Is this valid low stakes bubble strategy?

I haven't seen this discussed before, and I'm curious what folks think.

I've seen this occur in freerolls and in low stakes tourneys (mt-sngs and other mtts) -- up to $3.30. I don't know if it happens at higher levels because I'm too much of a pansy to play anything higher (still have low bankroll at a few sites, cadged together from freerolls).

Ok... so we're down to maybe 20-30 players to get out before the bubble.
Short and medium stacked players use all of their time each and every hand. If you have 2 or 3 of them at your table, each hand takes at least one full minute before you even get to see the flop -- and God forbid they actually play the hand and delay each bet.

I understand the strategy - you hope that by slowing down your own table folks at other tables have more opportunity to go all-in against each other and get you closer to the money.

My question is - is this actually valid? Isn't it more the case that by delaying you allow blinds to escalate and you in fact diminish your chances of making it ITM?

If it is valid, how far above the bubble position does it become valid? I've seen (rarely, admittedly) this take place 50-60 seats above the bubble.

Also, IMO, the onlhy time it's a worthy strategy is in one of the freerolls that pay a few seats with usable money -- for instance the 2700 player $100 freerolls at Fulltilt with min payout being $2.00. It's really not worth risking the escalated blinds when the min payout is a few dimes.

Any thoughts?

No mods on, hand me the ban hammer, Robin.

Sorry OP, I'll answer now. This should only be for very close to the bubble (last rotation) You could use speeding and slowing to be the last player before the blinds raise but then it could become a game of hot potato. Generally you want to see more hands, you're right.

Ok... maybe it's just me, but neither of the above responses makes any sense to me with respect to my OP.

Maybe one of us is drunk... and I haven't had a drink in 2 months.

Just fyi... I was posting this right after the first two responses... the 3rd and 4th came in while I was typing.

Yeah you notice the first post after yours is gone? He was about to be exterminated. Knew that was going to look weird, sorry.

ive seen this before but not at the small stakes that you are referring to. i saw this once in and Aussie millions sattelite on ftp. and they were 10 from the money which was a seat obviously. i dont know about people doing htis in fr's but if they do that is crazy to me. a free buy in and im not just trying to cash im trying to win. if i bust before the money ina fr i dont like it but who cares there will be another one soon enough and you didnt lose any money just time. i dont like this practice my self. i alway try and act as quickly as possible cuz i like to play tight aggressive in tournesy anyway. this way i can see as many hands as quickly as possible. i dont like the time wasters. gl and play on.

KDS63,

Great post, and it does happen, in a variety of ways of implementing the 'Clock'. Is it valid? Unfortunately, yes, the rules are defined, and all agree to them. Is it good etiquette, NO.

Is it a 'valid strategy'. Could be? Does it work? Methinks it does. Seems people are doing it, and you are bringing up the subject.

Do I like it, no. Would I do it, no. Would others, sure!

Anyway, good post.

Why is this not considered a delay? I thought you are not supposed to intentionally delay play.

Ok, I am not going to be popular but yes I have done this and will continue to do so. If I am a short stack and need to wait out 20 more players to the money to get my buy in back, I will use the clock.

I, unlike most of you, do not have a huge bankroll, so if I can get my buy-in back plus a little extra I will do everything I can to get it.

I wait until my time has run down, just before my timer starts, then fold. If it is less than 10 players, I'll let the timer start to run.

hate to admit it but i've done this before,,,,i'm on fixed income so every dollar counts,,,,,i try not to if it looks like i'm going to make the cut.
anyway take care

i think it can be valid if there say 19 left and 20 make the money to slow down the play so the blinds will increase and the SS wont get another round,

eg. blinds 1000/2000 and the SS has 4200 and is 3 seats away from the BB, the next level is in 3mins and will be 1.5k/3k. We use up our maximum time if we only have a medium stack as we do not want the SS to be able to fold another found of blinds and risk not making the money by shoving AA and loosing, we would prefer the SS was eliminated before we got the blinds again so we use our clock so that when the SS is the BB it will be 1.5k/3k and he will hopefully get eliminated.

Thanks for the responses... Believe me dufferdevon, I understand. I don't have much of a bankroll either, and I have played the clock once or twice back when I first saw folks doing it.

I do realize that it's valid - the clock is part of the game.

But I'm really thinking more of strategy. Dufferdevon's comments about a low-stakes buy-in game are good. I can see that if you're close to the bubble and seriously short-stacked, you might be just hoping for your stake back so you can try again at another table. And definitely the big stacks are gonna be pushing at that point.

However, a couple of comments:

If the big stacks see you playing the clock, they're MORE likely to push -- they know you're worried about making the bubble and so won't call off with anything but the biggest monster hands. So you'll clock out each time but be guaranteed to lose your blinds as well. If you're stack is middlin' at least, you're better off showing that you're not afraid to play a strong (but not necessarily monster) hand.

And in the dimes-payout FR - it makes absolutely no sense at all. Not only because of the fact that you're not losing any money, but because it's just not good odds strategy (IMO). You let yourself get blinded down to the point that it will be nearly impossible to advance beyond the 20-40 cent level of win, so you set the stage for meager winnings. I think that in the long run, over several tourneys, if you actually play your hands in that situation, you'll be more likely to accumulate enough chips to get you a greater payout. If you can make it to the $1 level in one tourney, that's worth more than 3 at the 30-cent level. What are the odds of making it to the money on 3 FR?

