59 replies to this topic

[TJ_Eckleburg]

This is a very long post, over 1300 words, and it won't hurt my feelings if you don't want to read it. If you do read it, I welcome assenting or dissenting opinions, especially from Smash. From what I've read of his posts I really respect his opinion, but everyone is definitely welcome to comment. It's all about the system that I use in multi-table tournaments, with reasonable success. I'd love to get Daniel's opinion too, but I kinda doubt he'd have the patience for me since I know he's so busy. I've very much considered writing a book about this. Even if I couldn't get it published, then just for it to exist for me. This post focuses on surviving the first stage, and stealing blinds in the late stages. If I get enough positive responses I might explore other aspects within online multi-table tournaments. I also welcome opinions on my writing style, verbiage, and organization. I've spent literally hours proofreading and editing this. I truly welcome anyone's opinion, positive or negative, and my hope is that it helps someone out there win some money (just not off me :)I have made 8 final tables, (two wins, two 3rds), and cashed at about a 20% rate in multitable tournaments of over 400 people, usually in the 600-800 entrant range. I've probably entered between 75-100, and just from the two wins I'm still way ahead. To quote Knish, here's a playbook I've put together off my own bad beats. This is what I've learned about multitable tournaments from literally living off of them for the last 6 months.You do need a bigger than average bankroll. I buy into a poker website with enough to play exactly 10 tournaments of the stakes I prefer, in my case the 30+3. If I make a final table, I'll cash out my account back to $330 bucks, (and buy a TON of alcohol) but if I cash but not in a big way, I'll just let it ride.Next, you need to pick a structure on one website and become infinitely familiar with it. I prefer Partypoker, (screen name TJEckleburg) for a couple reasons.A) There is SOOOOOOO much dead money. I realize Partypoker's sit and go structure sucks, but keep in mind: at any given time Partypoker has about 4 times the players online as Pokerstars or anybody else. I would assume about 90% of the field has a 0% chance of coming in 1st because they make SO many mistakes either early on, or in the late stages. The intricacies inherent to tournament poker are subtle, but very VERY important.B) There's no ante. The blind structure isn't egregiously aggressive, and the lack of an ante really benefits disciplined players and people that are good at stealing. I've found that most opponents later on are either loose lucky huckles who destroy themsleves, or have survived only by playing uber-tight and aren't too problematic to steal from. As much as Negreanu hates it, I've specialized in steal/move-in poker, and I think to be successful in ONLINE tournaments, you need to, too.C) Partypoker tournaments are very predictable. In any normal tournament (where normal is defined as not their 200k+ guaranteeds, but with 1000 initial chips and 15 minute escalations), between a buyin of 20 dollars and 100 dollars, exactly half of the field plus or minus 3% will be knocked out at the end of the first hour (end of level 4). The jump in blinds after the break is effectively the most atrocious in the whole tournament, from 25-50 to 50-100. A great number of average stacks or shortstacks either get crippled or knocked out in the next two levels, as compared to the number of players left. For the 50-100 and 75-150 levels, you must play especially tight and let the field adjust. Losing a pot in this level can be devastating. The end of the 75-150 round, for most tournaments with 600-800 people, is where the strategy changes officially to The Middle Stage.Because of that, my one goal is to hit one double-up within the first hour. Aces, a set, flop a straight from the blind, draw to a nut flush, these are the best ways to double up in the first hour. That way, I have 2000 chips, and the average stack if half the field busts is double the initial stack. After that, for the rest of the first hour I play even tighter.Don't forget, the first hour is always the hardest to survive, and the last hour is always the hardest to play well, and ultimately will be the test as to how much money you'll make in tournaments.For the first hour:Squeaky tight. [I welcome opinions from successful tournament players who aren't this tight, especially Daniel Negreanu and his 6-4 offsuit]. Raise/reraise more than the pot with AA, KK, and QQ. With AA, KK, or QQ, seek to be all in preflop. Raise more than pot with AK, suited or unsuited, but do NOT reraise with AK early on. Play it from the flop as an unmade hand, unless you hit an A or a K, and then don't get cute with it.Limp with JJ in early position, raise cautiously in late position. No bones about it; hooks suck. Do NOT seek to be all in preflop early on with JJ, you're DEFINITELY racing or already behind. That means there's no difference between your JJ and 22, because that's exactly what you've turned them into. Along those lines, do not seek to be all in with AK early. You don't want to race early on. Limp with TT on down, from any position, and you can call reasonable raises, especially if you're getting the right price. No set, no bet, and don't get cute if you hit a set. You'll get paid off in the first hour. If you don't get paid off, then that's not a problem either. You have to have somebody else hit something of a hand to get paid off with a set anyway. Limp with suited aces in late position, not early position, and don't call a raise with it unless the odds are great. Remember that you need at least 2:1 implied on the flop with a NUT draw, and 4:1 implied on the turn. If you're shortstacked, shorthanded (not more than 3 way), and feeling froggy, pull a Brunson and push with outs on the flop.I still haven't figured out how to play AQ well, but play it cautiously [Please comment]. I believe it's too strong to fold, too weak to play hard, and too much of a trap if you're not really careful. I limp with it in early position during the middle to late stages of the tournament. I've decided AJo is unplayable