Ok, I am in the TEC final tomorrow on UB, 947 entrants (a bunch of fools much have won twice).

Top 10 get a TEC plus $9 cash. (TEC is worth $100 towards MTT entries).

My game lately has been to take my chances early to try to build up a big stack (like my AT all in hand), then once I have a big stack, I can keep playing my game, but do not have to take chances for all of my chips. I can play a good solid game, putting pressure on the medium stacks and take advantage of pot odds. I find this way I either go out early, when I don't have much invested in the game, or I build a nice stack I can work well into the money. I don't have to worry about being short stacked late in the game and make a desperation move after investing hours of my time.

I am familiar with basic flat pay theory, but was wondering if anyone else has any general ideas.

A lot of people share your strategical view, but in my eyes it's really pointless - why play in the tournament in the first place if you are going to take numerous risks straight off the bat? My tournament strategy is a lot like Cloutiers and most others - tight in beginning, open up SLIGHTLY mid-game but very carefull selection of what and how you play, then you open up a lot in the endgame until you reach final 2 tables or final table at which point you tighten up again.

This is basically the opposite of what you are doing.

I understand your idea - either try to get a big stack and have a good chance of placing, or else lose out right away and save yourself the time. But there are two major flaws to this strategy:

1. You are really playing very lousy if you want to gamble your tournament away on a coinflip early on.. you are essentially saying "I don't want my entry fee" everytime you do this. This is how half the tournament entrants lose.

2. Your idea falls flat because even though you may build up an early chip stack - that chip stack will ALWAYS revert to standard chip stack quite quickly as the blinds increase. Thus, you will end up in mid game (after 1.5 hours or so) with an average stack, and you took all those risks getting to it, whereas you could have NOT taken the risk, and have had the same stack - therefore your strategy only provides you with GREAT risk.

These are however, only my views, and should not be taken seriously because I suck ass :P

__________________
KiD[ReD]
PokerForums.org
Latest deal: 38.8% SunPoker Rakeback with a $1000 deposit bonus. More info.

I agree with beavis on this one.

tournament poker has changed so much in the last few years that playing tight early in these 500+ people events will get you nowhere.

beavis we kind of started discussing this on pokerpages before, where I was explaining the difference between fast times and slow times in tournaments and how the avg stack determines this. This is more true in these large field tournaments especially in a flat payout where being the big stack or even top 5 stack doesn't matter. if 10 places get paid and 9 people have 1,000,000 chips it doesn't matter if you have only 100,000 if everyone else has 10,000.

Basically if you are in good shape use the fast preiods to your advantage by killing shorter stacks who need to double up. or in the slower stages maintain your stack by attacking medium and large stacks blinds. If you can stay above avg in one of these you will make it.

Well, I started off using Cloutiers advice, and found it really didnt work. Not only that, it didn't seem like that was how the pro's were playing. Then I started reading some of Paul Phillips writings.

Basically, he says "why view a tournament as a closed event? It is just part of the larger game" He is a great ring player as well as a tournament player (he actually makes Sklansky's 10 smartest players list). His point was, why play a few days to just double your buy-in, when you can play ring games and earn more in that time. Your play should maximize the value of the time you invest.

Now, I will not take unreasonable risks early, I still want to play good poker. But, I am no longer afraid of busting out early. Look at the example I game. One first place is the equivalent of 30 10th place finishes.

What I try to do is play solid, fearless poker, not reckless poker. But I really don't see a reason to loosen up as you get further into the tournament, you are still play at a full ring for the most part, and you have more invested in the game.

Why? Because of exactly your mindset! Players will tend to play tighter and try to outlast others, and opening up and playing more aggressive in the end will win you many important blinds and extra money. This is only if you have small-med stack though. If you have a big stack you should stay low.

__________________
KiD[ReD]
PokerForums.org
Latest deal: 38.8% SunPoker Rakeback with a $1000 deposit bonus. More info.

I agree with paul phillips here.

If you were only going to play 1 tournament ever any amount of money you win will put you in the + side.

however if you plan on playing multiple tournaments you should play them more like a ring game, taking advantage when you have an edge. now I'm not advocating unnecassary risks close to the money but early on you should be willing to take some chances in coin flip situations.

Doing this will give you the best chance to get as far as you can, waiting and waiting will either get you blinded off or when you do get a hand your stack size will get you called.

Blinds 50/100 avg stack 2200, you have 1300 chips go all in on KK and are called by a player with 8000 chips with AT so what? you will have 2600 if you win but your in the same position you were in before doubling up, near avg and at the mercy of the large stacks. the blinds will be going up in 1-10 minutes and the avg stack will keep growing.

i discussed this with Beavis elsewhere.

If you can build an early stack you will be able to take out players during knockout stages of the tournament (we have all seen these, small stack goes all in everyone either folds or he is called heads up). Even if you lose 1 or 2 of these you will still have plenty of chips to play with.

You can also attack blinds and limpers during slower stages (picture the first hand of a tournament wher 3 or 4 people limp). you can do this against big stacks too,

if you have 4000 chips and the blinds are 50/100 even if players still to act have you covered you should try some steals with hands like A9s, 33, JT. if they call or play back at you you can easily lay your hand down for a 300-400 chip loss.

The problem is that a big stack early doesnt quarranty you anything. Thats why you are just surviving until the mid to late stages of the tournament, when every pot counts because of the antes. Real poker doesnt start until the 6th level.

Yay VeNSe agrees with me!

That is what I said here:

"2. Your idea falls flat because even though you may build up an early chip stack - that chip stack will ALWAYS revert to standard chip stack quite quickly as the blinds increase. Thus, you will end up in mid game (after 1.5 hours or so) with an average stack, and you took all those risks getting to it, whereas you could have NOT taken the risk, and have had the same stack - therefore your strategy only provides you with GREAT risk."

__________________
KiD[ReD]
PokerForums.org
Latest deal: 38.8% SunPoker Rakeback with a $1000 deposit bonus. More info.

Hehe yeah i agree with you, i posted because they were 2 and you was 1. :P
Its a matter of style as usual though. Try to play against Gus Hansen if you disagree.

And gj at your tournament.