I like this last post.

I have always said i would rather play against 9 "good" players than 9 horrible ones. The so called good players read just like a 2+2 book.

__________________
For poker news, strategy, and more, check out my daily column at Examiner.com

It depends on your skill level. If you think you are weaker than the table and are at high risk to get outplayed then the all-in "method" is fine. You'll do better with that method than trying to play solid poker. If your more skilled than the table than playing solid poker such as making correct reads, skewing pot odds, setting traps, will be much more +EV than the all-in "method".

If it takes you more than five hands to figure out if you are more skilled than the table then I'm sorry to inform you, you are not. One poster commented that by the time you figure out the table you won't have enough chips.......If this happens to you it should be a clear sign that you can't outplay the table and all-in is just fine.

__________________
www.partypoker.com bonus codes:
"football" for a 20% bonus up too $100 on first deposits.

Sign up on Empire Poker for a bonus of up to $100.

He "proved" it given assumptions that don't apply here.

Typical hands in these situation is 55+ AT+ KQ and KJ. You are a 2:1 favorite against those hands. There I proved it.

Also, I believe in HoH the table conditions were different, I will have to check it when I get home.

Making the right move is solid poker.

Once you invest a substantial amount of your stack you can't outplay your opponent because you don't have the chips. You can't get any reads in a SnG besides figuring out if a check means he is trapping or missed his hand.

This isn't a cash game with 100bb stacks, it is a SnG where you are under time constraints. Get over your ego trip about "outplaying" and "playing post-flop" and your results may improve. Instead think "keep it simple stupid".

Beav,

You are correct that in HOH he is basically assuming that you are playing against skilled players and therefore the times that you are called will mostly have you as a huge dog.

With that said I still agree with jackemy that if you are the better player at the table you do not have the need to adopt this strategy.

I do not argue against its affectiveness at a fishy table. I simply am saying that I don't prefer to play this way.

Beav....how effective have you been? I am asking because its seems from some of your recent posts that your SNG results have been extremely volatile. Some big swings in results. If this is how you hace predominantly been playing and you track your play could you post your results?

Please don't read this as sarcastic. I am genuinely curious.

Looking at it mathematically.

there is 130 in the pot with an 8% chance the raiser has AA or KK. If he folds all but those hands you will still make money in the longrun. 10 times you will win 130 chips and 1 time you will be called and be a 4.5 to 1 dog.

10 times you win 130 for a total of 1,300

1 time you lose on average 1,200 chips since you will win occasionally, about 1 out of 5 times.

No matter what range of hands your opponent calls with you will always be +EV in this situation.

Even if the guy will only call with AA and KK it is a good play. the worst case scenario is +EV, and we will usually be in a better scenario than worst case with people calling with small pairs and AQ and even 89s as some people will.

This is game theory at its best. No matter what course of action your opponent takes you have equity in the hand because of the initial size of his raise. So, why not increase the cost of a mistake by him by pushing in.

__________________
For poker news, strategy, and more, check out my daily column at Examiner.com

Would you care to make a wager on sit and go results over 25 tournaments? You use your skilled method and I'll use my "unskilled" method.

__________________
For poker news, strategy, and more, check out my daily column at Examiner.com

Anteye, that is a good question, I am not offended.

I actually rarely play SnGs anymore.

When I seriously played the 5-20 SnGs on UB I had an ROI of around 36%, my 1st place finish rate was 50% of my ITMs. I think those were from 60 or so SnGs. That is how I built my bankroll, then got burned out. I also played a ton on Party where I was quite profitable, but didnt have a record for exact %s. I also cashed most of my money out. If I recall correctly, I made about 200 my first month on UB playing just $5 SnGs, maybe a few tens. I think I 400 or so on party poker, but I didn't keep good records and most of the money went back into my bank account.

I don't really play SnGs any more, most cheap MTTs and Omaha8b or Stud8 .5/1 to 2/4. When I do play SnGs it is a 50c or a $1 on Doylesroom - let's say I do not play optimally - but I am still profitable (pretty hard NOT to be). I have been known to call all-ins early with just a flush draw and crap lke that. I am not trying to make +EV decisions on every hand, just having asome fun.


My best results come when I play similar to they way steve describes. Not quite as tight early, but close.

No ego trip here. There has certainly been times where I've found myself at a final table or a SNG where I felt I wasn't the best player there and I've utilized the "all-in" method.

It's about understanding the situation, table texture and being honest with yourself and your game......Ego will only get you slaughtered at a pokertable.

__________________
www.partypoker.com bonus codes:
"football" for a 20% bonus up too $100 on first deposits.

Sign up on Empire Poker for a bonus of up to $100.