in the first hour. I really hate that hand. KQs on down to Kx is also unplayable in the first hour. To quote a great poker player with questionable self control, Phil Hellmuth, "Millions of dollars are lost every year on king-high flushes." Hitting just an A and offsuit undercards that aren't two pair is NOT worth a bet or a raise for a suited ace, because you should assume you're already behind. You play a suited ace for one reason and one reason alone: a nut draw. Bet if it's checked to you, but don't call a raise.Suited connectors, face-face, these are all unplayable outside of the blinds for the first hour. They're just more trouble than their worth. Suited connectors are cash game hands because, simply, you can't afford the chips to draw at hands in tournaments. Sklansky sums it up best in Tournament Poker for Advanced Players: "Every chip you gain doesn't help you as much as every chip you lose hurts you." You cannot chase straights and flushes regularly in Tournament Poker, in my opinion.Most importantly, and personally my biggest weakness, is getting carried away from my blinds. Be careful with that, and ask yourself how you'd play the hand if you weren't in the blinds. If the answer is you wouldn't have played K-8 that way because you'd have folded it, then look for a reason to fold.If you run KK into AA or someone spikes a set on your overpair, shrug and pay it off. The hardest thing to accept about tournament poker (and even poker in general) is that there's no defense for an outdraw or an inescapable situation.Stealing blinds:Stealing blinds is not effective at least until the 7th or 8th level, 100-200 or 200-400 at the very earliest. You're risking too much to win too little at any blind level earlier than that.The middle to late stages of Partypoker tournaments become something of move-in poker, especially on the bubble. This is also DEFINITELY the most profitable time to steal. Pay attention to who's stealing and who's not defending.Blindstealing is an art, and few have mastered it. I certainly don't claim to have mastered it, but here's what I've discovered works. Blindstealing is most effective if YOU are an average-to-somewhat-big stack stealing from two other average stacks. Shortstacks in the blinds are too likely to push all in with a marginal holding, and you don't want to be in an all-in situation with a steal hand vs. a marginal hand, or worse, a premium hand. You'll just take a hit (eventually) and feel like a knucklehead. Big stacks are likely to call and see a flop. Furthermore, you don't want to tangle with people that have you covered if you can help it. Worse yet is the ever-present possibility that they have a hand. Middle stacks have the most to lose and play the tightest, but can still afford to fold some blinds to avoid committing their chips out of position on someone else's terms. This makes them prime blind-stealing targets.Similarly, stealing isn't as effective if you yourself are a big stack or a shortstack. Shortstacks have to push to steal, and you only need to be wrong or unfortunate once. Monster stacks are risking too much to win too little from their point of view. Risking 3 or 4 big blinds to win 1.5 big blinds when you have 30-40 big blinds just isn't worth it. Here are my rules about blindstealing:1) Don't EVER steal with rags. Only steal with a hand for which there is such a thing as a good flop. Besides a boat, there is no good flop for 83 or Q6. Suited aces, suited connectors or one-gappers, even offsuit connectors are fine to steal with. Make sure you've got a Plan B for the flop if you get called. 2) If you ARE caught, give it up unless you flop something nice. Lots of people will "just call" someone they've seen stealing with AA or something and check it to you to see how far you'll go with it. If you're called, you're probably in position on them, and the temptation to bluff is great. Don't get fancy and play straight up from there on out. Take the free cards they give you, and hopefully drown them in the river. This is how skilled tournament players put themselves in a position to get lucky and catch that miracle card in that crucial pot against that crucial opponent.3) Pick an amount to designate as your standard preflop raise. Changing your bets means there's a reason in your cards to change it, and that gives tells. I always do 3x, or a raise to 3000 in 500-1,000. Some of my most powerful cardrushes come from stealing two hands in a row at 3x, and then picking up AA and making it 3x. Heh heh heh, come on in, water's fine.4) Don't steal if someone limps. Ever.5) If you're not desperately shortstacked, as in if you have 6 or more big blinds left, don't push into tall stacks in late position with a small pocket pair. Yes, there's a good chance it's the best hand you'll see if you're really desperate, but you'll feel like a huge jack@$$ if you push with 55 and a monster stack in the big blind calls you with Q9 and wins a race. I've learned that one the hard way too many times.6) Stealing doesn't always have to be from the button. Late position, maybe even middle position if the table's tight enough. The stacks in the blinds are almost as important as your position from where you steal. Obviously, the farther off the button you are, the more dangerous a steal is. However, you can use that to your advantage because people give middle position raises a lot more credit for a hand than a button raise. Plus, this way you're not stealing from the same people. People get crazy and do stupid things if you've stolen their BB 3 rounds in a row.7) Don't get too greedy. If you've stolen one hand per round, you've earned yourself 10 free folds. Stealing one hand per round keeps you from losing money and gives you free chances to give yourself aces and double up. And, if you HAVE been stealing, nobody will give you credit for aces when you get them.I really hope somebody finds this helpful. Last but not least, the number one rule I have for tournament poker: "You can't win tournaments if you can't win races. All you can do is seek not to race." (Daniel Negreanu's opinion, which I do immensely respect, notwithstanding, because we're talking about online poker). Good luck, and may your aces and sets hold up!

