bonycamel's poker diary

I noticed in another thread that 30ish% hands played is probably on par with a winning omaha player, which explains yesterday quite a bit. But I have another pre-flop question in mind that is sort of close to home for this.

I did a quick google search and didn't come up with anything(not to say it's not out there, I may be searching with the wrong keywords in mind). But does anyone know of a general guideline of pre-flop hand groupings for omaha?

I have a really vague list i compiled today, and was looking for some input-- please be kind.

group 1

AA+faces/tens
KK+faces/tens
QQ+faces/tens

group 2

JJ+faces/tens
TT+faces
sequentials starting with 8 and up
AA-QQxx(dangler's above 7ish)

group 3
sequentials below 8
"double run" sequentials-- eg 6778
gapped connectors - high card queen & above -eg: 8-TJQ

group 4
gapped connectors - high card jack & below -eg: 5-789
double gappers - eg 5-7-9T

group 5
scattered high cards - eg: AT8K

group 6
most others, trash hands and muckable pre-flop in most cases


I've played way too much heads up with a friend here lately which has taught me some bad fundamentals for ring games... Trying to do some damage control to keep from killing myself like i did yesterday.

The groupings are in seriously early stage, and just something i'm trying to finalize to make myself play a little tighter, and get rid of some leaks i found.
I'm not trying to formulate a "what to do in every circumstance" guide, but just some ideas of where and when to my hands pre-flop stand better chances. Any input would be appreciated

As we all know, Sichuan, a province in China has suffered horrible earthquake on May 12th. PokerStars has created a kind event on donation. We donate one dollar, PokerStars would also donate one dollar.
I post one thread on 2+2: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthread.php?t=208195
It seems that it works well. Lots of guys would donate.

Those guys who know ICM, and the principles I’m discussing here, well will find this very yawnsome. Those who don’t might like it and they might find it useful to see figures. I am trying to make some of the posts I wish I had been able to find six months or a year ago. They may exist but if they do, I haven't found them.


These are two common setups on the bubble. You have 3000 chips. In one example the chips are reasonably evenly shared out; in another there is a shorty and a bigstack. Compare these tables, which show stack size and equity (share of the prizepool):

3000 0.251
3000 0.251
1500 0.147
6000 0.351

3000 0.232
3000 0.232
3500 0.257
4000 0.278



You can see straight away that you have more equity when there is a shortstack. This is a feature of ICM that it’s important to grasp: even though you have the same number of chips, you have more equity if someone else is short. And you'll notice that it's quite a decent chunk: 1.9% in this example. The shorter he is, the better. If he has 500 chips and the bigstack has 7000, your share is .278, even though you still have the same share of the total chips: .222

And note that the chipleader having a bigger stack is only partly what affects your equity (so long as the chips he is gaining are not yours, obv.). Give the 1000 chips to the other stack and your equity is .274.

Well, it’s because he will blind out quicker, right? Not really. Here’s something that may not be obvious (or at least its implications might not be): the blinds don’t matter. You have the same equity no matter what the blinds are in ICM. Some people think this makes it a poor model when blinds get higher, because it doesn’t account for what the blinds eating your stack does to your equity. But that’s not a problem with the model as such; it’s just something you have to understand and account for.

ICM is static. It measures your equity right now. This is something you’re well advised to bear in mind when using SNG Wizard to work out whether shoves are +EV. If blinds are reasonably low (say t200), your change in equity after eating the blinds will rarely be huge. Let’s say the bigstack stole both your blinds in these scenarios. Your equity will drop to .238 with the shortstack, and .217 with the more even distribution. That’s not too bad. If the blinds are higher, it starts to be painful quite quickly.

So let’s say that you play a hand with the second stack, and you take 1200 chips from him. Here are the new equity tables:

4200 0.305
1800 0.184
1500 0.157
6000 0.355


4200 0.292
1800 0.16
3500 0.264
4000 0.284

Two things strike me here. One is that you do not gain all the equity the second stack loses. In the first example, he loses .67 and you gain .54. The other two stacks gain the rest. (We all understand that this happens with allins, but it’s true too of any gain or loss of chips. Look at the figures closely. The chips you gained in the first example were only worth .54/.67 = ~80% of the chips he lost. It’s an easy mental jump to imagine that you are either player and could have won or lost the 1200 chips. It’s not so easy to realise that if you play pots in this scenario, you must adjust pot odds at all points so that you will gain enough more chips to offset their lower value. It's no good taking even-money bets. Imagine that you wagered on red at roulette. There's no 0 or 00 but you bet in American dollars and are paid in Australian dollars. You are not liking that bet if the Australian dollar is buying US80c.) But the other stacks don’t share it equally. The shortstack takes nearly .1 and the big stack about .04. In the second, the second stack actually loses more equity, and you gain a little bit more. The other two share the residue more evenly.

What does that tell you? Well, it tells me three things. First, other people playing pots makes me money. Yes, that’s right. I gain if anyone else plays a pot and I don’t. (Not just when they put it all in, but any time I’m not in a pot.) That should make folding marginal hands feel that little bit better. Also, think it through: if folding makes you money if others are playing, then when you consider what you risk by entering a pot, you must add the equity you would gain if you simply folded and let others play. Second, shorties gain more when they avoid playing pots than other stacks do. Sometimes it’s frustrating when you are at, say t150, with a 1000-chip stack, and the table is really active, so that you can’t steal the blinds. But you can console yourself that you’re still making money, and what’s more, you’re making more than others who have also had to fold. And third, when stacks are reasonably even, you lose more equity when you lose. I guess that means you should be more apt to play with a medium stack when there's a shorty than you are when there isn't.


