If we knew how to obtain that success, dont u think we would do it?

Edit: not trying to be rude, just saying.

They made most of their money from HU sng,not 9-person SNG. And there are no techinically perfect ways to play HU SNG, you have to read your opponents well. For 9-person SNG, a formulatic approach may make you some money at lower buy-in, but at higher buyin SNG, you are break-even at best using this approach.

<h4><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td align="left">By qjuice14 on 05-04-2008 3:41 AM </td><td align="right">Reply Favorites </td></tr></tbody></table> </h4> <table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr valign="top"><td><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" height="100%" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td>One thing they know is neither they nor jennifear play technically perfect in sngs. Jennifear even advocates playing a lot of junk hands from different spots to confuse her opponents and b/c she plays well after flop. If you just play ABC robotic in sngs you will have success, but the best players will exploit you every time.
</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody></table>
not really. the better players that beat you just have a better grasp of icm and a outstanding push/call range in the 100-200 100-200 25 ante levels which every grinder knows are two of the biggest levels.

The post you guys are both referring to, I think anyway, was about playing some speculative hands, in position, in myultiway pots, in the VERY early blind levels because a lot of bad players at low buyins are going to be giving their money to someone and you'd rather get a piece before those chips get into the hands of better players. I don't recall her advocating mixing it up to keep people off balance though.

Tough question, but I'll give it a go.

The popular notion that SNGs are solved is a bunch of bullshit.

There is a "technically perfect" answer for every situation in the late game. There is a Nash Equilibrium in this stage of the game that means that there is a perfect play for each situation, against perfect players, who know you are playing perfect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nash_equilibrium

You can calculate the proper plays using SNG Wiz, or a calculator like this one:

Nash ICM Push/Fold Calculator

At the highest levels, the Nash play and the proper play nearly always mirror each other, with few exceptions.

The top guys know push/fold better than anyone. However, like you suspect, it's more than that. See, people aren't perfect. And those who are don't always know that you are near-perfect. So the optimal push/fold ranges are often quite different from the Nash Equilibrium.

An example of what I mean, in English:

3000 3000 3000 3000 at 200-400 with 25 antes. Let's assume that we are the BB. The SB shoves.

<TABLE class=simple cellSpacing=2 cellPadding=3 border=1><TBODY><TR><TH width=40>PU</TH><TH width=40>CA</TH><TH width=40>OC</TH><TH>Range</TH></TR><TR><TD>CO</TD><TD><TD><TD>38.8%, 22+ Ax+ K2s+ K9o+ Q5s+ QTo+ J7s+ J9o+ T7s+ T9o 96s+ 86s+ 75s+ 65s 54s </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD>BU</TD><TD><TD>2.6%, TT+ AKs </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD><TD>SB</TD><TD>0.5%, AA </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD><TD>BB</TD><TD>0.5%, AA </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD>SB</TD><TD><TD>4.5%, 99+ AJs+ AKo </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD><TD>BB</TD><TD>0.9%, KK+ </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD>BB</TD><TD><TD>7.1%, 88+ ATs+ AJo+ </TD></TR><TR><TD>BU</TD><TD><TD><TD>49.0%, 22+ Ax+ K2s+ K4o+ Q3s+ Q8o+ J5s+ J9o+ T6s+ T8o+ 96s+ 98o 85s+ 75s+ 64s+ 54s </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD>SB</TD><TD><TD>7.1%, 88+ ATs+ AJo+ </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD><TD>BB</TD><TD>0.9%, KK+ </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD>BB</TD><TD><TD>8.3%, 88+ A9s+ ATo+ </TD></TR><TR><TD>SB</TD><TD><TD><TD>100.0%, Any two<<<This here is what he should be shoving with.</TD></TR><TR><TD><TD>BB</TD><TD><TD>18.4%, 55+ A4s+ A7o+ K9s+ KTo+ QTs+ <<<<This is the "technically perfect" calling range, assuming that he is shoving correctly.</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Against a pro, or a competant player who will indeed shove 100%, you should call about 16-18% of all hands, depending on if you need/want a minimum edge.

Against a random player, calling that often is crazy, because many players are not shoving any two in that spot. You may assume that a random is shoving about 25% and decide to call with only 77+ and AQ or better instead!

In addition, most of the popular literature out there will tell you to play a tight early game. In most cases, you should indeed do this because there are ICM considerations. However, the way most of this literature reads, you should be folding hands like A9 or KJ, when folded to you in late position. That's just horrible advice, and it's costing people money. It's still a poker game. When it's folded to you in late position, raise a wide range, especially against players who are horrible. Your better postflop play will easily make up for the problem of the chips you are risking being worth more than the chips you stand to gain.

This is a situation-dependent game. Keeping your mind open at all times is a good idea. There are indeed times to play hands such as 73s early in a SNG, where it is unquestionably the best play. (example: folded to you in the SB, 20-tabler in the BB). In addition, limping 22 UTG is a theoretical mistake, but one that is easily made up for (in most $27 or less games) by the fact that other players make bigger mistakes, such as stacking off with top pair.

The very best players on this planet recognize when the "Technically perfect" play is not the optimal one.

Please do note that often, if you are an exceptionally good player, volume (playing more tables) is really the key to making more $/hr, and passing up on some of the small edges that I have outlined may increase your ability to play more tables, and therefore may be in your best interest.

Cliff notes: For optimal results, see the game for what it is, and don't rely on a rote strategy or ICM exclusively to beat the game.

Your first sentence is pretty flawed, at least the first half. If that were true, people like bigjoe, Spacegravy, jhub, etc. would not be top players, because they don't play hu.