Collin Moshman - Sit 'n Go Strategy study group

[pcgnome]

When you're going to steal the blinds you're obviously going to need a decent speculative hand. When you get called you are going to at least want to give yourself a chance to win the hand post flop. Say you have 2 limpers behind you, then you can bet 3X the big blinds to give them the opportunity to fold. A hand like K-To is stronger than lower T hands, but that's only before the flop. You will miss most of the time, and you are going to have to re-evaluate your hand strength post flop.

 

[basse]

When you're going to steal the blinds you're obviously going to need a decent speculative hand. When you get called you are going to at least want to give yourself a chance to win the hand post flop. Say you have 2 limpers behind you, then you can bet 3X the big blinds to give them the opportunity to fold. A hand like K-To is stronger than lower T hands, but that's only before the flop. You will miss most of the time, and you are going to have to re-evaluate your hand strength post flop.

Agreed. Another way to look at it is this: The better your hand, the less certainty you need to have that the remaining players will fold to your raise, as you have more EV when they actually call.

Obviously what's stronger post-flop depends on the flop at hand. But let's take the example where you hit a pair. If you hit kings on the flop, you're a lot better off than if you hit a pair of 8s (especially if there are overcards). So even post-flop, since the flush/straight is fairly improbable (and if you only have one other player in the pot, you might not be able to get that much money out hitting it either), it seems to me that KTs might still be better than e.g. 98s, even though 98s is played as a speculative hand, whereas KTs is not.

 

[floweryhead]

My copy of the book still hasn't arrived but this thread looks like it's going well. I'm actually wondering if I'll need to read the book again after following this thread. Nice one Basse

 

[Jacki Burkhart]

[*] What are your interpretations of the late position "steal" hands? Do all speculative hands count if you are late enough? E.g. on the button?
[*] Does anybody want to supply some extra info from the section? My review is a bit rushed as I still have a bunch of work to do for tomorrow.
[/LIST]

here are my thoughts on this. This is not necessarily from his book, but from my experience. Though I started my SnG "career" after reading his book, so everything is kind of based on his book, but I have adapted for use in my own game and the ever changing game dynamics....in other words...."your mileage may vary":

Any time you are trying to "steal" then it doesn't really matter so much what your hand is, it matters much more who is in the blinds and whether the reward is worth the risk.

Implied odds and speculative hands are not such a big deal in SnG poker as compared to MTT poker because the stacks are generally shallower (shallower stacks = lower implied odds) and because the field is smaller you don't need to take nearly as many risks to make it to the money. For instance in a MTT you may need to 10x your starting stack to survive the bubble, but in a SnG you can often survive the bubble with only a double up, or a 2.5x starting stack. So, the bigger risks are not as necessary and also not rewarded as handsomely. (In a MTT top pay spots are often 10-50 times your buy in, but in a SnG the top pay spots are only 3-4x your buy in. More risk for more reward).

So later, when you DO want to steal the blinds you may be raising your button with some hands like 67s, but it is not because it is a speculative hand it is because you have fold equity and a hand that is likely very live against his calling range. I know it's a slight distinction but it's important for understanding the fundamentals. Speculative implies that you KNOW your hand is behind and you're knowingly making a -EV play right now hoping to make a monster hand and get their whole stack when they CALL off with their strong hand. In the case of a SnG bubble stacks are so shallow you just want to take down the blinds THAT is your primary goal. If you happen to get called, it is a bonus to have a hand that is live. Basically, it's all about Fold Equity and not about winning stacks. Fold Equity makes hands like 67s +EV on the bubble.

So, generally when blinds are low I won't even bother "stealing" the blinds when it folds to me in late position. I'd rather preserve my "tight" image and fold equity for later when the blinds are big and I will be stealing relentlessly. IMO, raising KTs on the button is not actually stealing. It is value raising a marginal hand in position. I agree with the line the author recommends which is basically "raise a pretty good hand with position and if you get called play it cautiously and be ready to let it go"

 

[intents09]

here are my thoughts on this. This is not necessarily from his book, but from my experience. Though I started my SnG "career" after reading his book, so everything is kind of based on his book, but I have adapted for use in my own game and the ever changing game dynamics....in other words...."your mileage may vary":

Any time you are trying to "steal" then it doesn't really matter so much what your hand is, it matters much more who is in the blinds and whether the reward is worth the risk.