These effects are on the whole fairly small, except the disparity between equity won and equity lost. That's huge, and the bigger the percentage of your stack you are risking, the worse it gets. Look at this last table. This is the equity situation if you take 2000 chips from the second stack with the shorty in:


5000 0.337
1000 0.123
1500 0.179
6000 0.361

You gain .086 in equity. He loses .128. Your gain is worth only 67% of his loss. Meanwhile, when you make that bet on the flop, the shortstack laughs his nuts off. You just made him money, whether you win the pot or lose it. He gained 3% of the prizepool, more than $4 in a 16, because he folded and you played a big pot.

After a few months of playing online poker for real money I thought it would be appropriate to summerize a few of the common mistakes that I learnt through losing my money, and I saw my friends make and I commonly see on this site.

Nothing I say here is any new and amazing stuff, and it is stuff that you will see in most Poker Books and in this site, but I still think it is valueble for new beginners to avoid those pitfalls.

My experience is mainly in Sng's and is aimed for Sng players.

OK, enough introductions:

1. AJ, AT, KJ - Most beginners tend to overvalue those hands. In late stages in Sngs they are gold but in early stages (7-9 players) they are very dangerous hands. It is exactly the kind of hands that you either win small pots or lose big ones. In early stages I fold those hands to any agression preflop, limp from MP, maybe raise from LP, depending on the table structure.

2. Suited connectors are for flushes or str8s - I believe that limping with suited connectors is a profitable move in Sngs - assuming you remember why you play them!
You want to make a str8 or a flush, not Top pair. Way too often you will limp with T9 to have a flop of T,7,2 rainbow - your hand is not good. You may be able to win the pot, but you have a very mediocare hand, be willing to drop it.

3. KK - This is a great hand ofcourse, but by no means it is a guarenteed winner. When an A comes on the Flop you have to be very careful. If you raised nicely preflop and you had 1 or 2 callers there is a very good chance they are holding the A. If it is checked to you and you are last or one before last to bet throw in a continuation bet, but be willing to fold to a reraise.

4. JJ, TT - my least favorite hands of all time - Early in the tournament I am not willing to invest too much money in them, maybe 10% of my stack. From EP I will play them as I would low pair (see the flop cheap, if you didnt hit a set or a low flop when you have overpair fold to agression).

5. Once you put chips in the pot they are not yours anyomre - Dont feel compelled to chase the hand just because you invested money in the pot. Sngs are not about any one specific hand - its about making it to the money.

6. Slowplay monsters only at early stages - And by monster I mean a boat, a nut flush or a set on a very uncoordinated board. Dont slowplay two pairs in the early stages, you will get burned more often then you can believe. If you have JThearts and the flop comes 2 7 9 hearts dont let the Q, K, A hearts get a card for cheap. Make them pay to chase.

7. People can get a few good hands in a row - It is not uncommon to get 3,4 or even 5 good starting hands in a row. Just because someone raised 3 consecutive times preflop does not mean that he is a bluffing maniac, he could be, but he is not neccessarily is. When he raise 7 out of the first 10 hands you can assume he is a maniac.

8. Dont minbet at early stages- It accomplishes nothing - You will not scare anybody with a minbet when the minbet is 1/50 of their stack. If you think you should bet do it agressively.

9. pot odds are less important then stack size - In ring games pot odds is king. In Sng your stack size matters much more. It is way too easy too blead half your stack on chasing hands that you had pot odds to call ,and then have a short stack and having the entire table picking on you trying to knock you out.

10. He is bluffing syndrom - Everybody I know had this syndrom at one point or another - You are sure everybody is bluffing all the time - so you reraise somebody with your TPLK only to discover - surprise,surprise they have you outkicked. You need good reads to find out that people are bluffing.

11. Good players change pace - the ABC of Sng is to play tight in the beginning and agressively towards the end - dont be surprised when people do it. Just because somebody playing only 2 hands in the first three orbits does not mean that they will be tight forever.

12. Dont limp when you are short stacked - When you are the short stacked (5BB or less) you can't limp into hands - pick your spot and try to double up.

13. Think about the entire hand - When you bet/raise/call think about the entire hand - remember what you opponent did at every stage and try to anticipate what he will do next. A poker hand is not a series of indpendant decisions, its a series of connected decisions each affecting the other.

14. Notice the tight players too - It is way to easy to overlook the tight players at the table and focus on the loose/agressive ones. Pay attention to those who fold 80% of the hands, they probably know what they are doing

Ok. First things first. Have you read Poker Nerd's SnG strategy? If not, go do it.

With that under your belt, I want to establish that I do have success on the Party SnGs. I've been reviewing my SnG numbers since I resumed playing the $30+3 SnGs in late July after a long hiatus of most of the year. Here's the breakdown:

[updated 8-16-04]
55 tournaments
$1815 invested
30 money finishes (55% ITM)
1st place: 8
2nd place: 10
3rd place: 12
Profit: $1,027
Total ROI: 57%
Hourly rate: $26.95

My historical ITM last year, before I stopped playing the SnGs, was in the high fifties, so although this sample size is on the small side, the numbers sound about right. I think the lower than normal ITM is probably accountable to two brutal days right at the end of July when I went 1 for 9. Also, in an ideal world, I'd love to see one or two of the seconds become a first for a more even progression, but wouldn't we all.

