tournament skill levels

i use "math boy's patience factor calculator for no limit hold'em tournaments - enhanced by pokerkhan.com". it will figure out the patience factor and the skill level of tournaments by the blind levels. the skill level falls between 1 to 20.

my question is, what is considered a "good" skill level for a live tournament?

i was considering heading down to brantford for one of their weekly tourneys, but i've heard their tournaments are not good. for example, their $150 knock out has a patience factor of 6.75 and a skill level of 4. does this mean that 4 is not "good"?

where do you draw the line on "good" skill level tournaments? 5? 6? higher?

Comments

  • I thought math boy's only went to 6?
  • is this suggesting vekked won't final table as high of percentage of turbos vs non turbo?
  • Hobbes wrote: »
    I thought math boy's only went to 6?

    originally it did. there was an addition to it where it can calculate the weighted patience factor and weighted skill level in regards to the total number of entries in the tournament. it also altered the skill levels adding 7-20.

    does that mean everything 6+ is really good? is that the cutoff from "good" structures?

    is 5 or 4 that bad?
  • darbday wrote: »
    is this suggesting vekked won't final table as high of percentage of turbos vs non turbo?

    vekked final tables all.
  • trigs wrote: »
    vekked final tables all.
    oh no i thought it was refering to blind level times....
  • trigs wrote: »
    does that mean everything 6+ is really good? is that the cutoff from "good" structures?

    is 5 or 4 that bad?

    I'd need to look at it a bit more. Is there a link?
  • can't find a link with the weighted version on it (only the old one with only 6 skill levels). however, i can email you the excel file if you give me your address.

    i did happen to come upon the following while trying to search for the link:

    Patience Factor - Skill level - comment
    1.49 or less - 0 - crap shoot
    1.50 to 2.99 - 1 - still very fast, pray for good cards
    3.00 to 4.49 - 2 - very fast but good for learning speed play
    4.50 to 5.99 - 3 - fast, excellent for good speed players
    6.00 to 7.49 - 4 - medium fast, requires more poker skill
    7.50 to 9.99 - 5 - medium slow, requires much more poker skill
    10.00 and up - 6 - slow, highly skilled players only

    however, it does not factor in higher than level 6.

    EDIT: here's a .pdf of it at least if that helps.
  • trigs wrote: »
    can't find a link with the weighted version on it (only the old one with only 6 skill levels). however, i can email you the excel file if you give me your address.

    i did happen to come upon the following while trying to search for the link:

    Patience Factor - Skill level - comment
    1.49 or less - 0 - crap shoot
    1.50 to 2.99 - 1 - still very fast, pray for good cards
    3.00 to 4.49 - 2 - very fast but good for learning speed play
    4.50 to 5.99 - 3 - fast, excellent for good speed players
    6.00 to 7.49 - 4 - medium fast, requires more poker skill
    7.50 to 9.99 - 5 - medium slow, requires much more poker skill
    10.00 and up - 6 - slow, highly skilled players only

    however, it does not factor in higher than level 6.

    EDIT: here's a .pdf of it at least if that helps.
    ya...see i think this throws players off....many pros love 'crap shoot' because there is actually alot of skill and edge to be had in the bingos. if you use this chart to avoid those games i think you do your learning a diservice....and i think that there is money to be made in them because people see it this way...

    turbos just require a different type of adjusment..


    and also the best you can do is makes the most +ev play...i don't think patience factor is actually in the formula...its more old school

    not that its not a factor completely but i think that its way overrated by old school thinkers.

    wrong?
  • darbday wrote: »

    turbos just require a different type of adjusment..


    I seem to recall a conversation in regards to this...you were adamant that there is no difference..??
  • DennisG wrote: »
    I seem to recall a conversation in regards to this...you were adamant that there is no difference..??
    it was about needing to call a shove with ak in a turbo more so than a non turbo because we need chips fast...and because the early game is not as important as the later game....the edge really makes no difference...

    its not that it doesn't its that there is no difference..but most players need to see that there is no difference to truly understand whats going on...

    and most would do better i believe to think that there is zero difference.
  • Patience factor is very important. In a skill level 0/1 i'm prob open shoving pretty wide taking a 30-70 dog. In a level 6, I'm not going broke with AK early.