Implied odds and speculative hands are not such a big deal in SnG poker as compared to MTT poker because the stacks are generally shallower (shallower stacks = lower implied odds) and because the field is smaller you don't need to take nearly as many risks to make it to the money. For instance in a MTT you may need to 10x your starting stack to survive the bubble, but in a SnG you can often survive the bubble with only a double up, or a 2.5x starting stack. So, the bigger risks are not as necessary and also not rewarded as handsomely. (In a MTT top pay spots are often 10-50 times your buy in, but in a SnG the top pay spots are only 3-4x your buy in. More risk for more reward).

So later, when you DO want to steal the blinds you may be raising your button with some hands like 67s, but it is not because it is a speculative hand it is because you have fold equity and a hand that is likely very live against his calling range. I know it's a slight distinction but it's important for understanding the fundamentals. Speculative implies that you KNOW your hand is behind and you're knowingly making a -EV play right now hoping to make a monster hand and get their whole stack when they CALL off with their strong hand. In the case of a SnG bubble stacks are so shallow you just want to take down the blinds THAT is your primary goal. If you happen to get called, it is a bonus to have a hand that is live. Basically, it's all about Fold Equity and not about winning stacks. Fold Equity makes hands like 67s +EV on the bubble.

So, generally when blinds are low I won't even bother "stealing" the blinds when it folds to me in late position. I'd rather preserve my "tight" image and fold equity for later when the blinds are big and I will be stealing relentlessly. IMO, raising KTs on the button is not actually stealing. It is value raising a marginal hand in position. I agree with the line the author recommends which is basically "raise a pretty good hand with position and if you get called play it cautiously and be ready to let it go"

Well said missjacki, this is what I was trying to put out there in my response, but I'm not yet great at putting it all down in words like this. Sure it's a bonus to have a live hand if called but there are many steal opportunities you may skip out on if you worry solely about whether your hand will be ok if called.

 

[or3o1990]

Indeed, well said. The structure of the sng tournament dictates what hands you are to be stealing with as well. If only first place is paid for example your going to need to take more risks in order to accumulate chips to have a chance at winning. I play only triple up tournaments at the moment and because all three winners get paid the same there isn't as much of a need to take as many risks on the bubble. Or if it's a turbo for example, at the bubble the blinds and antes will be coming around quite fast so you'll have to adjust accordingly.

 

[scooba13]

Low Blinds

What are your interpretations of the late position "steal" hands?
- I generally don't steal at all in low blinds. In late position I bet/raise for value based on my read of the players (unlikely to be much developed in low blinds unless I've played them before) - this makes me super nitty in low blinds but I'm normally happy to sit back and wait.

- Even if you peg the SB & BB as very tight getting their blinds in low blinds is not that worthwhile. If you abuse them in low blinds they are more likely to play back at you later. If you build a tight image then you can get away with stealing with trash when it matters much more.

Do all speculative hands count if you are late enough? E.g. on the button?
- I bet the good speculative hands (but not low suited connectors) in low blinds if I'm first in on cutoff or button.

In low blinds micro stakes there's a lot to be said for staying out of the way while things shake out a little. You don't want to get it all in with anything but a super premium hand (as per the book you don't want to take flips for your whole stack) but some of your opponents will not mind going all in with AK preflop (totally reasonable in high blinds but not early on).

 

[eidikos]

hi!
i ve read that book but i would like to join you
its a great book with strategy that i use a lot in s n go's

 

[floweryhead]

The book has just arrived... then... guess what?... I find my first copy of it... doh.... I'll read it through tonight once I've gone through the decision making process of which copy I should read... then I'll reread this entire post and finally get involved... wehhhay... am a bit excited now that I get to participate

 

[basse]

here are my thoughts on this. This is not necessarily from his book, but from my experience. Though I started my SnG "career" after reading his book, so everything is kind of based on his book, but I have adapted for use in my own game and the ever changing game dynamics....in other words...."your mileage may vary":

Any time you are trying to "steal" then it doesn't really matter so much what your hand is, it matters much more who is in the blinds and whether the reward is worth the risk.

Implied odds and speculative hands are not such a big deal in SnG poker as compared to MTT poker because the stacks are generally shallower (shallower stacks = lower implied odds) and because the field is smaller you don't need to take nearly as many risks to make it to the money. For instance in a MTT you may need to 10x your starting stack to survive the bubble, but in a SnG you can often survive the bubble with only a double up, or a 2.5x starting stack. So, the bigger risks are not as necessary and also not rewarded as handsomely. (In a MTT top pay spots are often 10-50 times your buy in, but in a SnG the top pay spots are only 3-4x your buy in. More risk for more reward).

