You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
PRIMO 29/08/2010 - OFFICIAL SHOW THREAD
Afternoon all,
Lisa-Marie and I will be with you from eight o’clock this evening with live coverage of the Primo. If you’re playing in the tournament, good luck!
Obviously, you can ask for a specific hand to be shown by posting the ID number in this thread. We also welcome your comments and questions.
I’m sure LM will be along later to tell you what else is happening on the show and give you some ideas for discussion points, but here’s one debate I’d like to get going…
Maths vs tournament survival
This was brought up in a thread in The Poker Clinic about a hand in Thursday’s main event. (For reference, the thread is HERE)
And these are the key arguments presented by two of Sky Poker’s finest…
GREGHOGG:
Some players view tournament survival (i.e making a min cash) as essential to remain profitable players and therefore do not make "maths" calls that put their tournament lives at risk if they are clearly behind.
beaneh:
If you are only ever playing for the min cash then you will be a losing tournie player because all the money is up top, it's that simple. You cant min cash every other event.
Let’s keep this debate going! Where do you stand on the issue? Should every decision you make in a tournament be a simple mathematical consideration? Do you play for the win, or just aim to make the money? Do you make laydowns in tournaments that you would never make in a cash game?
Look forward to reading your responses.
Comments
Its clear to me that you must always play for the win , because as Beaneh rightly says the cash is all up top, especially in a big field like Primo.
Approaching the bubble usually offers the opportunity of picking up some easy chips, particularly if you can accurately identify the players on your table who are desperate to just cash.
Going towards the business end of a tourney, you need to accumulate as many as you can, as quite often you will hit a card dead spell, and may have to tighten up a bit.
I always keep a close eye on the leaderboard and set myself targets, firstly top ten, where the money starts to become worthwhile. The next is to final table, and often I am happy to quietly ladder up through 9th, 8th and 7th, knowing that even if I arrive at the FT short I still have every chance of winning it.
Tony
Tight aggressive is accepted as the way to play in the early stages of a tournament but it is also a good style to adopt post bubble in some circumstances. Aggression pre bubble can bring great rewards but sometimes circumstances make it right to be passive immediately pre bubble. If you don't cash you won't win the tournament and sometimes what you do post bubble is as vital to giving yourself a chance of winning the tournament.
Choosing to be passive at various stages of a tournament is absolutely fine as long as you can recognise the point you need to step it up a gear or two. Passive immediately post bubble is often a wise choice as a lot of players will be either relieved to have made it or panicked into making a move. Passive (tight aggressive) at this point allows things to re-settle and keeps you in the hunt. In the very late stages, laddering is a perfectly acceptable means to winning the tournament. Often your opponents will damage each other with no risk to yourself.
A simple philosophy I have always followed is that if you don't cash you don't win. If you don't get to a H2H position you can't possibly win it. Sometimes it needs a combination of activity and passivity to achieve both goals. A look at my Sharkscope graph (currently on ''super tilt'')will show that I definitely play to win but passivity has a part in my game and hopefully in winning any tournament.
I don't play the maths in tournaments. Decisions I make are based on my position on table/tournament and who the opponent is and their relative chipstack to mine. Always looking to progress, the hand I hold is a lesser consideration generally. (Warning this can and does lead to some spectacular crashes and cashes).
Yes, I too have some spectacular crashes before and after the bubble. From chip leader to out in two hands has been known !
But I know that crashing in the deeper stages of four out of five tourneys , and reaching the final table for a good cash in the fifth is more profitable than creeping into the money in all five.
When we play poker for fun only, the objective is to at least break even, and making a small profit is a bonus. Any larger wins are obviously nice, and playing generally tight in mtts to try to make a min cash does not mean that the big win wont come. But of course it is much less likely.
Therefore, if you are prepared to make big fold's in mtts you will not lose longterm and you will never go broke beacuse the min cashes pay for the next mtts. This is the point tikay made very well in the thread.
If, on the other hand, you don't mind not cashing because you are prepared to risk it all and make "maths" calls frequently you are relying on binking a big win to cover your costs. This will not always happen and you can soon find yourself being a losing player, allbeit a very good aggressive losing player. When the big wins do come you are laughing though, obviously.
I like playing poker without much risk and therefore i naturally favour the first approach...
However, i have attempted the other way of playing many times with varying degrees of success lol.
Just play the way you are most comfortable with is my advice and as long as you are at least break even or making a small profit over time, this is all that matters imo.
Anyone willing to take a phone call on the matter should post below!
A
I don't think our views differ, I just took 200 more words to say it than you did
Hi Lisa-Marie & James, have a great show!
On the subject of cashing -vs- winning - James, I recently watched the final table of the EPT Monaco tournament which seemed to be a classic case of CASH rather than WIN. Chouity just stomped all over the table as the other six folded their way up the cash ladder. Unusual to see a final table where so many seemed to be hoping for the cash ladder rather than the win.
That QQ fold by Karmazinas was rather interesting.
Ive never played a tournament to cash, ive always played to win. If you play to cash, surley your better on a Cash table or DYM?