    For me it really allows me to judge how wide to open / stack off with preflop
  • Hobbes wrote: »
    Patience factor is very important. In a skill level 0/1 i'm prob open shoving pretty wide taking a 30-70 dog
    this is what i mean though......how are we taking a 30/70 dog?
  • @darbday:
    so you're saying that this whole skill level assessment is pointless and that a skill level 3 or 4 tournament is just as "good" a structure as a 6+?
  • Hobbes wrote: »
    Patience factor is very important. In a skill level 0/1 i'm prob open shoving pretty wide taking a 30-70 dog. In a level 6, I'm not going broke with AK early.

    For me it really allows me to judge how wide to open / stack off with preflop

    ^this.

    in the wsop main event, if i have AK early i'm not going to go broke with it (most likely) because there is so much play. early in a turbo, i'm pushing AK hard.
  • trigs wrote: »
    ^this.

    in the wsop main event, if i have AK early i'm not going to go broke with it (most likely) because there is so much play. early in a turbo, i'm pushing AK hard.
    this is not so much because of the blind structure but because people open their shoving ranges mistakenly too wide...

    blind structure counts but i think ranges and stack sizes are way more important considerations....

    edit: many times we come to the same shove or call conclusion but for a different reason i mean...


    just waitin on the big boys to make me look retarded...either way im right or i learn.....winning!

    also that with such a big field and strong field...all in pre early with ak...may actually be a good idea......did i just go 180?
  • trigs wrote: »
    can't find a link with the weighted version on it (only the old one with only 6 skill levels). however, i can email you the excel file if you give me your address.
    I remember the spreadsheet where the skill level went beyond 6 as well and I believe we had this discussion a year or more ago. Pretty sure I had the spreadsheet as well but misplaced it somehow. Can you email it to me trigs? my email is my username on here, add poker to it @gmail.com. Thanks....


    as Darb says, it doesn't really matter how "good" or "bad" the structure is as long as you adjust your play accordingly.. However the better structure favors the better player as it gives one more time to "suck" the bad player dry... More of a luck element in the turbo...
  • compuease wrote: »
    I remember the spreadsheet where the skill level went beyond 6 as well and I believe we had this discussion a year or more ago. Pretty sure I had the spreadsheet as well but misplaced it somehow. Can you email it to me trigs? my email is my username on here, add poker to it @gmail.com. Thanks....

    sent.

    EDIT: wait, [email][/email]? sent as well heh.
  • got it, thx.
  • I think darb's point (and I agree to a point) is that many random live players will be making pretty awful mistakes with shortstacks, while they might be playing reasonable with deeper stacks because they're more accustomed to live cash. I think from a $ point of view at lower stakes live stuff the structure isn't going to make or break the value of most tournaments unless you're pretty bad short-stacked yourself. If you're a super sicko cash player or if they buyin was really high and thus had a tougher field in general then you might want to avoid faster structures since it diminishes your edge over other people who are similarly skilled.
  • Vekked wrote: »
    I think darb's point (and I agree to a point)....... If you're a super sicko cash player or if they buyin was really high and thus had a tougher field in general then you might want to avoid faster structures since it diminishes your edge over other people who are similarly skilled.

    What ever vekked agreed with is actually what i meant...

    what i am also saying is that turbo requires a different skillset...different than longer structure which involve decisions more like a deeperstack cash game..

    alot of people think you need to build a deepstack early in order to win a turbo, much like people think the secret to rebuys is to bust a bunch of times and load your table with money or until you get a big stack taking marginal spots.

    These thoughts stop people from seeing where the edge in these games lie...

    until they don't see a turbo as a luckfest they will always fold to much and shove too loose.


