Ring vs Tournament

Replay Poker Poker Strategy
21

The function of Risk ( chipstack/BB(bet/raise) ) will stay constant in a Ring situation due to the fact that blinds never increase… ( or stay linear , ie- a straight line )

The function of Risk ( chipstack/BB(bet/raise) ) increases in a SnG/MTT situation due to increasing blinds over time… ( modified exponential curve , ie- 1/2 of a parabola opening up )

Not only as @1Warlock said edges eventually reduce to 0… Risk, eventually becomes 100 ( well it hits 1, up from 0 ) in SnG-MTT applications… The dbbl whammy… your edge goes down as risk goes up … All the more important is to have a good read on the players left, so you make the correct decisions.

1 Like
22

We could get deep into the weeds of ratios and odds but that probably doesn’t help new players that just need a basic strategy for winning at a tourney or ring table so here is my strategy and is easy to remember.

Tourney play:

1- You have a narrow window of small blinds when you should take more risk on hands and see more flops. Take advantage of that window to build up your stack with some big pots so you can survive the blinds as they increase.

2- As blinds increase take less risk but watch for vulnerable players sitting on the big blind. If they are slow playing to run out the clock then a double bet might get an easy fold with no risk.

3- Always be aware of where the Big Blind is and as it gets closer to you take more risk on a good hand to offset a possible bad hand on the blind.

4- Let other players take each other out if their stack is bigger than yours.The object is to stay on the table and let the big stacks fight it out. If you get into a battle between two big stacks your risk is alot greater so fold and let them battle it out unless you have a monster hand.

5- Look for vulnerable players with low chip count where you can go head to head. That is your best opportunity to pick up some hands on a fold as they try to run out the clock but be aware they are also more likely to all in you as a desperation play so you better have a good hand.

Ring games:

1- Your blinds stay constant so there is less risk and you can ride out a bad streak of cards but because of that the hands people will hold will generally be stronger than in a tourney. You will see more full houses and straights and less pairs because players are not under the gun of playing against blinds and the clock.

2- Because risk is lower you will see more players stay for the flop and that increases your risk so watch for hands to play when most of the players fold and you can get a heads up or fewer people in the hand. There may be times you want all the players to stay for the flop to build a big pot so be aware a big bet or playing bingo bet pre-flop is going to drive the money off the table.

3- Watch for players that fold alot and then suddenly throw out a big bet. They are laying for you and have the nuts and probably playing a big pair so you better have a good hand or fold and frustrate them.

4- Don’t let people fish to the river. If you have a winner on the flop and you can see a potential flush or straight then put out a hefty bet to drive off the players that are fishing.

5- Watch the plonkers that join and go all in right away and keep doing it. They are just playing the bonus chips they got that day and most never last more than a few hands but they do get lucky and will take you out on stupid hands. Better to fold and frustrate them. That is similar to tourney play at the start of a tourney.

OK, that is just my strategy and opinion and I hope it helps!

23

SPG - I think this thread may require some direction from you. You started with edges and later stated that you were looking for general ways rings and tournaments differ. Where do you want to take it next? Are we looking at the structural differences 1st and then examining how those are addressed strategy wise or did you want to dive into strategy right away? A huge amount of information falls under this thread’s topic and without direction, I think the conversation may wander all over the map and not address the elements you had intended it to.

24

I don’t mind if it wanders, let it go where it will.

Having said that, it would probably be better to look at the structural differences first, then see what strategic differences are implied by the structural differences.

25

I think the driving difference between rings and tournaments is the “survival” factor, and that all other considerations come out of this foundational difference.

I just can’t wrap my head around the relationship between cEV and $EV. 1Warlock has patiently tried to explain it to me, and, though I do understand his arguments, I just can’t accept them. This has almost nothing to do with the fact that he is named after a cat.

Especially difficult is his assertion that chip EV and “cash” EV are closest at the beginning of a tournament. To me, the math of this relationship gets washed out by the “noise” of other factors, and is much better defined near the end of the tournament.

The key to this, I think, is the varying average skill levels involved. This is almost impossible to quantify, but certainly plays a big part. The math doesn’t take this into account.

For example, early in a tournament you raise preflop with AK and get called. The flop comes A56. Is your hand still good? Early on, a lot of players will call raises with any ace or any pair, but this isn’t so much the case at the final table. This is what I think of as the “wild card” factor, and it is very real.

Anyway, let me ask this… would you agree that the foundational difference is the “survival” factor, and that the relationship between chip EV and cash EV is the primary manifestation of this fundamental difference?

26

OK, lets talk structural differences first. The relevance of ICM and cEV and $EV should come naturally out of this line at some point. You have to keep in mind that ICM doesn’t do a lot of things. It doesn’t take into consideration skill differences or positional advantages and it assumes the game ends at the end of the current hand. Its a limited tool for these reasons.

I think the survival factor is a major difference but not the whole picture in most tournaments, except satellites. In a basic satellite, everyone who makes the money is paid evenly. As soon as the bubble breaks, it doesn’t matter if you have 1% of the remaining chips or 99% of them - the payout is the same and the game ends. There is 1 bubble in a satellite because there is only pay-jump - you get nothing or you get paid the same as everyone who made it to the cash.

In all other tournaments, the payout structure is not equal once the bubble bursts. We can use 9-player SnG’s for simplicity’s sake. 6 players get nothing. The winner gets 50%, 2nd gets 30% and 3rd gets 20% of the total prize pool. This is a top-weighted payout structure where the winner gets as much as #2 and #3 combined. The payout structures of all MTT’s are heavily top-weighted - even more so than SnG’s are. In a typical 100 runner MTT, you have the top 12 spots paying. The winner may receive close to 30% of the total prize pool while spots 10-12 receive about 1 3/4% each. This is far from the equal payouts in a satellite.

So, when considering strategies, how do the payout structures affect them? Yes, there is a survival factor because unless you make the cash, you get nothing. However, the difference between just cashing and wining is huge. You would have to min-cash 17 times in a 100 runner MTT to receive the same payout as the player who wins 1 and doesn’t cash in the other 16. You have to consider all these pay jumps and factor them in to your decision making at the time.

Going to leave it here to see if anyone else wants to add in some more structural differences before moving on. I guess one other obvious one is that you can get up and quit most cash games anytime you want and take your chips to the cashier. In tournaments, this isn’t possible. You play until you are out of chips or you have them all. How you placed in terms of finishing position determines what, if anything, you pick up at the cashier on the way out the door.

3 Likes
27

The cat said I could change my user ID anytime I wanted to, but only after I beat him in a HU match. I think I’m going to have to live with it because he’s just too good for me :slight_smile:

2 Likes
28

min-cash 17 times to equal 1 win and not cashing the other 16 times. hmm , are u taking pure profit from both of those to compare and deducting all buy ins for the 17 games played each or are u not deducting the buy in amount for all 17 games on both or 1 of them??

29

Same, same. Assume they both play 17 MTT’s with $100 buy-ins and 100 runners per tournament (no entry fee to keep it simple).

Player 1:
$3000 payout for 1st place + $0 x 16 did not cash = $3000 - $1700 for 17 buy-ins = $1300 net

Player 2:
$175 payout for min-cash x 17 MTT’s = $2975 - $1700 for 17 buy-ins = $1275 net

Kind of startling isn’t it? This was a concept it took me a while to grab on to. Once I did, my % cashes went down but my ROI went up. More early bust-outs but more deep runs the times I did cash led to much higher returns overall.

3 Likes
30

ok, ya it is startling. I always knew it is so top heavy and i usually go for the win well before placing because of the fact its not worth the time u play to just min-place. i might take more risks on some really good hands because i know if i win 1st a few times it will pay for many more buy ins for future games on top of the profit and will pay for the previous buy ins where u didnt place too. Its similar to seeing the flop as much as u can early on while blinds are low and play every hand, even 27 off,38 off and everything else because you are bound to hit a stght,flush,trips etc. on 1 or 2 of the ones u woulda folded ( how many times did u say " i wish i didnt fold that hand, i woulda had this or that and won " so all u have to do is play those few hands well and the pot or pots u won on those so called bad cards that turned into the best hand and those 1 or 2 hands will pay for all the blinds of the other so called bad cards that lost and u are usually still left with a profit. Kind of a similar situation what we are talking about as far as the placing break down of the numbers. That 1300 net will buy your way into 13 more tourneys too, and all u have to do is win 1 and not place all others ( which of course u most likely will in many ). Seems a lot easier to win the 1 than min-place 17 times :slight_smile:

31

I have been trying to tell you that since your first post here!

Let’s confine this to MTTs for now. Satellites and SnGs are special cases which we can look at later.

I agree that ICM type tools are extremely limited in their application.

OK yes, there are more differences than just the “survival factor,” but it’s probably the most important structural difference, and the root cause for many strategic differences.

The ever increasing average skill level in a typical MTT is unique to tournaments. I consider it to be structural because it should (and does) drive strategic considerations.

The top-heavy payouts are also a structural difference, and should influence strategy.

The changing blind/ante is another obvious structural difference.

What else?

1 Like
32

Yup - you were one of the 1st to plant this concept in my thick skull. It took a little while to germinate but eventually I got there. It was actually easier to understand than it was to change strategies to do anything about it. That took a bit of doing.

1 Like
33

OK, let’s take this from a different angle. I think there are 4 main differences between ring games and MTTs, and that these differences drive a lot of other strategic adaptations.

First would be the survival factor. Once you’re out, you’re out. The need for bigger edges, the need for tighter calling ranges, and other strategic adjustments arise from this basic difference.

Second, the average skill level of the players you face gradually goes from lowest to highest in an MTT, and this dynamic is absent from ring games.

Third, the blind/ante structure almost demands that you make adjustments during the course of a tournament, and this pressure is missing in ring games.

Fourth, MTTs have a fixed payout structure, which isn’t the case in ring games.

Can anyone add any basic differences that don’t fit under one of these four?

1 Like
34

You will get low ranked, middle and high ranked players in ring games and players drop off and new join so the game is constantly changing. That is why you need to check the players rank or know them when you sit down and when they join.

Rank doesn’t really mean anything though and a player with a low rank may have just joined Replay and actually be a very experienced player from some other poker website. Their game play will tell you more than their rank and a poor player is a poor player regardless of rank.

Inexperienced players are harder to read and will do crazy stuff and win hands they should have folded because of that luck factor. Good players develop bet patterns and hold patterns you can read if you know what to look for and you can take advantage of those in a ring game because you will be on the table with them longer.

The pay structures and time involved is the reason I prefer ring to tourney because in a ring I can wait for a good hand and really capitalize on that rolling up the bet so you can win alot more on a ring table in a shorter period of time than you can playing tourneys unless you play sitngo which is really not so much a tourney as it is people shuffling chips back and forth to get a win on the boards and increase their rank. High pot sitingo’s are a joke IMO.

Just my opinion and others may see it differently.

1 Like
35

@SunPowerGuru ,

2 more are symbiotic… Bankroll risk and Bankroll profit potential …
MTT/SnG both are fixed, whereas Ring both are variable…
I shall assume SPG, we are talking about Ring vs Tourny in a vaccum, because attaching any sort of leaderboard to this equation drastically changes the question.

Sassy

1 Like
36

I would roll these up into the fixed payout structure one.

You would assume correctly, at least for now.

We all know ring games and tournaments are different. I’m trying to sort out the ways they are different in the most basic terms. Once this is done, we can start looking at how these basic differences relate to ways one can approach the game.

I will admit I am doing this for my own benefit. Writing things out helps me to order my thoughts on a topic, and the feedback often opens new doors for me to explore. I hope the exercise might also be of some small interest or benefit to others as well.

1 Like
37

yeah, I guess ur right… sorry

38

Another difference is: if you like it, you can’t put a tournament on it. :wink:

1 Like
39

Good list. I’d add in that you cannot select your table or change seats/games in tournaments while you can in cash games. Game selection is a big deal in poker. In cash, if you are at a table or position that isn’t good for you, you can change tables or seats (diff methods for live and online). In a tournament, you are stuck wherever you are seated until the table is broken up. Therefore the only way to select games is to look at the format and the field before you select one to register for and then hope you get lucky in where you are seated.

I’d modify #3 a bit

Nothing “almost” about it. Varying stack depths and increasing blinds affect almost all decisions and require adjustments in everything from open sizes to hand selection.

Adding to #4 since we are talking non-satellite MTT’s to point out a top-heavy weighting to payouts. Also that the final payout details may not be known when you begin play if they allow for late registration. Generally you can look at the tournament’s payout template well ahead of time to get an idea of what it will look like when finalized. Some pay top 10% and min-cashes are significantly more than your buy-in. Some pay top 20% and a min-cash is only 25-50% more than your buy-in.

I think that about covers the big differences unless someone else has something we overlooked. Looking forward to getting into differences in strategies between the two.

40

OK, let’s add that MTTs don’t allow table selection, while ring games do. I agree that this is a big part of the game.

I also agree with your comments on the top-heavy structure, but I was trying to list differences in the most general terms.

As far as the “almost,” yeah, agreed. So many people try to play the same game all the way though that I added the “almost” to be sure I didn’t offend anyone. As you know, I’m am always sensitive to the feelings of other people!!