![]() |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Note than for Strategy 1, this strategy is aborted once the 'early' stages end.
__________________
"Most of the money you'll win at poker comes not from the brilliance of your own play, but from the ineptitude of your opponents." |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I started out with Strategy 1. It always worked well for me and has always led to me getting very deep in tournaments. I've recently started dabbling with the second strategy. It works, but not as well as I like. I think part of it, it doesn't fit with my playing style so it's hard to for me to use that style well. Basically, I was looking to improve my game, so I figured trying out a different way of playing could help me improve my play when I switch back to what I'm more comfortable with.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Because my schedule is messed up, I can’t commit large blocks of time to anything and so I don’t play many tournaments and when I do they are usually 3 or 5 table SNGs. In these environments strategy #1 works great until the ft. At the ft there is generally one or two people who have large stacks because they are lucky donkeys and they can’t wait to double me up the first time I get a hand (assuming the poker gods didn’t decide I need to suffer). Usually after that hand is shown the rest of the table puts me as a tight rock and that image is good for at least a couple steals.
Then I bubble out and get pissed I wasted that time in a tournament and not a ring game. Or I am clip leader and some disaster strikes (one of the kids wakes up, dog pukes on the floor, etc) and by the time things settle down I have blinded out and I am pissed I wasted that time in a tournament and not a ring game. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Players like Phil Hellmuth use strategy #1.
Players like Daniel Negreanu invariable end up using strategy #2. I'm not a tournament player, but if I try I can do very well in tournaments (I get impatient sometimes, which is my downfall in those things). I've used both strategies and have experienced limited success with both, albiet a small sample size. Like JD says, you have to adapt to your table and the tournament that you're playing, but I usually find that if I'm at a table full of weak players, it's best to see a lot of cheap flops and crack someone who wont fold top pair; play it more like a cash game, minus the aggression unless you have a big hand. I think the first strategy fails to exploit the weakness of some of the horrible players, but both are viable obviously. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Remembr though - we're talking EARLY in a tourney. Exploiting weaknesses usually isn't even worth it for 75 chips (as in my example above). I think you might be surprised how tight even the loose guys are EARLY on in big tourneys. There are guys who will play EVERY flop with ANY two, but Negreanu is not one of them.
|
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|