Ok, enough of that. Actual strategy time. Poker Nerd eschews the traditional early/middle/late strategy for a stack-based strategy. However, I believe that a combination of the two, with an eye to table conditions, is the ideal method of play. So complex! At the start, however, everyone will have the same amount of chips, and you won't have a read on the table, so let's begin with...

Early Play
In the early rounds (on Party, this is the first two rounds), you should play generally solid poker. That means, play your position, raise when you should, etc. There is no sense in getting fancy in the early-going; it's giving the average SnG opponent FAR too much credit. It is definitely ok to limp speculative hands in the early-going, because the implied odds of catching the right flop are huge. Keep in mind, it is not uncommon for four people to be eliminated in the first two rounds of play on Party. Those chips are up for grabs; this is an excellent time to double up if you catch the right flop.

However, I tend to play a little tighter than normal in the first two rounds. Why? Two reasons. Number one, I see absolutely no point to stealing the blinds. On Party, the first two rounds are 10/15 and 15/30. Those chips are not going to make or break me. Number two, there are usually several people in the early going who don't know how to fold preflop and are willing to gamble it up. I think the better strategy is to conserve those chips for later rounds where they can be put to more effective use, or for more clear-cut hands in the early going. I will still limp the speculative hands, of course, but I generally play fewer hands than I otherwise might. This also allows me to get a feel for the table.

A few other pointers:

1. Group 1 hands need to be played hard. A 3xBB is not going to scare out ANYBODY in Levels 1 or 2. AA, KK, QQ, and JJ to a lesser degree depending on position, need to be raised aggressively, by as much as 10xBB. If you do not raise them aggressively, watch as 6 people call your raise, and then be prepared to lay your hand down when an ace flops (while holding KK through JJ), because you can be sure that somebody called with A6, and shame on you for not protecting your hand with a bigger preflop raise.

2. AK and AQ, on the other hand, are a different matter. With AQ, suited or not, I will only play the hand in position and will limp it most of the time. This does two things: keeps the pot small, and allows you to get away from the hand when you miss the flop. AK I think requires a raise (again, depending on position) but raising to 10xBB with AK is asking for trouble. Mark my words here. Somebody will call you, and when the flop misses you, you'll have a hard time getting away from it.

3. In Level 1, I will call with ATC in the SB if the pot is unraised. The SB is 2/3 of the BB, it doesn't make sense to throw it away. What you're hoping for here is to flop something more than a pair.
--

I assume that, if you're reading this blog, you probably have a handle on post-flop play in NLHE. However, I will point out a few areas where I disagree with Poker Nerd. Number One on this list is top pair, solid kicker on the flop. I'm the first to admit more money is lost on top pair in NLHE than just about any other hand, especially in an unraised pot. Remember what the Texas Dolly says about this: "Never go broke in an unraised pot." However, also keep in mind that on Party Poker, especially in early levels, bad players can't get away from hands that have missed or only caught a small piece of the flop. If the pot is unraised, there will probably be as many as five players seeing the flop. Bet your top pair and narrow the field. The bad players will call all the way looking for that inside straight, the fifth heart, or two pair, or whatever. Sometimes they will hit; that sucks, but you will know when they do. Most of the time they won't. Sometimes you will be beat on the flop; that sucks too, but again as long as you don't overvalue your top pair you will be able to get away from it. Keep in mind that the bad players are the ones who aren't going to be around long. You want to get their chips while they're still in the tournament. And if you have enough NLHE experience, you'll know when your top pair is no good. I don't know how to articulate it better than that; it's a feel that comes from experience.

I do agree with Poker Nerd that you shouldn't bluff on the flop in the early levels, for the most part. A semi-bluff is ok once in a while when you're HU or if you're sure that an orphan pot is out there waiting for an owner, but if you get called, you're done. You have to go into check-fold mode.

Not much to say about turn and river play. The river is straightforward and self-explanatory, I think, and if not, Poker Nerd covers it fine. Value bet your winners; check behind if you think you might be beat; etc.

By the end of Level 2, you should have a read on the table. My general experience on Party is that there are either: a) 3 to 4 people eliminated, with the remaining players breaking down as 1 or 2 poor players, 2 or 3 tight-weak, and 1 or 2 decent players; or b) the entire table remains, in which case you can be sure that you're playing at a table predominantly populated by tight-weakies. Keep that in mind as we move to...

The Middle Rounds
On Party, the middle rounds start at Level 3 (25/50). By this point, you will generally either have an above average to large stack by having taken down a couple of hands from the poor players and/or having doubled through in the early going, or you will have a bit under 700 chips from blinds and missed flops that you check-folded. You will also have a read on the table: again, either 6-8 players remaining broken down as above, or a table of tight-weakies. This is where the strategy starts to branch off.

Table of Tight-Weakies
Start raising. And when I say start raising, I mean don't stop raising. Any time it's folded to you in LP, you should be raising to 3xBB with ATC. Watch them fold. They will do it. If they don't, or if they reraise, it's easy to let it go. This is where stack play gets involved. If you're a big stack, you can pretty much turn into the table bully. Don't raise EVERY time, of course, but do it often. They'll be afraid of tangling with you. On the other hand, if you haven't managed to pick up any pots and your stack is ~700, selective aggression is key, because losing one or two steals is going to put some hurt on your stack. Also, keep in mind that the table does not have to fold to you in order for you to raise. If you see somebody trying to limp in from EP who you've seen trying to limp in from EP position before, don't be afraid to raise to 4xBB. Again, watch them fold.

