Satellite Play Multi-Seat Guarantees

[Talking Poker]

It's hard to give specific advice without knowing a specific situation (how many seats, how many players left, your stack size, average stack size, # of big stacks, # of small stacks, blind size, etc, etc).

But, generally speaking, yes - there tourneys play significantly different than normal MTTs do. In a normal MTT, the big stacks pick on the small stacks. But in a satellite such as this, it's exactly the opposie - the short stacks (should) pick on the big stacks. Why? Because the big stacks are all but guaranteed to win UNLESS they start losing hands. And if they don't play, they can't lose. I see big stacks playing aggressively ALL THE TIME in these types of situations, and that's ridiculous. Why take a risk when you can ust walk away and win? Late in ourneys like this, you need to remember that you aren't playing to win - rather, you are playing to NOT LOSE.

Let me give you an extreme example: Down to 51 players with blinds of 1000/2000 and the top 50 all win the same prize, you are on the button with AA. You have 10x the average chip size. The shortest stack at the table, who has maybe 2 BBs left, goes all in from EP and it folds around to you. What do you do?

Answer: Fold. You shouldn't even be watching the screen. With 10x the average stack, you should be watching tv in the other room. There is no way it is mathematicaly possible or you to get blinded out at this point, so just go away. With 51 players left, there are about to be 50 winners and more importantly ONE loser. And the only way you can lose is by playing. So don't play. Just walk away.

That's an extreme example, and in reality, I would probably call the 2 BB bet and hope to end it right there. But I still believe the correct decision is to fold.

[Boobie Lover]

I have to disagree with the example. It would only be correct if you are in no danger of elimination (guaranteed a seat) and a person with more chips than you goes all-in. There, folding is correct. This example is not.

[Talking Poker]

Why? With 10x the average stack, there is a 0% chance of you being blinded off. Just fold. Calling here costs you 2 BBs if you get sucked out on, and potentially a lot more if either of the blinds comes along and you get involved in a bigger hand.

There is no reason to play.

Edit: What if instead of 2 BBs (extreme example), the short stack had an average stack? 10% of your chips? what if he had 1/4 of your stack? What about half?

He has you covered in none of those examples, and I think they are all clear folds.

[Boobie Lover]

Right from HOH Volume II for sattellite touranments.

"Correct strategy for the leaders is to avoid confrontations with each other and cooperate to eliminate the small stacks."

[eejit101]

nice on paper.....

[Robbie Robb]

While TP's initial example is a little extreme , I agree with him - if I can fold my way to a place and am mathematically guaranteed NOT to be blinded out, I put on my fold hat and away I go. The 'sit out' button works wonders for that sort of thing Even with Aces, I'm not going to risk some donkey catching his one-outer to double up off me, possibly putting me in a situation where I now HAVE to play to make it through.

ps. Like Aeq, I too must spread some love around before hitting TP again

[Nikita]

I'll give TP some of the love (no spreading around for me to do). I liked what he said as well. It's nice to try and eliminate that last person, but I don't want to sacrifice my seat to do it.

[bunny]

I gave him some points for that excellent advice post.

Mathematical win > eliminate small stacks

This ( ^o^) is me, for anyone who doesn't know it, yet.

[Aequitas58]

Good.

Oh well: You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Talking Poker again.

I tried.