[akishore]

great post. haven't finished reading it, and i rarely (never) play MTT's anymore, but after i finish reading this, i might give one a try again. i used to find them completely not worth it monetarily (spelling?), but i'm willing to give them another chance.thanks,aseem

[GT123]

Great post..ive recently became more interested in multi table tournaments..i have read harrington on holdem...it is a great book. But i play mostly online ...and there is a obvious difference. Online the structure is much faster. The advice in your post was exactly what i needed. Do you have a different strategy for rebuy tournaments?

[TJ_Eckleburg]

Glad to be helpful, and thank you both for the kind words. These are the things I think about to keep my mind sharp when I'm folding for hours, lol, and I'm glad I've finally found a place to share it with people.I've actually never played a rebuy tournament. I have, however, played an ass-load of multitable tournaments with different structures, and the form of a structure definitely affects the way the game goes. My advice would be tight/aggressive (obviously) but with the option to buy more chips, you can afford to gamble more. Basically, I would assume the rebuy period could be played almost like a cash game, and you should definitely add-on at the end, barring a major cardrush in the first hour (see below). Since you're probably planning on adding-on and accepting the possibility that you would rebuy, I would significantly lower my preferred buy-in for a rebuy. Therefore, the hour after the rebuy period would be the survival hour in a normal tournament the way I described it.Paul Samuel, the British guy who writes very math/statistics-heavy articles for pokerpages.com, did a great 2-part article awhile back on whether or not you should add on. Basically, it determines at what point the diminishing return is for chips, and when the value of your money outweighs the added value of your new chips. Here's a link to part 1:http://www.pokerpage...es/samuel32.htmand part 2:http://www.pokerpage...es/samuel33.htmP.S. I just re-read "part 2" and it seems to have nothing to do with re-buy tournaments. Maybe it's just mistitled.

