Some Snyder Questions

[jmbreslin 0]

So I've been experimenting with Snyder's PTF strategy in MTTs lately and the more I think about some of the stack advice the more I question some of the plays. Here are a couple that come to mind:1) Stack of 21-30BB ("short"), in EP, push-reraise 77-AA, AJ+. At the lower end of this range I can understand the push-reraise because a standard reraise will commit you to the pot. But there is a pretty big difference between push-reraising 21BB and push-reraising 30BB - assuming a standard raise in front, pushing 25-30BB can be overkill, no?For example, suppose blinds are at 50-100 and you have 2500 chips, holding 88 in UTG+1. UTG makes a standard raise to 300 (let's assume he has a similar stack to ours and isn't overly tight or loose). If you push over him he's likely only going to call with a hand that either has us dominated or at best a coinflip fav. Why not reraise to, say, 900, which allows us some room to fold if he pushes back or escape if necessary on the flop?2) Stack of 21-24BB, in MP, open push 77-AA, AJ+, KQs, QJs, JTs. Again, seems like overkill open-pushing such a wide range from EP with this stack size. You're not in good shape against the range of hands that will call such a push. So why not make a standard raise, giving you some room to maneuver and allowing you to escape without huge damage to your stack?On a more general note, what kind of experience do you have with applying Snyder's strategy to online MTTs?

[Sheiky 0]

Never heard of the guy or his book, and the stuff you've said that he advises in strat leads me to belive it's a pretty awful book.

[copernicus 0]

use the book as a paperweight till winter, then burn it to save a penny or two on your heating bill.

[Nopair3high 0]

I think that this system assumes that shoving with that wide range of hands for 20 -30 big bets becomes profitable because the pressure it puts on your opponents to play for a large percentage of their stack (or their whole stack) will result in people folding hands like KQ, QJ, A 10, etc. and pairs below 99 probably. The problem I find with doing that particularly with the huge online MTT is that too often you run into players who will not fold these and the variance level becomes very high there because you spent a lot of your time coin flipping for your whole stack or a large chunk of it. I like your line of thinking in both those situations better.

[jmbreslin 0]

Never heard of the guy or his book, and the stuff you've said that he advises in strat leads me to belive it's a pretty awful book.

Seriously? The book is pretty well known...That's pretty harsh, cop. I think there is definitely some worthwhile stuff in the book

[jmbreslin 0]

I think that this system assumes that shoving with that wide range of hands for 20 -30 big bets becomes profitable because the pressure it puts on your opponents to play for a large percentage of their stack (or their whole stack) will result in people folding hands like KQ, QJ, A 10, etc. and pairs below 99 probably. The problem I find with doing that particularly with the huge online MTT is that too often you run into players who will not fold these and the variance level becomes very high there because you spent a lot of your time coin flipping for your whole stack or a large chunk of it. I like your line of thinking in both those situations better.

Actually that sums it up pretty well. I've been experimenting with the strategy in the .10 360 turbos and 1.10 45-turbos and although I've had some success in the 360's I've been busting out of the 45's repeatedly (I previously had an ROI of about 50% through 200+ of those).It seems to me that his strategy is basically a home-run preflop strategy when your stack is below 50BB. It is designed to put maximum pressure on your opponents and reduce the amount of postflop play. Over the long term it would probably result in a much lower ITM but a higher percentage of deep finishes than an alternative strategy.

[copernicus 0]

Seriously? The book is pretty well known...That's pretty harsh, cop. I think there is definitely some worthwhile stuff in the book

I dont, obviously! If there were ever a book put out to intentionally instill bad play, Id vote for this one! (and after Hellmuth's book that says a lot).It cant win at low stakes, because you will be in far too many races against players who can't lay a hand down, and it cant win at medium/high stakes because it is so glaringly obvious. I think reading it/using it will set you back, not improve your game.His BJ books were similarly bad.

[jmbreslin 0]

Well, I'm not entirely convinced yet that there is nothing valuable about it. I'm going to work on using the basic framework as a starting point and modifying and adapting where appropriate (such as the points I mentioned in my OP) and see where it gets me. I'm basically a STT player learning MTT strategy, so I need somewhere to start. Until now I've been floundering trying to apply STT strategy to MTTs.

[copernicus 0]

I'm basically a STT player learning MTT strategy, so I need somewhere to start. Until now I've been floundering trying to apply STT strategy to MTTs.

Thats because they are two different animals and there is little similarity between strategies for the two, at least until the blinds get huge and/or bubble/final table. Because you play so many more hands, there are so many more levels in an MTT then in a STT, and the payout structure is much steeper, accumulating chips dominates early MTT strategy, whereas survival dominates STT strategy.Thus MTT strategy is essentially cash game strategy for the first few rounds, except for somewhat tighter opening standards (because stacks are never super-deep in a tourney limiting your implied odds). To put it a little more directgly, STT strategy is to play few hands, with most of the action pre-flop and taking narrow edges for bigger pots, while (early) MTT strategy is to play as many pots as possible, with most of the action post flop and playing pot control.This highlights the problem with Snyder and the PTF. The PTF theory can be expressed as "Fast MTTs degenerate into STT characteristics very quickly so play them as if they are STTs throughout". It is a logically appealing approach, and comforting especially to those in your situation, where post flop play is a minor part of the game, but it is a losing strategy imo.

[Sheiky 0]

Any book that advises open shoving a 24BB stack with JTs is just retarded and like Copernicus said will probably do you more harm than good.

[Sheiky 0]

Well, I'm not entirely convinced yet that there is nothing valuable about it. I'm going to work on using the basic framework as a starting point and modifying and adapting where appropriate (such as the points I mentioned in my OP) and see where it gets me. I'm basically a STT player learning MTT strategy, so I need somewhere to start. Until now I've been floundering trying to apply STT strategy to MTTs.

Harrington on Hold em?????Don't overthink yourself, STTs, especialy turbos are basically playing a video game where there is nearly always a correct strategy and the style of play is incredibly methodical. In MTTs, there is a lot more acctual poker involved, stop thinking about what Snyder says and think for yourself, you know how to play poker, you know the basics of shoving ranges and stuff, MTT strategy can obviously go a lot more in depth than that, but winning at low stakes MTTs isn't rocket science.

[jmbreslin 0]

This highlights the problem with Snyder and the PTF. The PTF theory can be expressed as "Fast MTTs degenerate into STT characteristics very quickly so play them as if they are STTs throughout". It is a logically appealing approach, and comforting especially to those in your situation, where post flop play is a minor part of the game, but it is a losing strategy imo.

That's an interesting way of describing the strategy - it does seem like an odd combination of MTT and STT strategies, or at least he perhaps over-emphasizes the STT part.Your post was very helpful, thank you.

[jmbreslin 0]

Harrington on Hold em?????

Read 'em - don't get me wrong, HoH is required reading for tourney strategy but I find the books very high-level (meaning broad and general, not above my head). What I liked about Snyder was that he provided a more concrete approach to MTTs, which is helpful for someone just starting out with MTTs.