’s $11-$75 regular tournaments!
well, regardless, I took the test, at 4:30am, and actually did pretty well considering I’m dead tired and my thought process isn’t where it should be with my eyes fluttering shut.
Your PokerIQ is: 121
Your Complete Poker Intelligence Profile has been generated and can be accessed immediately for only $9.95.
Not too shabby.
If you’re looking to score well, yeah, this is true. But if you’re looking for an accurate assessment of your, in this case, donkey-ness, then I think this invalidates the whole procedure.
I’m curious to see the scores of others, too, but I probably won’t ever give the test credit for being at all accurate. It was way too flawed, for my tastes.
I haven’t taken this score, but would be interesting to see what I would score, regardless of how accurate the test is.
I guess it’s like any test, sometimes, you have to think like the teacher who wrote it.
It’s definitely true that some questions don’t give you enough information, and a few times after reading the question I found myself thinking “I would never let myself get in this situation”, but I’m not sure what to make of the test. I search the web in hopes of coming across some pro’s that have taken the test, but no such luck. It says right on the sight that Noah Boeken scored a 150, but I would be interested in knowing what a player like Negreanu, Hellmuth or Ivey scored.
Hopefully more people will post their scores and we’ll get a better idea of how accurate this IQ test really is.
I scored a 109. But frankly, that number means nothing to me as the test was horribly flawed. Pretty much every one of the questions gave incomplete information. Whenever I’m asked about a poker situation by someone, my first response to them is always a question. Because they generally leave out a bit of information that is crucial for understanding the situation, and developing a coherent and accurate answer. I found myself asking multiple questions on each of the donkeytest questions, because I could not realistically give an answer due to the tonnes of missing information. I found myself guessing what the missing information was, and then guessing what the correct answer should be.
The second last question, however, was the real head-slapper. For those of you who haven’t taken the question, here’s your SPOILER ALERT:
The second last question outlines the hand from the opening scene of “Rounders”, where Mike McD makes nines full on the turn, and loses to Teddy KGB’s Aces full. But it doesn’t tell you it’s from “Rounders” (thought it does hint that if you’ve seen “the movie” please try and forget what you saw… duh!). Instead, it lays out the hand as you’d see it in the movie, without the names of the players, and says “You think your opponent made his flush on the river. What do you do?” Huh? If “I” think my opponent has a flush, and I have a boat, I raise. If I think he has a flush, but leave open the possibility that he has a bigger boat, maybe I just flat call. You can’t tell me what to think and then lead me to the wrong answer. That’s just ludicrous! It’s like saying, “The weatherman is calling for a lightning storm this afternoon, but you think that won’t happen. Do you continue on with your golf game?” Geez…
Ok, rant over. Anyone else want to contribute their scores?
Have any of you guys taken the poker IQ test on donkeytest.com? I just recently took the test and scored a 106, which makes me an “average” player. I would like to compare my score to others who play redhot just to see where I stand. I guess the test is pretty good, there seems to be lots of positive feedback about it on line. Just to test it out I had my wife (who plays poker just for fun) take the test and she scored a 86 making her a “donator” which I would say is pretty accurate. The only negative feedback I have ready about the test is the people who get low scores and think they are GOD’s gift to poker………..so obviously they think the test is crap.
Please take the test and share your scores.
A few of the dealers at the Ballagio without prompting said that Farha is the big fish in the Bobby’s room game. I believe they also said that Chan was the biggest cheapskate when it came to tipping.
I watched the Dwan/Antonius Aussie Heads Up Cash game over the weekend. Damn, did Dwan play great poker even though he lost $500K. And that is tough to say. Like Mike said he must have folded the 2nd nuts about 5-6 times and was right every single time.
yeah, I notice a lot of players near the beginning will reraise with this hand, forcing them to commit to the pot on the flop. By just calling in position here, I can get away from the hand, and when I’m up against the overused Raise/Check when I hit a set play that seems to be the norm these days, my opponent gave me the opportunity to catch a 10 with only one smallish bet on the turn. Alarm bells hit on the flop when he checked, raising from such an early position, that I had NO desire to bet the river when he checked to me.