[The Dude]

I think you are wrong in thinking you can have a system for any game. So much depends on the table you are at. Whats the point in playing a tight game for the first hour if everyone else is also playing quite tight. The best players get their results from mixing up the game depending on how others are playing, blind sizes, chip stacks etc. It's much better to play the opposite of how the majority of the table is, than sitting down knowing exactly how you're gonna play.I don't mean to say your system is no use, it's clearly reaping results for you, but I would love to come accross a MTT where most are using your advice. It all appears to weak tight to be provide any success on a regular basis. It's only because you play at Party you experience any kind of win playing this game. Try going over to stars or UB and giving it a go, they will soon clear you out by level 8-9.It's wrong to suggest stealing with Ax suited is better than with rags. If you are stealing it doesn't matter what you're holding. On a personal note if I'm gonna raise it hoping to steal the blinds I'm not gonna do it with Ax but with 8-3. At least you know where you stand and if you're behind postflop. If the flop comes A-x-x and you raised preflop with A7s do you really know where you are?Just my thoughts , I don't mean to offend you or your 'system'

[TJ_Eckleburg]

Please, don't in any way think I'm offended by this at all. This is exactly the kind of response I was hoping to get, and I appreciate your input.To answer your points: Perhaps the term "system" is misleading. I don't ever think that an if/then set of computerized responses can ever be of value in something as situational as tournament poker. Rather, think of it as a guideline to working towards situational goals when I'm playing.I still think tightness early on with a large field is correct. Being able to advocate playing the opposite of the table is great, but can you really say that you can effectively put them on that with 9 strangers so early? Especially when they're so bad in general that half of them are going to be knocked out in the first hour? Not to mention tables break a lot more earlier rather than later. Furthermore, early on is the only time you can AFFORD to be super-tight, because the blinds don't cost much.Yes, this is designed specifically for Partypoker's MTT structure. It is what I'm most familiar with and have had the most success. I have played Stars and UB before, and as you can imagine and predicted, I've had less success (and for not nearly as much money). I won one 10 dollar 200-something person MTT on UB back when I was starting out and won something around 400 dollars. The first 30 dollar tournament I played on Partypoker that I won had 650 people and paid me 4,400 dollars. The fields in Partypoker's daily tournaments are so much larger than on Stars and UB, and I believe they have such a worse quality of play that this kind of tightness is a necessity. Every second I'm not in a hand someone else is getting knocked out and adding to the equity for everyone else. For every Dan Harrington we can readily think of a lot more Gus Hansens (or Daniel Negreanus), but I think looser play on televised tournaments is oft over-represented for ratings.As for blindstealing, I do take exception, and respectfully disagree, and maintain that you DO need some kind of hand to steal with. If you try any steal, one of three things will happen. You'll succeed and everyone will fold, you'll get a call with 8-3 or Ax suited, or you'll get re-raised. Either way, you can't call a re-raise, but at least in 2 out of the 3 situations with a hand, you still have options. The point is, with the Gap Theory proposed by Sklansky, that they need a stronger hand if you ARE getting called, it's probably ace-face, big cards, or something like that. But, while you're correct in assuming you're almost definitely behind preflop, at least you can maybe pick up a flush draw or a straight draw, or be able to work with a raggedy board that would miss big cards.Again, I really do thank you for your input. It means a lot to me. The day I stop trying to learn about this game is the day I stop getting better at this game.

[screech]

Good posts,I especially liked your opinions on playing flushes that weren't the nuts. Sometimes I risk too much with those hands, for no apparent reason, and am left feeling like a complete moron when I go broke.I have one question regarding straight and flush draws. At what point in the tournament does it become profitable to chase these draws? Assuming your opponent makes a pot sized bet, when do you chase, and when do you release these hands? Is it worth risking a mid size stack to bust an opponent and take a commanding chip lead in the late stages of a tournament?

