Sit N Go Strategies against good players…
There is no shortage of advice on how to play a sit’n’go tournament. When I first began to play online I read everything I could about how to play SNGs, generally the advice was indistinguishable. Play tight early, pick weak players to steal blinds from in the middle stages, and open up the aggression in the late stages. Adhering to this basic formula was enough for me to profit at low limit SNGs. In fact, on certain nights at low limits you can play only premium starting hands for the first few blind levels and find yourself 3 or 4 handed before you even had to worry about your M.
If one searches online today they will find much of the same strategy that was being advocated a year ago. Further, the majority of SNG advice, that I have found, remains specific to $5-$20 level. The games seem to be stratified using buy-ins because the skill level, it is assumed, should be relative to the buy-in.
I have played quite a few SNGs at these lower levels and find that at $5 and $10 games you will get about 1 or 2 opponents who play well. At the $20 and $30 level you may have 3 to 4 (this of course depends on the day, time and site).
I would like to query the forum on how to play when you sit down with 10 players who know what they are doing. Players who do not, in general, get the majority of their chips in during the early stages on draws, players who do not over value A-J from first position 10 ways, etc… In this game you are not losing many, if any players at all, during the early blind levels.
I am referring to the home games I often play in. Home games, where each of these players are used to being ITM playing SNGs about 50% of the time. However, with 10 players who understand the game well, it is unlikely that any individual player can expect to consecutively win. A player can go from finishing first to finishing last from game to game. This, in my opinion, is a much different game than the SNGs we play online.
Having said that, the strategy to win must also be distinctive.
So, I query, how do you play these games, how do the strategies differ, what does it take to win consecutively against opponents that are better than the donkey’s we love to prey on in cyberspace?
I appreciate that there will not be a cookie-cutter approach similar to that advocated for low-limit online SNGs. But, I am interested in learning how other players adjust to these games – where skill of the players at the table require more attention and proficiency than usual.
If one searches online today they will find much of the same strategy that was being advocated a year ago. Further, the majority of SNG advice, that I have found, remains specific to $5-$20 level. The games seem to be stratified using buy-ins because the skill level, it is assumed, should be relative to the buy-in.
I have played quite a few SNGs at these lower levels and find that at $5 and $10 games you will get about 1 or 2 opponents who play well. At the $20 and $30 level you may have 3 to 4 (this of course depends on the day, time and site).
I would like to query the forum on how to play when you sit down with 10 players who know what they are doing. Players who do not, in general, get the majority of their chips in during the early stages on draws, players who do not over value A-J from first position 10 ways, etc… In this game you are not losing many, if any players at all, during the early blind levels.
I am referring to the home games I often play in. Home games, where each of these players are used to being ITM playing SNGs about 50% of the time. However, with 10 players who understand the game well, it is unlikely that any individual player can expect to consecutively win. A player can go from finishing first to finishing last from game to game. This, in my opinion, is a much different game than the SNGs we play online.
Having said that, the strategy to win must also be distinctive.
So, I query, how do you play these games, how do the strategies differ, what does it take to win consecutively against opponents that are better than the donkey’s we love to prey on in cyberspace?
I appreciate that there will not be a cookie-cutter approach similar to that advocated for low-limit online SNGs. But, I am interested in learning how other players adjust to these games – where skill of the players at the table require more attention and proficiency than usual.
Comments
In the low-limit SNG's, to be successful, you really need only play your cards. As you said, playing premium hands will usually result in an ITM finish.