So later, when you DO want to steal the blinds you may be raising your button with some hands like 67s, but it is not because it is a speculative hand it is because you have fold equity and a hand that is likely very live against his calling range. I know it's a slight distinction but it's important for understanding the fundamentals. Speculative implies that you KNOW your hand is behind and you're knowingly making a -EV play right now hoping to make a monster hand and get their whole stack when they CALL off with their strong hand. In the case of a SnG bubble stacks are so shallow you just want to take down the blinds THAT is your primary goal. If you happen to get called, it is a bonus to have a hand that is live. Basically, it's all about Fold Equity and not about winning stacks. Fold Equity makes hands like 67s +EV on the bubble.

So, generally when blinds are low I won't even bother "stealing" the blinds when it folds to me in late position. I'd rather preserve my "tight" image and fold equity for later when the blinds are big and I will be stealing relentlessly. IMO, raising KTs on the button is not actually stealing. It is value raising a marginal hand in position. I agree with the line the author recommends which is basically "raise a pretty good hand with position and if you get called play it cautiously and be ready to let it go"

Lots of good food for thought! I agree with what you're saying. Actually, that was why I was bringing up speculative hands (when I say that I refer to the group of hands that are mentioned under the speculative hands section, not whether they're speculative in the context at hand), I wanted to make sure how to rank them when played as non-speculative, but rather for fold equity. E.g. heads-up they're not as strong as KT.


Edit: missjacki, just saw your new tag-line, I like it

 

[basse]

What are your interpretations of the late position "steal" hands?
- I generally don't steal at all in low blinds. In late position I bet/raise for value based on my read of the players (unlikely to be much developed in low blinds unless I've played them before) - this makes me super nitty in low blinds but I'm normally happy to sit back and wait.

- Even if you peg the SB & BB as very tight getting their blinds in low blinds is not that worthwhile. If you abuse them in low blinds they are more likely to play back at you later. If you build a tight image then you can get away with stealing with trash when it matters much more.

Do all speculative hands count if you are late enough? E.g. on the button?
- I bet the good speculative hands (but not low suited connectors) in low blinds if I'm first in on cutoff or button.

In low blinds micro stakes there's a lot to be said for staying out of the way while things shake out a little. You don't want to get it all in with anything but a super premium hand (as per the book you don't want to take flips for your whole stack) but some of your opponents will not mind going all in with AK preflop (totally reasonable in high blinds but not early on).

There's starting to be a theme here with people essentially saying that they don't think the low-blind stealing section is applicable to the SNGs they play. Is this because the book is generally written for higher buy-in SNGs, where the play is different? Or has online play just changed enough since the book was written that this is no longer a good idea?

 

[basse]

hi!
i ve read that book but i would like to join you
its a great book with strategy that i use a lot in s n go's

The book has just arrived... then... guess what?... I find my first copy of it... doh.... I'll read it through tonight once I've gone through the decision making process of which copy I should read... then I'll reread this entire post and finally get involved... wehhhay... am a bit excited now that I get to participate

Good to have you guys on board! I have slowed down considerably on how fast I'm going through sections, as my semester really picked up steam in terms of workload, so you should have ample opportunity to catch up

 

[scooba13]

There's starting to be a theme here with people essentially saying that they don't think the low-blind stealing section is applicable to the SNGs they play. Is this because the book is generally written for higher buy-in SNGs, where the play is different? Or has online play just changed enough since the book was written that this is no longer a good idea?

Maybe you've got a good point about higher buy ins - I can only speak for the $1-$5 ones that I play.

My reading of the book is that the playable late position hands in low blinds are the speculative suited aces, mid/high semi suited connectors and low/mid pairs. I don't think playing those hands for a standard raise (2.5-4x depending on table dynamic) is a total "steal" - they have value both for the fold equity and the post flop equity you'll have in position in a lot of cases. The main issue is that it doesn't get round to you unlimped/raised very often at low blinds. In the micros you can do better tightening the range - certainly the pairs are worth it for set mining and on the cutoff or button any suited ace is worth a shot. I generally leave the mid suited connectors out, even on the button, since no-one is paying that much attention to your cards and yo can wait for a better spot.

I don't think online play in the micros has changed that much - maybe on a typical 9 handed table at Carbon there is one less total maniac and one more decent/breakeven player.