Table of 6 to 8
If you're already down to 6-8, you should still be raising, but you needn't raise with as much fear. Few players will make the adjustment that they should be playing a wider spectrum of hands, so you will still win many blinds uncontested. When you do get called, you will (hopefully) have position and can proceed cautiously.

Both Table Types, After the Flop

Either you raised with a strong hand to begin with, in which case, proceed with normal post-flop play, or you raised with trash. Remember, if you've been using a "standard" raise every time, you have given your opponents no signal as to the strength of your hand.

If you raised with trash and were only flat called (not reraised; if you were reraised preflop, just let it go), you have some choices. With a large or above average stack, if the caller checks to you, fire a 3/4 pot-sized bet. What you're doing here is guessing that your opponent missed the flop, and will credit you for a hand and fold. This is especially effective at the tight-weak table, because even if your opponent did hit the flop, if it's not top pair, they're still likely to fold. If you get called, it's check-fold from there. No harm. You lost a few chips, but your stack can take it. You'll get them back by continuing to aggressively pummel the blinds.

With a below average stack, you have to proceed very cautiously. A flop bluff, if called, will decimate your stack. I almost think it's better to check-fold in this situation and conserve your chips for better opportunities. So you got caught trying to steal. So what. One or two players might take notice of that, but with your stack now bordering on "short", you're probably not going to be steal-raising anyway. That works to your advantage, because when you do push with a strong hand, you're more likely to get the action you need to double up.

Keep in mind that this strategy is for HU play only. If you get called in more than one place, you are beat. Let it go unless you get a miracle flop.

If You Fall Into Short Stack Land in the Middle Stages

You're looking to double. Plain and simple. Get all the chips in preflop. Ideally, you want to be the first raiser if you're going to get all your chips in. It's a bad idea to be calling other people's raises unless you've got a strong starting hand, so be the first one in. Sometimes you will win the blinds. That is probably a small victory, because the blinds are starting to get big. Sometimes you will get called and win; sometimes you will get called and lose. That's poker. At this point, any pair from any position looks good; a medium ace or two faces in MP/LP; and of course the big hands.

"But asphnxma," you ask, "how will I know if I'm a short stack?" Good question. In a SnG, the rules are a bit different than in a typical MTT, where often the 10xBB is a good rule of thumb. Here's my guidepost: if you raise to 3xBB, and get called, and can't make at least a 2/3 pot bet on the flop, you're a short stack and need to get 'em all in preflop. So, at the 50/100 level, with 800 or 900 you're getting close but still treading water; at 600 or below, you may as well just push. It's true that committing 300 chips with only 800 or 900 behind is putting 1/3 of your stack out there, in theory pot-committing you. But it's a weird quirk of SnGs that you can still get away from that pot and not be completely desperate, and I think that's largely because 3 out of 10 places get paid, as opposed to the typical MTT, where only 10% of the field gets paid.

The Late Stages

I usually define this as the Final Four. Table-type is not really important anymore, so the strategy is going to merge back into stack size considerations.

Large Stack
As a large stack, you should still be raising LOTS. Remember, you're 4-handed now. Almost anything looks raisable. You should be especially keen in picking on the players in 2nd and 3rd place. Very often, they will be unwilling to play back at you, instead choosing to follow the (dangerous) strategy of hoping that the short stack busts before they do, so they can slide into the money. With the blinds starting to reach the stratosphere, you can rack up the chips to position yourself well for heads-up play.

Medium Stack
As a medium stack (~2000), it's very important to keep up with the blinds. If you miss one or two orbits without picking up blinds, you'll quickly start falling into short stack land. You cannot wait for cards at this stage of the game. If you get them, fantastic, but don't rely on getting them. Watch your opponents instead. If you see someone folding his blind every time because he doesn't want to tangle until after the bubble pops, go after him. If it folds to your SB, raise with anything.

Small Stack
As a small stack, your work is cut out for you. You should be pushing with any ace, any pair, any two faces, any medium face, etc. Basically, all but the crappiest of crappy hands. The goal is to double up before the blinds gobble you up. The caveat, here, is that if there's a shorter stack, you can try to play the Waiting Game, hoping they bust before you so you slide into the money. It's dangerous, though, because if they double up, you are Screwed with a capital S. This is a very situational decision. Some money is better than no money, and I disagree with Poker Nerd that one first place finish and three fourths is better than four thirds. While it's true that one first place finish will get you (slightly) more money than four thirds, the psychological impact of making the money four out of four times v. making the money one out of four times shouldn't be overlooked. You will feel like you won four times, instead of feeling like you won once and lost three times. And, if you're like me and play several SnGs in one sitting, this can affect your subsequent play. But again, keep in mind, that if the other short stack doubles up, you're in trouble.

Oh, another thing I can't stress enough that applies to all stack sizes: there should be NO limping at this stage of the tournament! I -might- limp in Level 3, but after Level 3, if I'm coming into a pot, it's for a raise. Limping at these levels is suicide, because a) you're asking to be reraised behind you; or b) you're giving the BB a free flop when most likely you could be scooping his chips preflop. How many times have I seen the SB complete and then get reraised by the BB? I do it all the time, to punish stupid players for completing their small blind with crap instead of raising/folding it. Also, how many times have I seen the button limp, the BB check, and then the BB check-fold to a flop bet from the button? Does anybody REALLY think the button caught a piece of the flop? Of course not! It's just that the BB didn't have anything to begin with. By limping, the button gave the BB a chance to put the hurt on. Don't do it.