However, with the home game SNG"s that you're describing (which I am often part of), you are playing position and the other player as well. For example, the last few times we played I remember a few hands
1. Beanie pushed me off the better hand with J-high (at his place - knowing I hadn't hit the 8-high board)
2. Mario pushing you off KK on the river that gave two aces and a flush possibility, when he had 10 high
3. Mandy trapping me with AA vs. my AQ
4. Me getting Johnnie to put all his chips on the line pre-flop with 77 against my KK
5. Me perceiving weakness on a SB raise pre-flop after you'd choked.
Now, as I'm sure you're going to notice, at least a few of these hands ended in bad beats where the trapper /aggressor / hero etc. got burned (#4&5). Well, "That's poker", but 9 times out of ten, it ends up that the person who played it well, wins. Notice I didn't say the best hand in this case (that would be back to the LL SNG's). But, I think that when you're against a higher talent pool, the "winner" will be the player who gets their opponents to make the bigger mistakes in game, and avoid their own mistakes. You do this by knowing your opponent, reading what they do, and at the same time, trying to make them err in their reads of you. Meanwhile, at LL SNGS, their mistake is usually made when they click "Register".
Mark
I think that this phsycology also plays into it. It's too easy to go all-in, blow all of your chips off and start another $5 game online. I KNOW that players will play this strategy. Looking at time investment v.s. ROI, either double up quick by getting lucky, or get out and start another. They don't want to play good poker to end up 1 or 2 outside of the moola. They want to get ahead early or get out and start another.
You won't get that in a home game because there is no other game to go to that will start right away.
1 all that being said, I overplayed AA and went out in the first hand of a live SnG today
I think in general most players we play with, although they are all capable of switching it up, generally stay within their dominant style so knowing those styles and developing the best approach to combating those styles is the real question...and I have no answer.....because regardless of what we do Mario will suck us out on the river 9 times outta 10
1. Get off to a good start
I've noticed that of the 3 money spots, only 1 is usually a comeback. Generally, those who are able to get ahead early (either by "starting quicker" or simply getting lucky) make the money.
2. Target the weaker opponents
When most of your opposition is good, pick on those you are dominating. "Weaker" doesn't necessarily mean skill, it takes the situation into account. A player who is normally a better player than you but is distracted or recovering from a bad beat is weaker right now, so pounce on them. Stronger players can actually be players you usually dominate, but are "in the zone" right now, and should just be avoided (even if you know you'd outplay them every other game). Also, being OOP makes an opponent weaker (although how weak depends on their skill).
3. Make fewer mistakes
Sounds pretty simple, but with knowledgable opponents, this is key. If you are all generally playing properly, making decent reads, good bluffs, etc., making 1 less mistake than somebody can be the difference.
As DrTyore stated, your reads become so much more important, as you are no longer playing your cards, but instead, your opponent. Many of the posts about heads up hands between CPF members are not about how someone made a mistake playing their cards, but rather that their read was wrong.
I believe that you're giving him the exact opposite advice that he is asking for. That is the standard lower limit online sng advice against a group of players who are poor on average. To play well against players who all enact these strategies you need to vary your game and take advantage of their early passive tendencies.
To Mark, Moose, Big E
I understand that you play your cards, their cards, and what your opponent is likely putting you on, and what your opponent thinks you are putting them on - wash, rinse and repeat to the Nth level.
I am fairly effective at doing this online, but struggle more in real life.
I think I am effective at this online for a number of reasons:
1. I can see the whole table from above – I find the overhead view gives you a grasp of the flow of the table. And I find that visually the flow of the game is easy to identify online. When something disrupts the flow (for example the guy who has been on auto-fold for 3 orbits throws in a big bet) it is easily recognizable.
2. I can take specific notes on players and log them. I wish I could put a note on Trevor’s head saying – will open raise from any position with low suited connecting cards and up – will bet ½ pot if missed – ¾ pot on a draw – will check a big made hand. This player will fold if re-raised ½ pot back – If calls – proceed with caution.
HOWEVER, I don’t know that most players in a live game would appreciated sticky notes on their foreheads. Too bad.
3. I don’t generally play online if I am drinking. Good rule, learned the hard way.
4. I am not friends with those I play with online – so I don’t get social.
In real life all of these things work against me. I generally see these games as social, and as such, I pay less attention to the game at hand and more attention to the conversation or some of the unusual antics at the table (if you have played with Mark you know the antics to which I am referring). I also generally enjoy a few beverages.