 

[floweryhead]

Good to have you guys on board! I have slowed down considerably on how fast I'm going through sections, as my semester really picked up steam in terms of workload, so you should have ample opportunity to catch up

I've read it through quickly last night and as soon as I have chance I'll work my way through this post again. Am looking forward to finally mastering these sngs.

 

[scooba13]

We could rail eachother? I play a lot of SnGs on carbon...

Is it possible to rail a SNG on Carbon? If so let us know some general times you'd like to play/rail - I am scooba13inia and do a few $1-$5 SNGs on Carbon - would welcome feedback on my play.

 

[Collin Moshman]

Cool thread!

There's starting to be a theme here with people essentially saying that they don't think the low-blind stealing section is applicable to the SNGs they play. Is this because the book is generally written for higher buy-in SNGs, where the play is different? Or has online play just changed enough since the book was written that this is no longer a good idea?

Very good question. For sure the games have changed, but there are a couple of things to keep in mind about low-blind stealing even in games where people don't like to fold. The first is that even if both blinds defend with close to top 50%, then you'll still pick up the blinds about 25%, which at 10/20 in a Stars SNG is like an immediate 2% ROI boost.

More important, playing in position early against weak players can be very profitable. For example, suppose we open 76s on the button, and the big blind calls. We have less than 50% equity even against his wide defense range. But we can outplay him post ... cbet on dry flops + give up if he continues and we miss, just give up on very coordinated flops that we miss, and often play the size of pot we want to play when we connect.

So even in very loose games, opening wide enough in late position can be a good source of profit so long as you feel comfortable playing postflop.

 

[nabmom]

Cool thread!



Very good question. For sure the games have changed, but there are a couple of things to keep in mind about low-blind stealing even in games where people don't like to fold. The first is that even if both blinds defend with close to top 50%, then you'll still pick up the blinds about 25%, which at 10/20 in a Stars SNG is like an immediate 2% ROI boost.

More important, playing in position early against weak players can be very profitable. For example, suppose we open 76s on the button, and the big blind calls. We have less than 50% equity even against his wide defense range. But we can outplay him post ... cbet on dry flops + give up if he continues and we miss, just give up on very coordinated flops that we miss, and often play the size of pot we want to play when we connect.

So even in very loose games, opening wide enough in late position can be a good source of profit so long as you feel comfortable playing postflop.

Just wanted to welcome Colin to Cardschat! I didn't know you were here and I'm very glad you are!

 

[floweryhead]

Yes. Very nice to have you here Colin. As soon as I have some free time I hope to get back to this thread.

 

[NoWuckingFurries]

Cool thread!

Cool book!

 

[scooba13]

When is the next round of questions coming? While we are still in low blinds I wondered what people think of Hand 1-22. If someone lead into you what range would you put them on?

I've seen quite a few players donk betting when they've got it - it seems to be a fairly successful strategy - so I wonder if others would take Colin's line and reraise all in - I feel like there's a decent chance you're way behind - at least with some players who donk lead.

 

[basse]

When is the next round of questions coming? While we are still in low blinds I wondered what people think of Hand 1-22. If someone lead into you what range would you put them on?

I've seen quite a few players donk betting when they've got it - it seems to be a fairly successful strategy - so I wonder if others would take Colin's line and reraise all in - I feel like there's a decent chance you're way behind - at least with some players who donk lead.

Sorry for the complete lack of updates. I had a bunch of papers due all at the same time, and then had to catch up on all the other work that I had postponed for them after that. I will throw up the next round tonight, after replying to the posts that have been made in the meantime.

 

[basse]

Cool thread!



Very good question. For sure the games have changed, but there are a couple of things to keep in mind about low-blind stealing even in games where people don't like to fold. The first is that even if both blinds defend with close to top 50%, then you'll still pick up the blinds about 25%, which at 10/20 in a Stars SNG is like an immediate 2% ROI boost.

More important, playing in position early against weak players can be very profitable. For example, suppose we open 76s on the button, and the big blind calls. We have less than 50% equity even against his wide defense range. But we can outplay him post ... cbet on dry flops + give up if he continues and we miss, just give up on very coordinated flops that we miss, and often play the size of pot we want to play when we connect.

So even in very loose games, opening wide enough in late position can be a good source of profit so long as you feel comfortable playing postflop.

Nice to have the author drop by

Good input here. I see your point about the post-flop play. Only problem is that my post-flop play is still a little shaky. Hopefully the rest of your book can help me with that! I guess this also leads to another truth (obvious, but I'm going to state it anyway): reading a book like this, the advice really has to be adjusted to the specific play at hand, to the point where it almost has to be seen as inspiration to craft a playstyle from rather than a specific scheme.

