Final Table Play - What Should the Goal Be?

My Q is lets say im on the bottom half of the final table withof a big mtt 100+ players is it correct to go for first or is it correct to try to get in the top 3 spots
Or lets change the Q to if im jn the top half should I go for first or should I try to get top 3 ive found my self knocked out a lot of big tourneys because of this trying to get 1st is why im asking

Huh? if I get you, which im not really sure lol, just play your cards. play to win. that's my advice. worry more about are you playing your cards correctly rather then what position you are/could be/end up.

by "Q" do you mean your stack size relative to average stack? so if your Q=1 you have an average stack. if your Q=2 you have double the average stack?

I find it best in most situations to play for top 3 spots instead of just focusing on first place. It gives me (I think) a nice balance between aggression and caution.

Once I get to 4 handed I tend to focus on getting heads up.

I never focus on first place until I'm heads up.

one step at a time is my motto....

Ok thx im basically asking if I was at ft with about average stack should I be playing for first pr top 3 or top 5

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk 2

newbie in training said:

Ok thx im basically asking if I was at ft with about average stack should I be playing for first pr top 3 or top 5

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk 2

Click to expand...

OK. I think it's only a slight adjustment in strategy to play for top 5 vs. top 3, but in general I'd say play for top 3

Normally I have my hopes set high every tourney lmao I start thinking about first every time probably why I cant out like 7th or 8th... anyways thx for advice ill update with my improvements

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk 2

I'm often curious as to exactly what people mean when they say "play to win". Do they actually mean playing to win outright, or is it more about aiming to finish high, with outright winning as a very nice potential bonus but not the primary goal?

Also, what does it actually mean at the table? When, how, how often and to what extent does playing to win mean taking different actions from not playing to win? I suspect different people will probably answer this quite similarly overall, but as they get more specific and detailed, will their answers still be exactly the same?

And how meaningful is "play to win" when you have a tiny or even a small stack? Is it as meaningful as when you have a large one?

When I get to final table as one of the smaller stacks, I want to see how the larger stacks are playing, this will determine how I want to move up. As you know you will have to win a lot of flips just to move up to top 3, so if the bigger stacks are going after the small stacks with crap, I might push with a good hand (doesn't have to be a great hand) to move up. If the bigger stacks are hitting with their crap, I might wait to see how far up the ladder I can go.

If I have a top 4 stack when moved to final table, I tend to stay away from the bigger stacks, but will go after the small/medium ones. If there is a maniac chip leader, I'll shut down and wait for him to bust as many as he can... then go for his throat and TID.

All though we all "play to win" I don't like the meaning... what I mean is, I don't always follow the push/fold rule when under 10BBs. I have made final tables with less than 2 BBs and have won.

1. Make bubble
2. Make FT
3. Make money jump
4. Make HU
5. Win
6. Tell your friends, so they can tell you how all degenerate gamblers loose everything at some point.

-

Yes it is depending on how big your stack is. When I have a good stack I often wait till some players get knocked out and play at the beginning only very good hands. Just because I want to take care of some ranks. So I can get under the top five without playing any middle hands.
But when I have a small stack I try to win a all in with good hands. I want to let the opponents know that I'm aggressive and that they shouldn't steal my blinds. But honestly I have often lost with this method that's why I try not to get to the final table with the smallest stack.

Arjonius said:

I'm often curious as to exactly what people mean when they say "play to win". Do they actually mean playing to win outright, or is it more about aiming to finish high, with outright winning as a very nice potential bonus but not the primary goal?

Also, what does it actually mean at the table? When, how, how often and to what extent does playing to win mean taking different actions from not playing to win? I suspect different people will probably answer this quite similarly overall, but as they get more specific and detailed, will their answers still be exactly the same?

And how meaningful is "play to win" when you have a tiny or even a small stack? Is it as meaningful as when you have a large one?

Click to expand...

this is a great question, and probably worthy of it's own thread. I dont' have a real answer....but for me at least when I've reached the final table there IS a difference in how I play if I'm playing to move up the pay grades, or if I'm playing to win.

The 2 big differences are:

1) willingness to mix it up with the big stacks. if I am playing cautiously I'll avoid the big stacks, If I'm playing to win I'll mix it up with them earlier even when short stacks are still alive.

2) willingness to take flips. If I'm playing cautiously, say with an average stack I'll avoid flips until some short stacks bust. If I'm playing to win, I'll take flips since I know I'm gonna need more chips at some point to have a real shot at first place.

I think it is more meaningful when you have at least average chips than if you are short stacked. If you are short stacked you are going to need to get lucky quite a bit to actually win, though it can be done. I've won first place many times when I was the shortest stack at the final table.

I am more likely to employ a "moving up the pay grades" strategy if I am one of the shorter stacks, but there are still shorter stacks in. Or if the prize pool is much much larger than I usually play , or if I think the biggest stacks are much better players than me.

Well the main reason I ask this is when I get there I find my self taking flips with everyone...and how I got there(winning flips) variance come around abd I find my self knocked out in 5th-9th

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk 2

newbie in training said:

My Q is lets say im on the bottom half of the final table withof a big mtt 100+ players is it correct to go for first or is it correct to try to get in the top 3 spots
Or lets change the Q to if im jn the top half should I go for first or should I try to get top 3 ive found my self knocked out a lot of big tourneys because of this trying to get 1st is why im asking

Click to expand...