Yeah, hopefully deepish turns into very deep next Sunday . . .
I will also be playing the 300k on party after winning last nights Red Club satellite. I’ll be looking to better RHFireball’s Red Club best finish of 30th.
Speaking of last night, I learned that Wargawd earned himself a WSOP ME seat recently, and would like to congratulate him on this feat. Also, my apologies for pushing him around last night, inducing a call when I shoved with KK. Even good players get fed up, I guess. lol. Funny thing is, 77 was my best hand before final table, then I got a streak of hands that made building my stack a piece of cake!
Let’s hope this is a breakout year for a lot of redclubbers. I think it is . . .
Daniel is the one who first said — that I heard, at least — that “calling” is often the correct play, when the current climate of aggression, aggression, aggression would tell you that raising is right. Top pair is not worth going broke over especially when the board is that connected.
I did. Got in through a $10.70+1.00 double shootout early in the week.
I think I played well; I just never hit any flops. I never made a hand, and only managed to keep my head above water for as long as I did — about an hour and a half — playing my position strong, and stealing, stealing, stealing. Except for pocket tens, the only time I even made a pair was the hand I went out on. I tried making a move after the button raised, reraising with 9d8d. He called, even though I’d already put in 1/3 of my stack. I had about 5000 behind, and there was 5000-ish in the pot, so I shoved when it came T-9-6 rainbow. He insta-called with JTs. Blech.
Congrats on your deepish run…
That’s the difference between good players and great players, great players won’t go broke on hands good players would.
I’m not calling myself a great player, but I had a hand yesterday in the Sunday Million that I think a lot of players would’ve gone broke on. I ended up with 4800 behind me after I cautiously played AK on an A Q J board, and luckily, I was up against a trapper and had to only suffer one value bet as he checked JJ on the river hoping I’d bet in position. I proceeded to double up a few hands later when someone overvalued top pair to my flush on the turn.
I had a buddy message me on FB, who logs onto PS to see if I’m playing, and I got the following comment from him “man, you do good in these larger player tournaments, everytime I see you, you’re cashing these events.” Well, it’s only recently that he’s been watching, hate for him to see my prior stats, lol.
He messaged me while I was making good runs in the Sunday Million and the 250k guaranteed (sooooo many donkeys at the beginning!).
I finished 992nd out of 7k and change in the million, along with a similar finish in the 250k guaranteed that had 27000 players to start.
I think this is all due to small ball. I think it’s only a matter of time before I hit a big score in one of these tourneys. The funny thing is, I’m still making tons of mistakes along the way, but know if I can get rid of a lot of these gaffes, the runs will get deeper and deeper.
Mike, did you play the Sunday Million this week? if so, how’d you do?
Watch the Aussie Millions heads-up match between Dwan and Antonius for a great example of this. Dwan has the second nuts — or close to it — like 5 or 6 times on the river, and manages to make the correct fold each time. Sometimes without hesitation, and always without a hint of frustration. He lost $500k in that session, but any lesser of a player would have lost over a million easily.
I think the comparison is apt, on first glance. But it falls apart when you look a bit deeper.
Sammy is a gambler, pure and simpler. He calls preflop with trash, chases draws, bottom pair, etc., in the hopes of hitting and cracking a big hand for a big pot. He’s capable of playing post-flop, and bluffing with skill, but his is an approach with more gamble than reason.
Dwan’s appoach — from what i can gleam from it — is more mathematical. He knows the equity in aggression, and, coupled with great instincts, he’s able to know where his opponent is at all times and use that information to bet effectively.
I think Dwan’s played so many hands of high stakes online for so long that he will be more than prepared for the post HSP backlash, where people start calling him down light. He’ll just have to value bet his premium hands better, and lay off the constant reraise bluffing.
WRONG! Sammy Farha tilted when he lost his chips. Come on, he called, what’s the amateurs name? BLIND! then shoves his chips with second pair! He didn’t go broke because of his style, I saw Sammy tilt off his chips.
The key to playing styles like Sammy and Dwan, is to make sure the pots you win are bigger than the pots you lose. Sure Sammy is going to lose his fare share of pots, and have losing sessions, but over time, his style works for him, because he knows how to play that style.