Also i dont mind a phone call to go into more detail
I watched that too. Chouity was hitting everything and getting the hands. I think they were all amateurs and each rung on the ladder represented a huge amount of money. Surviving or going for the win relate to how much the money means to you as an individual. A player who has been in the final table shuffle many times and been successful will have more confidence in his/her ability to go for it and be successful.
Surely this is Beanh's point, so I'm not sure how you disagree with him.
Right i said above that i play to win. That is correct, although a point i think Elsadog made, to a newcommer a small cash can double a bankroll. This takes me back a little. Recently when my BR has been weak ive done DYM's and cash to build it up quicker, but tournaments on the side are the real deal for me.
So going back to my early days playing poker, i did play to cash, however after one win, i realised winning is far more important, hense my above statements. The money is bigger, the rewards are greater, the feeling is more electric.
However the pressure i put on myself to win everything i enter is quite tough, expessially when you do get down the the business end. Everytime i enter a tournament i enter it expecting to Final Table or win it. This puts the pressure on myself more so after ive cashed.
However in the problem with this is then because ive put this pressure on myself i make silly little mistakes, often before the cash to so that i have something to build on afterwards.
If you are an inexperienced player, chances are you will have qualified for one of the main event competitions via a satellite, or a satellite then a semi-final.
Your first and main objective is to reach the cash bubble, for a substantial profit, then go for it.
I have only played the Primo five times and cashed once, 1st August finished 12th for £127, not a bad profit on £1.50 entry, at the bubble, 52 left in, I was reasonably safe in 42nd and folded KK out of position, as the shorties were pushing all-in with any rag A, btw A came on flop, after the bubble I could play normally and managed to reach the final two tables. Even the bubble was £83 which for any player not on a large bankroll is a good ROI.
Ok so shortys shove with any rag ace. OK so you fold KK. Ok. Now, onw thing here ive learnt from non-tournament play but can be adopted in tournament bubble sitations, now i dont know you posistion here im guessing UTG.
Ok to we're UTG with KK, say we open shove, (DYM style) do these shorties then risk their lives on A9 or less. I dont think so. OK so if they do and an Ace comes out then oh well we got our money in as good favorite and we can still double up again to cash and even go onto win. If no one calls we pick up the blinds happy days.
I fail to see the logic of folding KK OOP on the bubble of a big tournament unless we are say BB and theres and all in and at least 1 caller before us.
Giddens replied to two of my posts, 1 regarding the above and one regarding ljamesl's play the other night. I'd imagine his replies were pretty much in synch with your poker ethos James as he said you should play to win always. And I'm now a believer too. If I get through the satellite, I'm playing for the £3K. £70 kinda pales in comparison.
When I first started playing I probably had the same mindset. If I had a good run playing sit and goes and small tournies I would treat myself to an entry into a big one, or try to satellite in. And I would be over the moon with any cash.
And there is certainly nothing wrong with that. But I still believe that changing my strategy to playing for the win was vital in starting me off to being able to make a profit from the game.
All you guys posting on here that they are playing to just cash are the people I will be looking for at bubble time, if I havent already crashed !
Good luck all
lml / james
interesting question most good players look for the lower stacks near the bubble
i bealive every player starts a tournament thinking they can win it as anybody can get lucky against any better player
i also bealive it depends on the tourny as bounty hunters tend to be a lot loser play all the way through
as for folding a preuim hand just to cash me personally i wouldnt id rather go in and have a chance of the double up for the higher cash
if i lose i move on
the primo is the one i havernt won yet so good luck me tonite
allways enjoy primo and the show
I fully agree with this, although im one of these people who will try and satellite in the satellite will be well within my BR. I treat it if i get in as ive won the buy in and losing doesnt matter but winning is key. OK i have a very poor sucsess rate of satellites, but then thats part of poker. I just cant grasp the set up of them and the looser opponents.
I've got 3x chips of shorties, if they shove with A? and hit, they double-up, level with me. I'm back in trouble.
Best to pass and wait for the bubble, then you can loosen up. BTW if I'm short, I shove with any A? at bubble.
42 runners, 8 qualify, final 9, three shorties including me,
I'm in BB with AQ (5300 chips), blinds are 600/1200, UTG (shortie 5800 chips) min raises,
all fold back to me, hmmmm, min raise UTG smells of mid pair, correct JJ, I shove all-in,
flop comes 3 A Q, wooohooo two pair, turn is J for set, good night, river is blank.
Should have just called to see flop, then shoved when I hit, but UTG may have hero called.
Totally agree with theneons
Only one hand at this point can beat me. Im never folding unless i have an idea that one of these players has AA.
Your effecitley saying that after the river i have a mugs end straight flush to Q but ill fold it anyways incase my opponent has AK of the same suit to be tyhe only had that can beat me.
This is clear to me that you are playing with scared money. I agree if your short shove with any ace. If im short and i think i can get a shove through ill shovew with any two. I lost a deepie the other day, i shoved with 62os on the bubble because i thought i could get it through. I didnt and i lost. I moved on, but if i got it through i had a whole circle to find a spot to double up my stack with 1.5BB extra.
Secondly it is different because Any pair and AK is beating me, im starting with 15th best hand. So your telling me youll fold KK but shove with AQ. Hmmm a little odd dont we think.