[TJ_Eckleburg]

Thanks for your kind words.Another theory I have been somewhat kicking around is an idea about how tournaments change as the blinds approach a much more significant percentage of the average stack. It is my theory that as a general rule, the smaller the blinds, the MORE like a cash game the tournament follows. To support that from my own post, I advocate playing some flush-draw type hands early on, but not so much later on. Also, big tournaments in real life like the World Series Main Event start at 10,000 in chips, but 25-50 blinds. And it's that kind of structure that keeps from being "move-in poker" that Negreanu writes about not liking so much. In tournaments, I've tended to notice that the most successful players (and yes, you play enough tournaments you'll recognize some screen names) are tighter than the average participant in the field. Especially with a no-ante structure like Partypoker's that gives you 8 free folds every round.For pot-sized bets, it depends on the field (which is why you need to be in late position in the first place). If there's an unraised pot for 80 chips on a K-spade-spade flop, and you have the As2s, whether you call or not most heavily depends on a) the odds, and b) your stack. If 2 people call the 80, and you're last to close the betting, I'd definitely call if I still had around 1,000 chips. If I'd gotten douched earlier and had only 400 or so, I might do what I call a FILG push (F#ck it, lets go). But I probably wouldn't, because I tend to play tighter if I'm down, and wouldn't have played AsXs to begin with. If there's a bet to 80 and the next guy raises to 200, I wouldn't call because you won't get the right price if you miss on the turn. Don't forget you also can calculate implied odds with the true odds. That means that if you're getting 1:1 true odds on the call, you may be getting 5:1 implied if that's what you can get him to call if you hit. Obviously multiway pots increase your implied odds, which is why you play suited aces in multiway unraised pots in late position.As for straights, I like them a lot less. First of all, if you're open-ended and there are 2 spades out on the flop, you really have 6 outs, not 8 outs, because you can't comfortably call an all-in if the straight card is the 3rd spade. Plus, if you have the nut flush, you'll always have the nut flush, but you won't always have the nut straight. Even though JT makes 4 nut straights, you can still get your straight counterfeited. Omaha players always say one of the quickest ways to get in trouble is to flop the nut straight. That's why I don't really like playing hands for straight draws, even early on, because there's a slim chance they'll stay the unchanged nuts.As for drawing late in a tournament... in general, I don't like it, especially as a middle stack. As much as I don't like rooting on Phil Hellmuth, he's right in his book when he says that late in tournaments, "Bring your big guns (AA KK QQ) to the big wars." As a taller stack, maybe, but typically late in tournaments you're heads up. If that's the case, you're almost definitely behind preflop, and the odds just don't work out to make it a winning play. One thing I absolutely will not do is call heads up drawing (unless his stack is so small compared to the pot it doesn't matter). If you have AhKh and the board is 9h-6h-3s, and he showed you his black queens and moved you in for all your chips, if you weren't committed already, you're only 55/45 ahead. The key to tournaments is to not exploit tiny margins for all your chips. Now, if I was a tall stack and this all-in was for 1/4th of my chips, and I'm double the average, that'd be a situation where you wouldn't mind being in a race, especially to knock someone else out.

[Vertigo]

Great article. It sounds really good and I'd like to give it a try sometime.

[TJ_Eckleburg]

Thanks for the kind words, and best of luck to you. I'll be holding my breath for my cut when you win a PPM!