That style works, if you realize when your beat and get out of the hand. What happens with that style, is you leave your opponent guessing as to what you have, which at a high stakes game full of pros, is what you want. Although opposite approaches have been successful as well, Paul Wasicka, Gabe Kaplans short run, Jennifer Harmans 1 drink bluff extravaganza, get the job done, as well.
What’s the most common line you hear from Kaplan? “He/She doesn’t want to get bluffed on TV.” When you have the Sammy/Dwan style, when you hit that monster and realize they don’t want to get bluffed by the bluffer, wow, that’s easy chips!
I think Dwan is a better player than Sammy in this aspect because he doesn’t seem to tilt. I think suckouts just motivate him to tell himself he’s playing well.
I actually used a similar play on PS last week, I ended up losing the pot, but I chatted with my adversary about it, told him I knew he was holding AA, and played out my hand like a made set. He thought about it for a minute and seriously considered laying it down. He admitted he just did the ol’ “I’ll pay you off call” move that happens so much online. I had been sitting at this table for 45 minutes, and had everyone one of my players pegged. Plus, all of my check raises on the turn showdowned monsters! If that move works, I’m up pretty big, instead I went broke on that hand and left the table, not upset, but happy that an assumed crying call was what busted me.
Yes, a lot of those guys know Tom is aggressive, but if you go back to season one of high stakes poker, Sammy Farha won big by playing the same sort of style Tom is playing now, and I guarantee you they knew Sammy’s style a lot better then they know Tom’s style, but that didn’t stop Sammy from running the table, but once the show aired that was it for Sammy, people are calling him down with bottom pair if they have to and that is what will happen to Tom now that this season of high stakes has aired. He is definitely a smart player and I was very impressed by some of his moves, but the Tom Dwan show will come to an end as did the Sammy Farha show.
Meh. Never really got anything going. Tried to play small pots, see a lot of flops, etc. I just couldn’t connect on anything. My last hand I called a raise with KKJx. The flop came A-K-Q. Raiser checks, I bet, he calls. Turn was a ten, putting two spades up there, but giving me broadway. Raiser checks, I check behind for pot control, just to make sure a spade doesn’t come off on the river, and hopefully to under-represent my hand a bit so he makes a play on the river. River is a queen. Raiser makes a huge bet, which is what I was hoping for, and the pot is big enough that I can now shove. I’m only losing to AAxx or QQxx; he calls and shows me the former. Sigh. At least I gave my chips to a good player; this guy — caprioli — wound up finishing second in High PLO event that same day.
Wasn’t Stu Ungar the same type of player? I’ve also heard HSP comparisons to Stu about Tom Dwan.
I think they’re reading abilities to players tendencies and to pull moves like this are very read and whim oriented. Not only do you have to recognize every players “normal” tendency, but also on the whim of their mood.
There are only 2 players I’ve seen play cash I think that can do this. Phil Ivey and Tom Dwan. Eli Elezra can also be considered in this group.
btw, Mike, go to http://www.pokertableratings.com and search for some of the pros to see their cash game records. Antonius is down HUGE!
How did you do in the PLO event?
Barry said that Durrr looked way more aggressive on TV then he was during game play, due to editing. Of course he’s known as an aggro-tard to most in the poker world right now (paging Hellmuth) but, you’re right, he really does pick his spots well to be aggressive.
The pros playing HSP should/would have already known Durrr’s aggressive nature. I did and I’ve only known about Durrr from reading online so unless they have their heads in the sand they would know his style (some even commented about it during the show).
I’ve been impressed by Durrr in that he picks his spots extremely well. He isn’t just going ahead with blind aggression which is what a lot of the internet kids seem to do. He also knows how to get away from hands and bluffs from what I’ve seen.
The obvious parallel to me is Doyle Brunson. This year of Durrr all over TV is very similar to the year Doyle released “Super/System”, where all his secrets were revealed. Doyle has said that in the aftermath of the book, he had to learn how to show down good hands, because nobody ever believed he had anything and would call him down light. He couldn’t bluff nearly as much, and had to learn how to play a different form of poker. Which, in the long run, probably made him a better overall player. If Durrr can react to people’s image of him, and react accordingly, then he’s still going to get all the money. But if he only has one gear, his transmision is going to break down pretty quickly.