Any MTT you play you should aim to play for first, especially when at a final table. You can find a fair few players hitting lots of final tables but rarely close of the MTT. The better players generally bust out first or second a lot, but win by far more 1st-3rd places which of course is where all the real profit comes from.

Why do you think im asking this because 1st pays a shit ton more than 2nd almost 1/3 more

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk 2

Huh I don't understand what you're actually asking then if you know the answer?

newbie in training said:

Well the main reason I ask this is when I get there I find my self taking flips with everyone...and how I got there(winning flips) variance come around abd I find my self knocked out in 5th-9th

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk 2

Click to expand...

Flipping for you tournament life on FT when short isn't bad and you should take them given you probably won't find a better spot. However entering a final table as a short stack is pointless in most cases and you may as well go out in 13th by trying to double your stack and if you're going to the FT as a bigger stack, taking flips shouldn't effect much of your stack. You need to win those flips to get to the FT and also win the FT. If you're getting knocked out in 5th-9th through flips, don't worry about it it's the nature of mtts. It's when you're spewing your chips off is the problem.

ramdeebam said:

Flipping for you tournament life on FT when short isn't bad and you should take them given you probably won't find a better spot.

Click to expand...

I agree with that ^

Though, you don't really know for sure if you're flipping. AK vs tight player isn't exactly a flip. They probably have you beat. Can't do much about that with a small stack though. It's like ramdeebam said... No other choice.

With a big stack, and a highly volatile flippy table where everyone is going all in, why not just chill and wait a bit till they die out? Just play premium hands. It'll get you pretty high up in the ranks without having to risk shrinking your stack. When it goes to shorthanded play and they aren't flipping as much, start opening up your range.

Maximize $ev

I take flips when I know prettu much what they have like ive got KAs pre and I nnow theyve got QQ OR JJ OR 10 10 and im like isnt thay what a mtt is about anywaus ill dp the take it one step at a time for ft then top 3 then heads up then tid

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk 2

jcla6985 said:

Huh? if I get you, which im not really sure lol, just play your cards. play to win. that's my advice. worry more about are you playing your cards correctly rather then what position you are/could be/end up.

Click to expand...

no play to maximize profit longterm

WizardRubic said:

I agree with that ^

Though, you don't really know for sure if you're flipping. AK vs tight player isn't exactly a flip. They probably have you beat. Can't do much about that with a small stack though. It's like ramdeebam said... No other choice.

With a big stack, and a highly volatile flippy table where everyone is going all in, why not just chill and wait a bit till they die out? Just play premium hands. It'll get you pretty high up in the ranks without having to risk shrinking your stack. When it goes to shorthanded play and they aren't flipping as much, start opening up your range.

Click to expand...

Ak vs say JJ is not a flip actually, idk why people keep thinking it is

Its a -EV flip but its more or less a flip 60-40

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk 2

rumsey182 said:

Ak vs say JJ is not a flip actually, idk why people keep thinking it is

Click to expand...

Because by the time you're ~45% against any range, you're already committed to get all your money in. Early on with no money in the pot you have a humongous equity advantage vs. any reasonable ranges.

rumsey182 said:

Ak vs say JJ is not a flip actually, idk why people keep thinking it is

Click to expand...

Uhhhhh...JJ vs AK is a classic flip. If you don't think this is a flip, please give an example of a flip

Honestly, I believe it is a matter of a few different variables:1.Your stack compared to the other stacks in your "half", where the bigger stacks are located relative to you on the table, # of tournament entrants. So I will answer both questions based on these variables.

Large # of entrants:
top half:

If you are chip leader and 2nd and 3rd stacks are to your right (cut the table in half, both are to the right of you) Loosen up your preflop raising/3-betting range and stay aggressive (but remember to be selective based on situation. Raising and shoving every hand will get you busted). PLAY FOR THE WIN REGARDLESS OF OTHER FACTORS UNLESS YOUR STACK DWINDLES.

If you are chip leader and 2nd and 3rd are to your left, keep your raising range at high value (high suited connecters/1 gappers and premium hands). Stay aggressive. TRY TO MAINTAIN CHIP LEAD TO FINAL 6 PLAYERS AND RE-EVALUATE.

If you are chip leader and 2nd and third are split left and right, use above evaluation factors and play according to which side 2nd place is on.

If you are 2nd or 3rd, evaluate your play same as above based on where the bigger stacks are except tighten up your 3-betting range.

If you are lower/top half (4th or 5th), Keep a tighter range and stay aggressive. Try to move up spots and get it down to 6 people and re-evaluate.

Bottom Half:

Tight aggressive whole way and re-evaluate based on previous rules every time a player gets knocked out. I'd play to move up payout spots since in large # of entrants tourneys the payouts jump relatively big per place at the FT.

Low # of entrants:

When low number of entrants I always play to win because once you've passed the bubble the price jumps aren't big enough to justify trying to sit out to move up a pay spot. So with Low # of entrants I'd say gamble a lot and stay aggressive.

Now, lets also point out that this may not be relative when getting into tourneys with large buy ins because in a $500 buy in tourney, a single prize jump is much more significant than a $1 buy in tourney in "real life" value. However, if I'm in a wsop tourney, I play for the bracelet/ring because the jewelry means more to me than the cash.