[Rocketwadster]

The article was okay if not a little simple for my liking. To me, it seems like you have simple re-hashed the opinion of many poker pro's from their books on how to survive and thrive at a Multi-Table tournament. It would be nice to see some new information or theories in your article(s). Specific examples of what to do in certain situations at exact moments of the Multi-table tourneys would be helpful. You have indicated that you have won two of these tournaments, so how about giving us some key hands that came up during these wins, so we can get a better idea of how to get there ourselves. I personally have made it to the money of numerous Multi-table tourneys, but only two final tables (with both being 5th place finishes after being eliminated with the better hand after the flop but losing on the turn or river). Also, I do not believe it is appropriate to state that Phil Hellmuth is a "horrible human being". This seems a little harsh, especially considering that you most likely only know of Mr. Hellmuth Jr. from what they show on TV (which obviously has been edited so that you mainly only see the temper-tantrums). There is nothing wrong with venting a little frustration when you lose going in with the better hand to someone who has made a bad play but ended up winning. Unless you have a personal relationship with Mr. Hellmuth Jr. where you can provide substantive evidence that he truly is a "horrible" person, personal opinions related to an individual are best left out of these articles.

[TJ_Eckleburg]

I was being somewhat facetious, but I asked for critique on my writing style, which is something I do take seriously. And you're correct. I'll remove that reference to Phil Hellmuth. But come on, tell me you've never looked at the TV and said, "ARE YOU KIDDING ME?" with respect to Phil Hellmuth.Your suggestion to include more concrete, specific examples is a good one. I'll think about how to incorporate that in the future. One of the things I talked about in stealing blinds, the "pick a standard raise," did actually happen. There were about 3 full tables left, and I was probably in the top third in chips. I stole from two average stacks from one behind the button, and stole the very next hand with the same raise, too. The guy to my left (who probably was looking for a steal opportunity of his own) said to me "you better be careful TJ, I just might come over the top of you." I winked back and told him maybe he should, just to keep me honest. The very next hand, AA. I made it the same, and he IMMEDIATELY pushed behind me for his estimable stack, which I barely had covered. I even slowrolled him, milked the time clock down to 10 seconds. Partly to be a jerk, but also partly because I was laughing so hard. He had KK, and knocking him out made me the chip leader of the tournament, which I was able to ride home. Let's just say he had some not-kind things to say about me, and they were much worse than me calling Phil Hellmuth a horrible person :)

[justblaze]

there is no viable strategy for PP MTTs. its a crapshoot by the first break unless you double through. You cannot play any sort of strategy other than the one you have described because if you lose your first pot you are crippled. the structure is horrid. I wouldnt play MTTs there if you paid me. Also, any tournament player will tell you your bankroll is way too small. you want about 50-100 buyins to get an accurate idea of your success rate.

[TJ_Eckleburg]

The blind structure is not so different from other online tournaments, or even live tournaments, and surely you'd agree that the people that win those aren't lucky crapshooters. Therefore, I believe there is a right way and a wrong way to play tournaments, and I'm trying to do my best to get opinions on everything to find out what it is.As for bankroll, that's true that 10 buy-ins isn't enough. The reason I do it that way is moreso out of personal preference. That way, I can re-evaluate how I'm doing before I decide to cash more money in. Whenever I win a tournament, I immediately cash everything out and put it in the bank, to keep myself from temptation (and drunk 10/20 pot limit omaha). The 10 buy-in rule that I use is a matter of personal preference, because it keeps me buying in at distinct amounts. However, I believe my success record, which I'll have to ask you to believe, speaks for itself.

[justblaze]

pretty much every online structure is junk. the best ive seen so far is bugsys club which gives you 10k chips and fulltilt which only gives you 1.5k but has blind escalation which is reasonable. small buyin tourneys live are complete crapshoots as well. there is a reason the WSOP and WPT tourneys give you 10k chips to start: this is the best way to allow for skillful play as opposed to forcing it to an allin fest at level 4.

[TJ_Eckleburg]

From my own personal experiences in online poker (or live poker), I've noticed that a majority of the time I do well, it's because I'm exploiting other people's mistakes. Online is probably a lot more random than a live, huge tournament, but I think that still doesn't change the fact that becoming familiar with the workings of the structure can help individually informed players take advantage of opportunities. And if there's one thing you can count on in online poker, it's that people will make mistakes and incorrect plays.