    You missed our thread on this vekked ill try to dig up the link...maybe dennis can....


    Anyways.....so what your sayin is i need to 12 table all night tonight?:confused:
  • darbday wrote: »
    What ever vekked agreed with is actually what i meant...

    what i am also saying is that turbo requires a different skillset...different than longer structure which involve decisions more like a deeperstack cash game..

    alot of people think you need to build a deepstack early in order to win a turbo, much like people think the secret to rebuys is to bust a bunch of times and load your table with money or until you get a big stack taking marginal spots.

    These thoughts stop people from seeing where the edge in these games lie...

    until they don't see a turbo as a luckfest they will always fold to much and shove too loose.


    You missed our thread on this vekked ill try to dig up the link...maybe dennis can....


    Yeah, that discussion started with that AK hand and wanting to get chips early in a turbo vs a non turbo.

    but our conversation in person in regards to turbos vs non turbos was that you didn't feel there was a difference in strategies. You basically play each hand as it is. Stack size is what it is this hand, and blinds are what they are...You play each hand as an individual. To this, I guess I can't disagree..

    But I am torn... overall, I still feel like we need to approach the whole tournament slightly more aggressive. We are not going to see as many hands overall in a turbo vs. non...so we aren't going to have as many good hands in position, or premiums throughout the game...in turn, I feel like I need to open up the ranges some to account for the lack of hands we are going to see..

    I can definitely see (myself, as it has been shown I can be a spewtard shorter stacked) making more mistakes in these with open shoves.(working on that :P )
  • DennisG wrote: »
    Yeah, that discussion started with that AK hand and wanting to get chips early in a turbo vs a non turbo.

    but our conversation in person in regards to turbos vs non turbos was that you didn't feel there was a difference in strategies. You basically play each hand as it is. Stack size is what it is this hand, and blinds are what they are...You play each hand as an individual. To this, I guess I can't disagree..

    But I am torn... overall, I still feel like we need to approach the whole tournament slightly more aggressive. We are not going to see as many hands overall in a turbo vs. non...so we aren't going to have as many good hands in position, or premiums throughout the game...in turn, I feel like I need to open up the ranges some to account for the lack of hands we are going to see..

    I can definitely see (myself, as it has been shown I can be a spewtard shorter stacked) making more mistakes in these with open shoves.(working on that :P )
    i hope im not being redundant but i agree thats what it was about but only that we still do the equity math to decide to play a hand...we don't shove until we are first short enough and we take only what we decide is the most +ev play. the clock is not in the forumula.

    you might say ill shove A7+ instead of A8+ because the blinds are up next hand....but if A8 is +ev cutoff then A7 is not +ev and doesn't help us win....we can only make +ev or not +ev plays in poker there is no other quantifier with respect to the cev game.

    its there but the adjustment is slight and doesn't change the strategy which is to make the most plus +ev play as often as possible...

    however because others play so incorrectly usually by playing too loose and shoving too deep and too wide the actual game play does change. Others play too tight.
  • In a fast tournament I'll shove J10 for 11 BB's otb and get called by K9 from the BB. In a slow tournament I'll shove J10 for 11 BB's otb and get BB to "wait for a better spot" and fold K9 from the BB.

    All we have to worry about is relative stacks and relative positions. Don't worry about the structure much at all, there's no way to force +EV shove spots to come in superturbos. The guys in the ongame 3 min turbo's who shove their 75 BB stack in early and fold their 4 BB stack late from the BB deserve to be shot. The guys at the casino who ship in the full double buy 10k stack in an 80 dollar rebuy at blinds 25/50 to build a stack are retards. All skill level and patience factor means is how long does it take for the structure to force you to gamble hard preflop, it's not something you should ever adjust your hand ranges after unless you're doing like a cute 3bet fold right before blinds go up and dip your stack below 30 BB's or something
Sign In or Register to comment.