Big Hands
I sometimes see people try to get cute with a big hand (aces, kings, queens, jacks) in the late stages, trying to maximize it's value by limping it. Don't do it! If you hadn't been throwing away all those garbage hands that you should have been steal-raising with, you wouldn't need to maximize the value of your big hand when it comes along. Raise those big hands, the same way you would any other time. Don't give the BB a chance to flop some weird two pair for free. If you only get the blinds, so be it. That is NOT a tragedy in the late stages of a SnG. If you do get action, even better! Because of all the raising that's been going on, your opponent will be hard-pressed to put you on a big hand.

Heads Up

Raise or Fold?
With a pinch of luck, you made it to the final two. Great. But it's not over yet. Finishing first is significantly better than finishing second. My general rule of thumb at this point is to be raising any two cards that are a heads up favorite. Don't know which cards are heads up favorites? Take a look at this handy chart. If it's at least a 54% favorite, I'm definitely coming in for a raise.

Now, if you don't have one of those hands, then you're put to a situational decision. Obviously, you can't fold the crappy hands every time. You need to raise some of them, but you don't need to raise all of them. If your opponent is weak, raise more of them. If he's aggressive, raise less of them. Etc. Remember, it's ok to fold sometimes. Just for the love of god, don't limp in. When your opponent raises you, you will be swearing to yourself as you fold.

What If It's MY Big Blind?
On the other side of the coin, if I'm the one whose blind is being raised, I will play all of the above-mentioned hands for sure. I will also consider a mix of smaller cards if they're connected, suited, etc. But crap hands (93o) are still crap hands and should still be folded, I think. It's true that at this point, ATC can win, and that my opponent could be raising with crap, but I'd rather be in there with two cards I'm a bit more confident about. It takes more hand to call a raise than it does to raise. It's also very hard to pick off steals at this point in the tournament, so calling a raise generally demands SOME sort of hand.

[To head off any controversy on this point: I am aware that even the worst heads-up hand, 32o, has 32% equity against any random hand. Thus, in theory, I should be willing to call with ATC at this stage since I'm getting 3-to-1 for my money. I'd just prefer to get me money in where I'm have a better chance at taking down the pot, either by being the aggressor or by having a good hand. Argue this point if you want; maybe it's why I have slightly more 2nd place finishes than 1sts.]

Big Hands
This is the one, and only, time I submit that it is ok to limp. However, if your opponent is sharp, and sees that you've been raising or folding EVERY time but suddenly limp in, his trap radar will go off. It's more effective to CALL a raise with a big hand, then it is to limp the big hand in. Unless your opponent is an idiot, in which case feel free to limp away. =)

Stack Considerations
If you're on the short end of the stick (really short, I mean; he has a greater than 3-to-1 chip advantage on you), find a decent hand and go with it. If you're on the short end but less than 3-to-1, be patient. You can't be afraid to bet at flops that miss you, but you don't have to pick one hand and go all-in. Continue to wear your opponent down by raising his blind and getting him to fold on missed flops.

If you're the big stack, keep the pressure on. Raise, raise, raise. If you get your opponent down to under 1000 chips at any point, take a stab by putting them all-in with anything even marginally playable. They will be forced to call with just about anything. If you double them up, so be it. It doesn't hurt you that much, but at least you took a chance of knocking them out right there and taking down first place.

Conclusion
Unfortunately, luck plays a huge role at this stage of the tournament, with the blinds consitutint more than 10% of the chips in play. One SnG, I got the short stack all-in three times as a dog (one of them a severe dog) and he won all three. The last all-in crippled me and I finished in second place. Boo. This will happen. Just keep grinding away, and the first place finishes will come.

I guess that's it. Some of this advice overlaps with Poker Nerd; much of it differs. Clearly, no one style is more correct than another. Go with whatever works for you in the moment.

This is easily the most important section of the book, as this is the stage of a STT at which it is least like any other tournament or cash game format. Anyone with even a tenuous grasp on a winning STT game knows prize pool equity trumps chip equity so often that discussing decisions in terms of chip equity can't be effective at determining correct plays. Independent Chip Model (ICM) prize pool equity calculations have passed many rigorous theoretical and practical examinations and have proven sufficiently accurate in the overwhelming majority of high-blind STT situations. ICM modeling is introduced in Part 2 and is covered sufficiently for a beginning player to grasp. Therefore, I’m quite surprised that prize pool equity is largely ignored in Part 3, and when it is applied, it is often applied in a very hand-wavy, qualitative manner nothing like the simple, methodical calculations most good STT players perform on a regular basis.

The Fundamental Theorem of Sit ‘n Go High Blind Play is really more of a good general principle that follows from correct mathematical play. It is too general of a statement. There will be so many “exceptions” that if this “Fundamental Theorem” is taken as such it would cease to look very fundamental at all. There exists a very simple approach to solving high-blind STT problems. The author very obviously knows it well and applies it to a number of his example hands. What I don’t understand is

a) Why this problem-solving methodology isn’t the singular focus of Part 3 until it is fully explained and
b) Why chip equity even shows up at all outside of a comparison to highlight the differences that can arise between it and tournament prize pool equity.