[justblaze]

TJ_Eckleburg said:

From my own personal experiences in online poker (or live poker), I've noticed that a majority of the time I do well, it's because I'm exploiting other people's mistakes.  Online is probably a lot more random than a live, huge tournament, but I think that still doesn't change the fact that becoming familiar with the workings of the structure can help individually informed players take advantage of opportunities.  And if there's one thing you can count on in online poker, it's that people will make mistakes and incorrect plays.

you can count on this in any form of poker. If everyone played mathematically correct poker, only the house would win. the problem with online structures is it gives you very little time to identify mistakes and capitolize on them. if you arent right the very first time, you are crippled.

[creepy20]

I enjoyed reading your post very much and I think you have a very good structure that you go by. I'm playing the ones on UB which I enjoy a lot more than party or anywhere else. Haven't tried Fulltilt yet ( don't really like that site's interface, but its a matter of opinion ) I've gotten to the finaly table twice..best finish 4th, But I almost always make it into the money atleast 80% of the time. Out of about 700 people there is about 70 payouts. Although I do agree that there is some luck involved in making it into say the top 20..I definitely don't think that it is a total crapshoot. Anybody who knows anything about poker should make it through the first hour which leaves the tourny with about half the people left. Unless you get your KK's or AA's cracked. You should be able to double or triple up in the first hour but you aren't hurting if you don't. Now in the second hour I find that is the time to loosen up and get some chips because if you don't then you will be out by the third hour at around 150th. The biggest problem I have with the MTT's on UB is sometimes when you are a big stack...say 8k to 10k within the first hour and a half they tend to sit all those guys together at the first 4 tables. Its cool at first because if your the first one to get moved to those tables you can usually lean on the small stacks a lot...but if you aren't getting hands or hitting your flops and staying around 8k to 10k...then towards the end of the second hour they start moving in some of the guys with 20k and 30k and filling the rest of the positions with 7k's and 8k's which makes for a tough table. Anyways, I enjoyed your article and I stick to that strategy most of the time but lately I have been working on my post flop play and I have been playing a ton of hands early from any position. This is good I think only if you know not to call anykind of raise preflop with your marginal at best hand and if you don't hit the fl0p perfectly than you need to leg go fo the hand and wait for something better. I do this for the first couple of stages and I usually double up once. If I don't and I'm down 400 to 500..no big deal. I just go back to the tight aggressive strategy and it usually brings me back to where I can loosen up again. Anyways, I just read my post again and I'm all over the place...but yes..I did enjoy reading your article and I hope to get a win here in the next month or so.

[CavemanDoctor]

Good read.

[Rocketwadster]

I am curious how you have also managed to avoid so many bad beats over your tournament schedule. I've had just about every bad beat you can imagine, plus some you cannot fathom (ie. all-in (their money not mine) pre-flop with pocket kings losing to Q 6 offsuit when they made trip sixes, all-in pre-flop (both our money) with pocket aces losing to a J 7 suited when they made a straight not the flush). :evil: 20 minutes after I posted my first response to your article, my all-in with pocket queens got busted by pocket 7's when he made a set (when we were down to 63 players from 800, with only 60 positions being paid). :evil: Did I have to go all-in at that stage of the tourney, most likely not. Howver, I wasn't worried about finishing out of the money, as the buy-in was relatively cheap, and had I won (which by all rights I should have) I would have had a rather easy time of it making it to the better stages of the money (barring a freak bad beat). :cry: Then, about an hour after that in a two-table Sit-N-Go, my all-in with pocket aces got beat by pocket queens (they actaully made four of a kind, which was weird to say the least). I wasn't out of the tournament at this stage (still had $40 or so left), but you can see what I mean. :x Needless to say, I had a few choice Hellmuth-like comments to make on these bad beats. Very rarely am I ever put out of a tournament with the worst hand when all my money is in the pot, but get outdrawn by the inferior hand. This is a very common occurance in the internet-poker community, which I am sure everyone has had occur to them. :roll: