All in or Fold? Is this a viable tournament strategy?

[vampitup]

The basic premise is that pros prefer to play postflop where they have bigger edges, so only the weaker players will be calling you unless its AA/KK.

Yeah, that's basically what Sklansky said, and also, according to some accounts how Noel Furlong won the WSOP in the 90s.  The thing is, it's harder to call an all in for your whole stack or a high proportion of it, unless you have a premium hand, so blind stealing is made somewhat easier.

I will give you an example.  $20 sit & go on stars earlier, I was playing normal poker.  I had AQ spades in the SB and made it 300 to play with blinds 50/100.  BB called, flop 77K 2 spades.  First to act, I decide to go all in and try to pick the pot up and slightly overbet the pot with the all in.  BB calls in a flash with 3 7.  Point is, he would never have called the all in pre flop as it was such a higher proportion of his stack.

vampitup - the player phil gordon is referring to is a big of a big internet name, Spiritrock aka mahatma. aka Prahled Friedman.

Have you ever seen this guy play Gryffles??  What site does he play on? 

Anyone fancy trying this in a cash game???!!!

[Gryffles]

Have you ever seen this guy play Gryffles??  What site does he play on? 

Anyone fancy trying this in a cash game???!!!

He plays on UB high stakes cash games.

[Wardonkey]

I once took my brother to play a £5 re-buy tourney, he had never played poker before in his life and didn't know the difference between a flush and a straight. I taught him Sklansky's system, adapted for the more manic Gutshot beginners night (the system was originally devised for the WSOP main event).

It was one of the funniest things I have ever witnessed, the other players were scared witless of him. Whenever he was involved in a pot (always all-in pre-flop) he would just sit there with a bemused look on his face waiting to see if the dealer gave him chips or took them away, he would have been incapable of reading the board even if he had remembered his glasses!

He got to the final, claimed 3 more victims and amassed a huge chip lead. It all went a bit wrong then, he deviated from the system for the first time and called off half his chips with A9 and Q10. He eventually came 4th, from 110 runners, and won £240 from his £10 (buy-in and 1 add-on). I was very proud of him and could not wipe the smile off my face for days after.

[matt674]

I believe that if you are a player of better than average skill then this system will not be good for you in the long run. By only limiting yourself to two moves, either all-in or fold you are taking away the skill factor of the game and just relying on lady luck. If you are better than your opponents then use your skill and ability to outplay them and as many of their chips without putting your chips at risk where at all possible.

Sklansky took a quote from Bobby Baldwin just after the main event of the 1981 WSOP main event and interpreted it as follows:

"expert players do not rely on luck, they are at war with it. They use their skills to minimize luck as much as possible. They figure they're getting the best of it, and they leave the lucky draws to their weaker opponents. To the extent that they are getting the best of it, they will win more than they lose. Over the long run everybody gets the same proportion of good and bad cards, of winning and losing hands. Beginning poker players rely on big hands and lucky draws. Expert poker players use their skills to minimize their losses on the bad hands and maximize their profits on the big hands. They also are able to judge better than others when a big hand is not the best hand and when a small hand is the best hand."

[vampitup]

I believe that if you are a player of better than average skill then this system will not be good for you in the long run. By only limiting yourself to two moves, either all-in or fold you are taking away the skill factor of the game and just relying on lady luck. If you are better than your opponents then use your skill and ability to outplay them and as many of their chips without putting your chips at risk where at all possibl

I think there certainly is some skill element to this, ie hand selection according to the stages in the tournaments. 

It also stops you getting into trouble with hands when you end up chasing draws etc.  Example, if you go on a blind steal with a hand like T9 suited or JT and flop either top pair or decent draw, but come up against resistance, how far do you go with the hand?

The whole point is that you have to put your chips up for risk when you find a 'playable' hand at that stage of the tournament, and hence makes it much harder for opponents to call.  For example, the guy who defended his blind with 3 7 who I gave an example of earlier, would not have done so (or at least much less likely to do that) if it was for all his chips.  There are some hands you don't want to see a flop with and hence unless someone finds a big hand, you won't have to if you just move all in pre flop.  Having said that, I have seen some atrocious calls so far as you are taking the opponent out of his comfort zone, they were actually dominated by my hand and I doubled through. 

Did anyone who I PM'd last night have any luck with the system?  I would try it on a site like Stars where the structures of tournaments are usually better than the crypto network, and there are less people willing to call for all their chips which certainly exists on crypto!