Since you're here (or were, anyway), I have another question that I'm curious to hear your opinion on (I'm happy to hear everyone else's opinion as well): To what extent do you think that the ideas in your book are useful for playing at the final table of an MTT?

 

[basse]

Post-flop low-blind play

Hands are split into four categories:

1. Excellent flops: Top pair + top kicker or better.
2. Solid draws: Flop a draw to the nut flush, mid-pair plus an open-ended straight or flush draw, or other quality draw (??)
3. Hands where you were the pre-flop aggressor but miss: The given example is: you raise with AKo, get called, and the flop is three low cards
4. Marginal hands: Weak top pair or other modest hand

All other hands should tend to be check/folded (just today I made the mistake of not doing this, sigh).


Excellent flops

The author recommends aggressive play here. You want to force your opponent to make an unprofitable call or give up the pot without a fight. Also important to note is that we want to bet more with more opponents and more dangerous boards. Some attention is also given to monster flops, like straights or flushes. The author suggests heavy betting for vulnerable monsters (e.g. your private cards are the lowest part of the straight/flush). On the other hand, it is suggested to potentially slow-play a monster that is unlikely to be beaten.


Solid draws

Generally it is recommended to check and take the free card if you are the last to act. If there are acting players after you, tend make any bet that you would be forced to call if another player made it. If another player reraises, fold unless the odds are right.


Missed flops after being pre-flop aggressor
Check/fold speculative hands on all streets. But for pre-flop steals or premium hands that missed, tend to bet 1/2-2/3 of the pot against multiple opponents that have shown weakness (checking at least once), but fold to reraise or prior bets.


Marginal hands
If nobody has put chips in the pot, bet around half, hoping to take it immediately. Abandon ship as soon as you see any betting from other players. The author gives the principle: if the following three hold:

1. pot is small
2. your hand is marginal
3. you are not the aggressor

Tend to abandon the hand.


Questions

• For excellent flops, how do we correctly bet size? I realize that the general answer is that it depends, but I'm curious to hear opinions/stories/examples.
• For marginal hands, what if you have e.g. mid-pair? Do we not ever want to bet on these during low-blind play?

 

[scooba13]

Bet Size: I try and play preflop so that I am normally playing in position except with very good hands. I generally assume that at least some of the other players are paying attention so I CB with a standard half pot whether I am betting a monster, a draw, or air. Sometimes I also check with these hands.

It really helps if you bet half every street and show down a monster once or twice so that people get the idea that you are rarely bluffing and that half pot is your bet when you're ahead.

If I have tagged a specific player as calley I resize the bet to about 2/3s and never bluff (although middle pair gains value to make up for the lack of bluffability).

Marginal hands - these are worth betting in position if everyone else has shown weakness and worth betting out of position vs one tight or calley opponent (tight will fold, calley will call with crap). If I meet much resistance I just give them up - I've donked off too many chips playing 77 strong on a J83 board and finding I was beat by both the QJ AND the 84s that called me down.

 

[basse]

Bet Size: I try and play preflop so that I am normally playing in position except with very good hands. I generally assume that at least some of the other players are paying attention so I CB with a standard half pot whether I am betting a monster, a draw, or air. Sometimes I also check with these hands.

It really helps if you bet half every street and show down a monster once or twice so that people get the idea that you are rarely bluffing and that half pot is your bet when you're ahead.

If I have tagged a specific player as calley I resize the bet to about 2/3s and never bluff (although middle pair gains value to make up for the lack of bluffability).

Marginal hands - these are worth betting in position if everyone else has shown weakness and worth betting out of position vs one tight or calley opponent (tight will fold, calley will call with crap). If I meet much resistance I just give them up - I've donked off too many chips playing 77 strong on a J83 board and finding I was beat by both the QJ AND the 84s that called me down.

I think I'm still in the learning phase with playing middle pairs strongly. My two biggest weaknesses seem to be that, and then on the other hand playing too timidly because I worry that I'm too loose.

I will try to keep the "principle" given by the author in mind though, which should help.

Both you and the author mention betting half the pot. I think I need to start doing that more consistently, my post-flop betting ranges are much too varying, I think, and probably end up costing me money that way. Seeing as it's also pretty much never recommended betting more than the pot here (I guess excellent hands might work for that), I have definitely been betting too aggressively.