I need to form an argument to debate some of the author’s conclusions in his hand examples, but this is extremely difficult. What I want to argue about is the hand ranges, but the way the material has been presented, it isn’t clear to the reader that opponents’ hand ranges are a critical parameter.


Understanding and executing correct play during the high-blind sections of STTs at the highest levels consists of four steps.

* 1) Understanding how to execute push/fold/call calculations given the input parameters of chip stacks, prize payouts and hand ranges, and a good prize pool equity model. This is basic STT mathematical mechanics and is very similar to what is considered basic and essential knowledge in every other poker format.
* 2) How to determine reasonable hand ranges given any information about opponents. This is the “poker” and “feel” element unique to STTs that non-STT players usually lack and it is crucial for an introductory STT text to cover it.
* 3) The sensitivity of the results to changes in a players hand, his opponents’ hand ranges, and the chip stacks at the table, as well as the limitations of ICM equity modeling and cases requiring special treatment. This is usually what separates the winning high-limit players from the break-even mid-limit players, at least it does today… maybe not two years ago, and might be beyond the intended scope of this book.
* 4) How to alter all parameters except the exact hands dealt to players in real time. This is what separates the good high-limit players from the absolute best (and usually highest-limit) players, and would be well beyond the scope of an introductory text.



All of Step 1 is in there somewhere. It’s not central to most of the section, but it’s in there. Step 2 is also included, although usually much more qualitative and mushy. Also, it is not demonstrated how critically-important this step is. I doubt Collin needed to get Step 3 to think he knew enough to write an SNG book. He probably gets it himself, but it’s not covered except for a few isolated examples that should be pretty obvious to decent players. Anyone who knows anything about Step 4 won’t share. I’ll leave it at that.

So OK, I think I can reconstruct good high-blind SNG play from the information presented, but so what? I already know how to it. It’s my opinion that a decent poker player new to SNGs would learn something somewhere near proper strategy from reading the Part 3, but would be utterly helpless as to explain why any of lol donkament-looking plays are correct. He would also be utterly helpless against changing game conditions; perhaps changes that have taken place since the book’s author last played SNGs seriously. Without a Crystal Pepsi-clear understanding of the methodology behind these plays, a player will be completely lost.

The implicit collusion and micro-stack sections are decent, although I think it all makes much more sense as a variation on the same calculation we should have already done forty times by the time we get to these sections. The examples really aren't that elucidating, as I think most players could guess the correct play without really knowing or caring why.

The heads-up section, all the preflop stuff should be really simple using our methodology. The instruction needs to focus on a discussion of hand ranges, unexploitable play, and profitable variations from unexploitable play. I don’t like many of his post-flop lines. Hand 3-55 is an example of what I think is a really bad logical flaw that shows up in a lot of the example hands.

I have posted a lot here, gotten a lot of help from a lot of posters, and Ive never made a milestone post so I wanted to do something this time. Unfortunately I couldn't think of anything worth doing a whole post on that hasn't been done so I just sort of ended up typing random paragraphs about a bunch of different things. Ive tried to organize them into something intelligible, hopefully I succeeded. Not that much of this will be that helpful to a lot of you since this is a SNG forum, but I know a lot of you either have switched to cash, are currently switching, or are thinking about it/will one day relatively soon, and this forum is pretty much my internet home so it's going here whether you like it or not.

Thank You's and such

Pasterbater- Obv. I owe him a ****-ton. He taught me to play cash games, but more importantly how to think about poker in a way that allowed me to make myself better.

Irieguy- besides just making this forum more fun to read, he picked me to be one of the reporter's for the ultimate SNG at his house in vegas, where I met a lot of really sick players and good people, paster being one.

Bones- also makes the forum fun to read, and he hated Phil Gordon, whose book cost me my first bankroll. **** Gordon.

Bobbofitos- Probably won't read this as it's in a donkament forum, but living with him in Vegas last year was like having one long "AHA" moment for 30 days. Such a good player and poker theorist, and he explains his thoughts more coherently than just about anyone Ive ever talked to.

Wiggs73- Doesnt post much anymore, but he taught me a lot about SNGs, and staked me once when I was busto. Ive also learned a lot talking Cash with him on AIM after we both switched. \

Everyone else I talk to on AIM about poker, + those who lived w/ me last summer in LV+ anyone else I forgot. This forum has taken me from 1-tabling $5 sngs to making bank at upper MSNL, so in return I give you some confused ramblings that may or may not be coherent enough to help anyone.

Switching from SNGs to Cash

There probably isnt a whole lot I can offer most people on this for two reasons: I was never that great at SNGs and I had Pasterbator teaching me when I switched. That said, there a couple of things I will say on the subject. If you have no experience playing cash games, then stick to the basics. It sounds simple and boring (it's both) but it's also important. I see way too many posts in the SNG>>>Cash thread along the lines of "trying out some cash games for the first time, should i 3-barrel/cold-4bet/check-raise bluff this river. No, you shouldn't because most of these things are unnecessary at low stakes anyway, and you definitely don't have the experience to recognize the rare spots where they might be OK.