I think its a valid option, however I never understand the people that implement it when you are in hand for hand play, my instance being the $2 sattys to the 100k, you are usually down to 3 tables and there is no point in it as no other hand will be played till all hands are completed and no hands can be completed unless you play. Please don't tell me I'm having a DJ moment .

Guess I can see a point to this so-called strategy, use the clock and maybe let the other tables play more hands and knock each other out ...
But good comments by KD, you still have to play the game! Even if you let the clock run down before making your play, you have to play a playable hand even when, and perhaps especially when, short-stacked.
Otherwise you're just contributing to the big stacks.

I was playing in one of the fantasy poker freerolls on full tilt and was way low on chips and it pays 3.00 for the first 360. The other players on the table slowed the game down for me and told me to use the clock and slow down so I could cash. I did and thanked them all, then I luckily got hot and ended up making 4.00. Without them helping me and telling me what to do out of respect for the others I probably would not have done this. So sometimes it is a valid strategy especially if the other players are understanding.

it is pretty pointless but if u see people doing this u should be able to steal there blinds all day since they dont want to get eliminated so take advantage of that.

I have to say that it makes a lot of sense to do this in 3 situations.

1 - You are cheap leader by a lot and want the blinds to move up, players to drop off so you don't have to deal with the all-in fest that takes place before and just after the bubble. I hate getting something like JJ near the bubble and the short stk pushes. He's most likely pushing with some ace or a lower pocket pair. Normally you would have no problem calling these kind of bets, but all it takes is a couple of idiots getting lucky to cripple your stk going into the real money. It's one thing playing aggressive with a big stk around the bubble knowing people are playing scared and wanting to make the money it's another calling any all-in with JJ, QQ, AK even though you know the idiot that still have 12 BB's probably has A10o you still can't risk that much if you have a very healthy stk. If you have a F*** You stk than it's not much of an issue. I can say it's very frustrating to call with QQ and see A4o come and then they flop a straight or an ace ball hits and now you only have 12 BB's.

2 - If you are the last 5 or so players from busting and you are watching the others play and they are going all-in often then it's worth waiting it out. The other 4 will most likely drop out before your stk gets too low. Of course you wouldn't fold big, big hands, but you wouldn't fool around with A10 or below or any pocket pair below 99.

3 - In a satillite it's well worth this. If you have plenty of chips and are not in any kind of risk of blinding out in the next 2 hours and the bubble is really close or the bubble is here than you should take all of your time and time bank up before folding. You are only helping those 3 guys that are fighting for that last spot and not doing any favors for the other players like you that have secured your seat and want to finish up.

Well, here's a twist I hadn't even considered. I was thinking about the bottom end of chip stacks - those that are struggling to sneak into the bottom payout.

But to use the clock and escalating blinds as a big-stack weapon - interesting. I can see that it might come back to bite you in the ass later on if some mid-stack damages you with a draw, but in general, it's going to hurt the lower end more than the top stacks.

Definitely something to consider.

I don't play the clock out when I play.
What's the point, if I'm SS, why would I run the clock?, to make ITM just to get my money back?, I don't see the point when I have a better chance of doubling up with the next possible hand, if I'm on the SS and there are players who kill the clock, I get frustrated because I want my next cards.
I have faith in my abilities as a poker player that I have a better chance of making it further up the pay scale if I can get my cards sooner instead of killing time and let the blinds eat my meager stack.
I look at poker as I would look at life, If I'm going to die, I'm going to do my best to prolong my life, not just lie there waiting for death.

At bubble levels in a low stakes MTT, I fail to see the point. EXAMPLE: Say you've played 2+ hours in a $2 MTT and you're at low M to get into tier 1 of the money. So, you stall, piss off the whole table,aqnd put a target on yourself, and for what? Say it works, you firrle and twiddle, and finish 128th in a tourney that pays 130. Yee haw and congratulations, you made 85 cents for your efforts. Now you can go get a Snickers and celebrate; the feast is yours.

No matter what the stks are here is my thoughts on the clock.

During low stakes tournaments the DONKS with 15BB's are still pushing with A10o. It's a bitch to raise 2.5BB or 3BB with hands like 88 and get one of those guys moving in over the top with A10, A9, A8, 44, 55 ect. Of course you don't know what they have, but I'm not calling off 18BB's with 88. It really depends on your table so you might not play this way if your table is really tight. If they are really tight you want to put the pressure on. If there are no players at your table you think are going to go over the top constantly with any 2 cards than you can adjust your play and play at normal speed.

So like a lot of things you have to adjust your play to the situation at hand.

Well, there you have it!

Valid strategy, even as a bigstack.

I'd rather play cards, than game, time management. Just imo.

It is a valid strat. Not just for the cheap tourneys. I see it most in the larger Qualifiers. For instance the 150 WSOP Qualifier on Full Tilt Poker last month. when it got to the final 160 players, you had time to cook lunch and eat it before you had to act. This is for tourneys where the top finishers all get paid the same. 150th place trough 1st place all got a seat to the wsop.

In a normal tournament it is not so good. Here are a few reasons. 1st off, if you stall people will recognize it and push you around. Its like hanging a sign around your neck that says.....This guy is not trying to win, he is just trying to back into the money. Good players will exploit that. also you see less hands as the blinds are going up. This is like taking away your own Ms. thirdly you are not making any freinds. No one like a staller at the table. They are more likely to push you around because your play is a pain.