I think Durrr is in for a huge reality check in the coming year unless he changes his style. Now that he is becoming a bigger name in poker and everyone is watching every hand he plays, he is not going to be able to pull of half the bluffs he has in the past. I sort of relate it back to the first season of High Stakes Poker where Sammy Farha played every hand, bluffed at 90% of them and made big money all the while looking like a shark. The very next season after everyone had a chance to see how he played Sammy lost around half a million, had to reload twice in one episode and at one point looked like he was just going to start crying. I don’t know if durrr can change his style and still have success, but if he doesn’t change his style you can pretty much guarantee a loosing season this year and next.
The thing about Stars is they have different structures for different tourneys. Obviously the SCOOP, WCOOP and Sunday Major tournaments are deep, while the sngs are short. But they have these 90-man sngs now that actually move very slowly. Very comfortable.
Show me a link, please. Actually, you have to make sure you’re looking at a long enough timeline, because I think Durrr might be down overall for 2009, but it’s such a short period, and he’s way up overall. I think Gus might be the biggest winner in March, and he’s generally considered to be a big donator, according to the high stakes regulars.
Well, if the math is correct, is the call really “bad”? I mean, sometimes you know you’re waaaaay behind, but you have to call for the price. I called an all-in at a Red Hot tournament on Tuesday night with 9c4c because the math was just so juicy. I think i was getting 2.5-1 or so. I wound up losing the hand, but was going to win it well over the 29% of the time I needed.
LMAO @ UB.
Yeah, I agree Mr. Stone, FTP definitely goes up a lot slower than PS. PS is actually pretty close to PP in regards to their blind structure. I’ve never been on UB, but I love FTP’s structure (FTOPS coming soon! booya!). Might even consider trying UB now, I’ve heard good things about their structures . . . and I’m sure our hole cards aren’t exposed anymore . . .
Mr. Stone, was looking at some of the pro’s success rates at cash game, and boy! is Patrick Antonius in the hole on FTP! -$1mill and change! Ziigmund is pretty crappy, as well. Now, OMGClayAiken definitely the best on FTP, followed by Ivey and Durrrr.
I’ve been reading Matt for a few years and I find that he makes a lot of bad calls in my opinion strictly based on math. I’m surprised he actually called in this situation but he did explain why.
I haven’t done this comparison, but I always thought that FullTilt went up more slowly, but with shorter blind levels. UB, surprisingly, is the one that has the reputation for best tournament structures out there. Which comes in handy when your opponent can see your hole cards.
I think you’ll find PokerStars has the best tournament structure. Compared level for level they almost always come out better. But I do agree with you on Party Poker they have the worst structure.
Sorry to be asking all this mumbo poker jumble, can’t view much at work. Have you researched the online communities blind structures? Would be cool to have a site ranking.
So, far, online wise, I still feel FTP is the best for tourneys, while PP has the lowest skill ratio. and that’s by just playing, I would like to see how the numbers fare.
Yes it does. He assumes that an online tournament moves 1 2/3 faster than a live one, i.e. for ever 12 hands you play live, you’d get 20 hands in playing online during the same timeframe.
So, if your sole purpose at TOC is to make it to the delicious dinner break, you better hope to win a pot or two! LOL.
Mike, does this formula apply to online, as well? Is there some sort of live:online conversion ratio we can compare online blind structures with?
I have, and I cried.
Snyder has a lot of bells and whistles in his formula, but for me the one number that means the most is the “patience factor”, which answers the question, “How long can the most patient player in the world sit and fold every hand until they are blinded off?” For regular Red Hot tournaments, his formula estimates 1.75 hours (or soon into the 300/600/100a level). For the TOC, with it’s ten-man tables and double blind levels, that number bumps up to 2.97 hours, or halfway through the same blind level. For comparison’s sake, the WMPP (World’s Most Patient Player) can wait for 13.42 hours in the WSOP Main Event before blinding off.
So, have you tested out the Red Hot blind structure? What about TOC?