Haven't played too many, but one thing I routinely notice is that the same 2-3 players get real aggressive early in all four tourneys and try to double through ASAP... probably looking to pile on KO points and set up a top 3 overall finish.

Anyone else given these a shot? Any strategic observations?

I played one of these and cashed (about 20-30% on top of my buyin IIRC), but I just played my regular game. Clearly as you indicate there has got to be specific strategy adjustments for these given the different payout structure. I'll be interested in seeing what others say.

I'm trying to remember: isn't there a penalty for going out really early? That might make for tighter play if anything, compared to a regular STT where going out in ninth place and going out in fourth makes no difference (you don't cash either way).

I think they play much the same early as regular STTs......very tight. The only real difference is your calling range is going to open up a lot when you have the opportunity to eliminate people. Being loose early I think is a way to lose any opportunity to win. If you bust a couple in 8th/9th, you have very little opportunity to cash in the matrix part. Stay tight, sustain until the blinds are worth stealing. The longer you stay in, the more points you get too.

They are definitely fun but I don't think they are as profitable as playing 4 regular STTs.

One idea that occurred to me: if someone is involved in a big pot on one table, you might target their blinds on another.

So where is that extra profit going? Are they less unprofitable for bad players or something?

The less profit is mostly due to the inability to multi table. You cant really do more then 2 of these at a time.

Think about it, you have a 10% ROI at the $10 sngs and a 20% ROI at the $10 matrixes. If you can 4 table the sngs then why bother with the matrix.

I have found though that the matrix is good if you like a really low variance. You could def. get by playing these with only 10 buyins or so.

I noticed that Full Tilt has advertised these in precisely this way.

But I guess I look at the Matrix things as like, if you would normally four table $10 SnGs, then wouldn't you logically play a $40 Matrix? Obviously if you've got only 1/4 the money in play you normally would, double the ROI means half the profit. But what if you have the same amount in play either way?

I find though that playing a low variance style in these isn't that good for the Matrix payout. You can cash in a few, but you aren't guaranteed to cash in the matrix. I either run really good or really average, and running average is usually -roi in these.

Maybe it's because I run so bad on FTP

I'm playing one right now, and I just noticed a benefit. I raised preflop with JJ, and the BB reraised all-in (this is only the second blind level--his shove was an overbet). I checked the other tables, and he was already eliminated from two of them! Plus I had him covered and there was the KO issue to think about. Thus it was an easy call, and sure enough he flipped over A6 and didn't improve.

One other thought that comes to mind: since people have an incentive to call if you shove and they have you outchipped, you would probably want to be more careful about shoving to steal the blinds even when your M is very low--if the blinds (or for that matter other players who act after you) have you outchipped. But the reverse should be true if you are the big stack: shoving and making people have a decision for all their chips is to your advantage.

ETA: if you are a shortstack and have a premium hand like AA or KK it could make sense to shove preflop though you would normally raise less so as not to "waste" your premium hand and chase other players away. Since they are salivating after the KO points they get if they call you and win, they are likely to call lighter (one would think).

I think there was a whole discussion on the matrix SnGs a little while ago in the general forum.

Thanks to the OP for reminding me about these. I got to HU in three of the four matches (went 1-2), and got second in the Matrix pool as well.

Went heads up in 3 and only got 2nd in the matrix? Thats really tough luck

I was hoping so, but a search turned up nothing. You have a link?

http://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poker-foru...howtopic=129483

Yeah, I thought so--and it was only by one point (33 to 32 or something like that). The funny thing is that in two of the three HU, I was against the same player--and he came in third in the matrix! The matrix winner was another player who had a bunch of knockouts but faded late in a couple of them.

That's why I don't really like them. The guy who stays patient is often not rewarded in the matrix payout, whereas in a regular STT, it's a good strategy.

Yeah, the strategy is really different in these. I like to lie low at the beginning, since an 8th/9th place finish will really hurt you. Once it gets to push/fold time, you have a real incentive to call, since the 2 points for a KO is really big. But it seems that most of the ones that I've played have been really tight, and you can pick up chips with aggressive play.

Do people still play these? It seems like you have to wait a while to get one of these started, especially at the $100 or $200 level.

LOL, I'd think that at that buyin level, anything would take a while to get started--especially on FT. But I'm not in that universe (maybe someday). They seem to fill up pretty fast at the lower levels.

I'd add btw that IMO the matrix prize pool is kinda puny as a percentage of the total. If they really want us to adjust our strategy to fit it, they should make it more like half the prize pool instead of 20%.