Game and Seat Selection

Game selection is probably the most important thing that nobody does at cash games. In SNGs you guys just register for 25 tables and wait for them to fill up. At cash games, you are making money directly from the fish (i.e. not from mistakes that the fish makes against other players as in SNGs), so if you are not on a table with a few fish, you aren't going to be making as much money as you should. I like to look for people sitting with stacks between 40-80bbs. Virtually every player who is even decent will reload before getting this low, and shortstackers leave the table at 40bbs, so all of these stacks are horrible players. Same thing goes for seat selection. Being OOP vs a good player should not be your main concern. I would rather have CTS on my left and a huge fish on my right than the other way around (slight exaggeration). The only exception to this is when stacks get really deep (200+bbs), then you should either tighten up drastically with a good aggro player on your left or just leave and find another table. Having position on the fish is huge, you have the best chance of taking their money when you are directly to their left, and most fish leave after they get stacked so give yourself every advantage you can.


Megatabling

I don't do it except during double VPP promos, and i think it's generally a bad idea. Spend some time playing very few table and make yourself explain everything that you do, and you will be able to correct a lot of mistakes on your own. Learning how to formulate these thought processes will also lead you to recognizing when a non-standard play might be best. I play 4 table sessions at least 4-5 times a month for this reason, and generally play 6-8 the rest of the time. I personally can't see how anyone playing more than that is playing their A-game, but Im sure some can.


Be a nit in EP

Seriously, this is important! You aren't going to have the kind of edge you need to play a hand like 76s, QTo, etc vs most players when they have position on you. Even if they are terrible, as long as they are remotel aggressive you are hurting yourself playing ****ty hands OOP vs them. I would rather open 52o on the BT than 76s UTG. You make your money in position, so play more pots in position and less out of it.


Value betting


This is probably the main difference between someone marginally beating the games and someone killing them. If there was a way for you to look at how much value you missed every month it would make you cry. The reason a lot of people struggle at low stakes is because no one ever folds. You can't bluff them, and you can't make TP or better every hand, so how do you win? STOP WAITING FOR TOP PAIR! If someone is calling you down w/ 3rd/4th pair every time, for ****'s sake don't bluff them, and start treating 2nd pair like it's top pair. This goes for flopped 2nd pair as well, but even more for a flopped overpair or TP that turns into 2nd pair by the river. If they've already called 2 bets on a 9 high board, the K on the river changes nothing, keep betting. Your absolute hand strength rarely matters. All that matters is whether you have the best hand often enough and whether they can feasibly call with worse often enough. An overcard doesnt have to be a scarecard if the action is such that it rarely hits there hand. It might make them less likely to call, but it can also make them bluff-catch more b/c overs are good cards to bluff. Do not assume, ever, that someone can't call with worse just because you wouldn't. Who cares if they fold every time? Ive never been given a bonus for showing down the best hand vs. winning w/o a showdown. At the very least they now have less information about you than if you check behind. Stop checking turns for pot control with TPTK against bad players. Just stop it. Why do you want to control the pot with the best hand? The days of not putting money in with 1 pair are gone, it's time to catch up. Check 2nd pair decent kicker for pot control, bet top pair every time you can. If you're making a thin value-bet, dont bet 1/3 of the pot. Besides being obvious, it takes away a lot of the value in betting. You might say "but they will call more often." Probably, but they wont call twice as often as they call 2/3 pot in most cases (which makes 2/3 pot bettter).


Bet sizing

Ill keep this brief, but it is definitely important. Im going to focus on the turn and river here. If you're playing well, you have a plan for the river before you do anything on the turn. If your plan is to bluff-shove certain rivers, you should size your turn bet so that you have very close to full-pot behind for the river, even if that means your turn bet is only 1/2 pot. The reason you are planning to bluff-shove the river is b/c you think you have more FE there (I hope), so maximize it. If you are planning to value-shove on the river, leave yourself a decent bit less than pot behind so it's easier for them to call. Although i really only touched on a couple situations, the general idea can be applied on all streets in all situations. Size your bets in a way that fits your plan for the hand, whether that plan is to put in 30bbs or 100 or 200.

Folding

Learn to fold! Just because someone is bad doesnt make TPTK the nuts (ya i know what i said earlier just shut up and listen!). If im in a pot with a fish, Im betting the hell out TP all the way of course, because TP IS the nuts when they are just calling. If they raise me at any point, it loses it's nuts status and I have to re-evaluate what kinds of hands they are likely to be raising. If a 50/5/0.25 min-raises your river bet, you can fold top pair pretty quickly. Part of value-betting enough is betting a lot of hands for value that you have to fold to a raise, and if you don't make those folds you're better off never value-betting in the first place. Just keep in mind that not all fish are created equal, and some of them will raise trash post-flop while some will call all the way with bottom pair and only raise the nuts. You make a lot of money in the long run by folding in the right spots.


3-betting

Everyone loves to 3-bet, and for good reason (its fun obv). But almost everyone is doing it completely wrong. I posted a hand in the **** thread the other day where i 3-bet A7o OTB vs a CO raise. This isn't standard and i had my reasons for doing it, but when someone questioned the 3-bet it got me thinking about the fact that if I had posted the hand and given myself 98s or QJs, no one would have said anything, when both of those 3-bets would have been worse than A7o IMO. When I'm 3-betting, I'm doing it with hands that are almost good enough for me to flat-call with but not quite, and obv also with hands that are too strong for me to flat-call. I think you show a much bigger profit by flatting hands like 98s and JTs in position than by 3-betting them to win a few bbs pre-flop. Out of the blinds I will 3-bet a lot of suited broadway cards vs someone who calls 3-bets really light and bluffs a lot/stacks off light post-flop. But I'm not turning them into a bluff, Im turning them into AK (stacking off when i flop a pair or big draw). The most absurdly horrible thing that I see from regs on a regular basis is squeezing SCs/gappers and off-suit connectors when a TAG opens and a fish calls in between. WHY?!?!!? These hands play so well in position in multiway pots, and the fish plays so badly post-flop! Why in the ****ing **** do you want to risk 16-18bbs to win 8bbs pre-flop when you can make so much more by flatting. Basically, if a hand makes a big profit post-flop by flatting, stop 3-betting it all the ****ing time. The air in your 3-betting range should consist of hands that are almost good enough to flat with, thus you aren't taking all the value away by 3-betting it and you can still win a decent pot b/c its better than having 32o or w/e.


Shot Taking/Fish Chasing

This is an important part of developing as a player, and I have always done quite a bit of it. Please understand that I am not talking about putting your whole roll on a 25/50 table. Say you're a 50NL player w/ a $1500 BR, and you see someone you know is a fish sitting at .5/1 or even 1/2. Don't be scared to sit at that table. When taking a shot i generally sit out or leave most if not all of my other tables to make sure I am giving my full concentration to that table. Note that you shouldnt do this every time you see someone who might not be a great reg sitting. Make sure it is someone bad enough to make the reward worth the risk. There are a few things to keep in mind when sitting at a table that is 2-4X your normal stakes.

A) You only need to cover the fish. If he has 60bbs, buy in for 60bbs. There is a good chance he is the only player there you have a significant edge against, anyway.

B) Make sure you have position on the fish- otherwise the $EV you gain isn't going to be worth the risk

C) Tighten up- there is no shame in this. You're playing over your bankroll so there is no reason to take unnecessary risks. You're there to stack the fish, not to flip coins with regs for >10% of your BR.

D) The regs are not playing back at you as much as you think- Seriously. They just aren't and you're being paranoid the majority of the time. Honestly though, assume that they are for a second. WTF are you gonna do about it? If you had the skill and the BR to combat their aggression you would be a regular in these stakes already, so don't waste your money trying. In all honesty, if the regs are spewing it's probably a good thing for you since you're playing tight like I told you to and will eventually have a big hand you can felt comfortably vs them, if the fish doesn't pay you first.

E) Leave when the fish leaves- if you want to wait for your BB fine but seriously if you're left w/ a table full of regs at 4X your normal stakes just fold everything but big hands, take your free FPPs and get out.

F) Leave when you get stacked- if you lose a stack for >10% of your BR, chances are you're gonna be slightly tilted, so let's not make it 20%. Even if you're not tilted, this isnt the best way to make your money back and you can still get coolered again. Just leave.


Life as a Pro

This profession makes it very easy to end up hating life. Even lots of ppl who are killing much bigger games than I play are miserable. There are obviously multiple reasons for this but a few common things that would make most people much happier are listed below.

A) It is bad (horrible) to keep 95% of your net worth in a poker account. If you have to do this to play the stakes you need to play to make a living, you shouldn't be playing poker for a living. There are exceptions to this, but mostly college students who don't need that much money to live so they can still function daily and be a pro while using most of their net worth as a BR.
B) Along the same lines as A, you don't need 100 buyins in your account to play cash. Take out half of it and put it in an INTEREST BEARING account. You can always put it back online if you need it, but to have it just sitting in your stars account is burning money.

C) You have to have balance. Find some sort of hobby, read books, go out with your friends regularly. If you are playing/browsing 2p2/studying poker 24/7 you are missing the forest for the trees. Online poker as a job lets you work on your own time, make great money, and do something you (hopefully) enjoy when you are working. If you don't have a life outside of the internet, you're doing it wrong.

D) Most people starting out as an online poker pro are young. We are lucky, We have time on our side if we choose to take advantage of it. We can watch the interest on our investments compound over and over again for a long time. Invest. Constantly hoarde your money away when you have a decent amount laying around that you dont need. Max out IRA's every year, when you start making substantial extra money look for good ways to invest it. You won't even miss that money now, and it will huge for you when you're older. This isn't to say you shouldn't spend any money, I spend a good bit on traveling and such and I greatly enjoy it. I have nice things. But Im investing as much as Im spending pretty much every month, because the quickest way to end up hating life is to spend every dime you make from poker and then go on a long downswing and end up broke, when you could have had enough put away for your life to not change a bit.

E) Realize and accept how much variance there is in poker, cause there's a ****ing lot of it. You can run bad for 100K hands or more, and it sucks bad. Of course it's rare to do so but CTS has said before that he has 100K samples w/ a negative ptbb. Downswings happen, bad beats happen, coolers happen. They happen every day to everybody. You arent special, and they don't happen more to you than they do to everyone else. This is why you shouldnt play poker professionally if you are depending on your results each week/month to live on, you have to have case money to make it through the rough patches.


I'll wrap it up pretty quickly cause this is already longer than any post should be. Life is about being happy, not about being rich (although is never hurts). One thing I feel lucky to have learned at a very young age is that time is far more valuable than money will ever be. Life is extremely short, and every year goes by faster than the one before. My goal for my poker career when I first started out was to 12-table HSNL all day and make a billion dollars every month and buy everything on the planet. Now, my goal is to put away enough money to have a passive income as fast as possible, and to play as much as I can without ever sacrificing anything from my personal life for poker. The extra time I get to do things I enjoy, namely spending time with my wife, friends, and family, is a far better reward for me than the money is.