I know of players, this applies to any card game, who can remember exactly every move their opponent has made. I know the pros can have a full conversation with someone at one end of the table but pick up on every detail for the entire table. Online this is simple – In real life it is much different.
BUT – at least I realize all this.
(And Eric – Mario often sucks me out well before the river – but I don’t let bad beats bother me anymore)
To Trevor:
Great advice and yes you are usually one of those players at my table.
I agree about the good start – and often I too think it will be necessary – and as you are well aware I am willing to play a lot of hands early that give me good odds with good draws – because we play with better blind levels than online I will usually play more of a cash game style during the early stages – hoping to get an early lead. Whereas online, I prefer to save my chips as a few blind steals in the 4 th level are as profitable as playing early.
Making fewer mistakes unfortunately has a causal link to the previous stated variables – social setting and beverages
To Water –
Yes you are right – an online SNG only takes about an hour – so if I hit 4th I have only invested about 40 mins or so. In real life – I don’t want to play for 3 hours to get 4th – I would rather be playing in the next one, cash game or online.
I definitely identify this as a weakness.
To GTA
I have never played SNGs above the $50 mark, primarily because I think it is smart to not play in a game that will impact your psyche based on buy-in. I don’t mind playing a $100 MTT deepstack because of the duration, potential payout, and increased payout spots. I don’t mind sitting down in a cash game with a few hundred either. But SNGs force action quickly – since I don’t believe I can accept that mentally I have stayed away from those games.
(I would link the money to tangible things – and missing the money in a couple $200 SNGs, I would start thinking about that J.Crew camel top coat, the Prada wallet or that Burberry sweater, that could be individually purchased for that $400.)
Having said that, I am quite willing to learn from those who are playing at that level. Thanks for the input.
To Jeff –
You are very perceptive – no wonder you have so many chips in the WPT finale – I really wish I had played my 6s
To bdiddy69 –
GTA is correct.
See, now what other guy on here thinks like this? Sure, equate the $ to goods, but I'm thinking more like "Xbox 360 / Four cases of beer / 5 lap dances"
Hmm... or maybe I'm just alluding to this weekend.
Mark
I hope these are really your notes ... but you're right. That's exactly how I play, my game is an open book to you!
I'm not sure this has much to do with "against better players" but is instead a strategy difference due to the style of game. I'd assume you would adjust playing online with donkies between a normal SnG and either a turbo or deep-stack SnG, regardless of the players skill, simply due to structure differences (blinds, starting chips, # of payouts, etc.).
And I know you would like if I actually played that way against you
Yeah, I've struggled over the $50 level myself oniline, but for me it's more like, "I just lost $500 playing online, that's almost an entire 10 20 buy-in live
Kitchener-Waterloo, Ontario!
Woot- woot!
Wait, now I'm confused, does Mark play these or not??
Remind me again... are you playin RC2? Cuz it's ON LIKE DONKEY KONG!!!
Mark
Totally agree. In general I avoid putting my money in situations where the skill is high but dammit KW poker is just too much fun.
I am just the opposite of you. I find it easier to stay in the flow of the game live. Sometimes I get distracted and miss a hand or two but online I miss far more when the kid wakes up, the cat is hungry, the wife wants the garbage put out, you need a beer and so on. Online I tend to see my seat in much more isolation than I do live. I find it much harder to ignore my cards and play my opponent online.
One of the best things about the 4 game WPT series was the chance to play the same people over and over again. I was so pissed that I went out early 2/3 sngs because I missed the opportunity to work on my strategy for the final game. And no I can't just watch. I need to be in the game. One interesting thing I found was that position relative to certain people was much more important than I thought it would be. When we play at Bristol it is not nearly as much a factor because tables break up, people get moved and you don't spend nearly as much time in a good or bad position relative to people.