Expert poker players use their skills to minimize their losses on the bad hands and maximize their profits on the big hands. They also are able to judge better than others when a big hand is not the best hand and when a small hand is the best hand."

I wouldn't class myself as an expert player by any means but I have far better results live than online, as live I find I can gauge mentally whether a player is weak or strong, and have a better idea whether I have the best hand or not.  Online, obviously this is more difficult and hence harder to read a player, and with so many volatile players online I often seem to be folding the best hand.  The system avoids this.  Whether I would use it live is a different issue, although when I played at the Walsall festival recently the players were so volatile it was like playing online! 

[Graham C]

No joy  but I may give it another go tonight.  You can't sit around waiting for AA, KK or AK on the first few levels - it just doesn't happen often enough, perhaps A 7 would be enough?

I don't think it would be a good long term stratagy though, maybe a few STT's but if you go all in all the time, you will get outdrawn at some point and it will mean the end of your tourney when you do.

[vampitup]

Also does anyone fancy trying this in cash with the idea of moving in on the flop instead?  Like the guy Phil Gordon described, and Gryffles referred to, move in with 2 pair or better or any draw.  Go all in pre flop with AA, KK, QQ, AK.  

When I get back from work tonight I am going to try this on a couple of $5 buy in cash games on Stars.

[matt674]

I'm sorry but if i get AK early on in the tourney when the blinds are only say 15/30 then i am not putting my 1500 chips at risk just to win a possible 45 chips. If i get called by any pair then i'm actually having to rely on outdrawing my opponent to win the pot!!

If i want to play games of chance then i'll go down the local bingo hall of an evening instead........

[AdamM]

why do you want to take ALL the skill out of poker. only moving in on a selected range of hands doesn't make it skill, it makes it reliant on the luck of the deal. the more hands you're dealt in your range, the more likely you are to win.

Sorry guys but I don't think this All in or pass strategy has much to do with poker. I realise that it's tough to beat because unless the whole table reacts in the right way to it tilting weak players will chip up the All In player. if the whole table simply rocked up it and only called with top 10 hands it and played strictly in position it wouldnt take long to knock you out.

[Wardonkey]

The system is designed to give the complete novice a chance in a no-limit tournament. The whole point of it is to take the skill out of the game by eliminating the decision making process. It serves its purpose very well and is difficult to play against. I doubt it is profitable in the long-term and skilled players will undoubtedly have better results than anyone playing 'the system' on a regular basis.

[matt674]

The system is designed to give the complete novice a chance in a no-limit tournament. The whole point of it is to take the skill out of the game by eliminating the decision making process. It serves its purpose very well and is difficult to play against. I doubt it is profitable in the long-term and skilled players will undoubtedly have better results than anyone playing 'the system' on a regular basis.

And the novice will never learn anything from the game...................

[Wardonkey]

The system is designed to give the complete novice a chance in a no-limit tournament. The whole point of it is to take the skill out of the game by eliminating the decision making process. It serves its purpose very well and is difficult to play against. I doubt it is profitable in the long-term and skilled players will undoubtedly have better results than anyone playing 'the system' on a regular basis.

And the novice will never learn anything from the game...................

It is not supposed to be a teaching aid, its purpose is solely to give a COMPLETE novice (a total non poker player) a chance, not to create a winning poker player. Slightly more experienced players may gain something from experimenting with the system as part of a more rounded poker education. 

[matt674]

It is not supposed to be a teaching aid, its purpose is solely to give a COMPLETE novice (a total non poker player) a chance, not to create a winning poker player.

case closed............

[Wardonkey]

Matt, I don't know if your argueing with me or not, but I think your missing the point.

I'm not trying to say that anyone should use the system as a way of playing regularly. I don't think anyone has suggested that. To deny that the system has any value what so ever is wrong. It is very good at what it was designed for. As part of a rounded poker education it is an interesting experiment.

[matt674]

No sir i'm not arguing with you i'm just trying to make the point that for anyone with an ounce of knowledge and skill of the game that this is not the way to play poker as in the long run it just would not be profitable.

Looking at the thread there are several people who have said they have tried it or that they were going to look into trying a slighty modified version and whilst it may be a bit of fun whilst playing a $1 sit and go - it isn't the way to make a profit in the long term.

How many top class players can you name who incorporate this style into their game? How many big tournaments have been won recently by players using this method? Come the think of it how many small tournaments have been won by this method?