Examining Early SNG Play from a Different View
It's long been said that correct Sit 'N Go strategy is to play a tight game early when the blinds are small, opening up your game only when the blinds get larger. SNG experts have used ICM (Independent Chip Modeling) to back that argument up. While some players have attempted to propose an alternate strategy, none have effectively tried to counter the original argument that shows, mathematically, why you should play tight early on. I will counter that argument today, plus explain when it is correct or incorrect to switch styles.
I'll tell you some of my story, because I have a unique perspective on the game. I started to play poker in August 2002, never intending to play for real money. I won a very small amount of money, built it up to $100 playing .01/.02 NLH, then discovered the SNG five months after I started. Though gifted in mathematics, including probability and odds, I was not a natural.
I learned this game through trial and error, friends, and extensive reading of poker books. Every poker book I read suggested aggressive play, so I learned an aggressive style, completely unaware that what you were "supposed to do" in a SNG was play a tight game early. I managed to play a few thousand $5+.50 and $10+1 SNGs on Ultimate Bet this way before I ever learned that "tight is right" early in a SNG. Despite not knowing this information, I was highly successful. Even after obtaining this information, I never drastically adjusted my style. To this day, I am not a very tight player in the early going. Although I have become more cautious at times, aggression is still the rule for me. It's worked very well, as I have been tremendously profitable and have had several successful students who also employ an aggressive style, in position, early in a SNG.
Here is the argument I will counter today. I have seen it in various forms, but this is the classic argument used by experts for playing tight early, and even though I am not fully "on board" with this argument, it's very important that you understand the mathematics, reasoning, and concepts involved in it if you want to be a better SNG player:
————————————————————————————————————-
The biggest reason you should play tighter early in a SNG is that it's a competition of survival. SNG's don't pay you for early leads, and you can't win the SNG at the beginning, but you can certainly lose it. You don't win any money unless you make it to the final three, and if you win all the chips at the end, you still only get half the prize pool, but if you lose your chips early, you lose your entire buyin, so the upside is not that high.
Your chips and your money are two different entities, and doubling your chip count doesn't double the amount of money you can expect to win:
For instance, in a 10-man $20 SNG, everybody's equity on paper is the same at the beginning:
| Player | Chips | Prob 1st | Prob 2nd | Prob 3rd | Equity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hero | 1500 | 0.1000 | 0.1000 | 0.1000 | $20.00 |
| Player 2 | 1500 | 0.1000 | 0.1000 | 0.1000 | $20.00 |
| Player 3 | 1500 | 0.1000 | 0.1000 | 0.1000 | $20.00 |
| Player 4 | 1500 | 0.1000 | 0.1000 | 0.1000 | $20.00 |
| Player 5 | 1500 | 0.1000 | 0.1000 | 0.1000 | $20.00 |
| Player 6 | 1500 | 0.1000 | 0.1000 | 0.1000 | $20.00 |
| Player 7 | 1500 | 0.1000 | 0.1000 | 0.1000 | $20.00 |
| Player 8 | 1500 | 0.1000 | 0.1000 | 0.1000 | $20.00 |
| Player 9 | 1500 | 0.1000 | 0.1000 | 0.1000 | $20.00 |
| Player 10 | 1500 | 0.1000 | 0.1000 | 0.1000 | $20.00 |
However, should you double up and defeat player 10 on the first hand, your equity on paper is:
| Player | Chips | Prob for 1st | Prob 2nd | Prob 3rd | Equity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hero | 3000 | 0.2000 | 0.1778 | 0.1556 | $36.89 |
| Player 2 | 1500 | 0.1000 | 0.1028 | 0.1056 | $20.39 |
| Player 3 | 1500 | 0.1000 | 0.1028 | 0.1056 | $20.39 |
| Player 4 | 1500 | 0.1000 | 0.1028 | 0.1056 | $20.39 |
| Player 5 | 1500 | 0.1000 | 0.1028 | 0.1056 | $20.39 |
| Player 6 | 1500 | 0.1000 | 0.1028 | 0.1056 | $20.39 |
| Player 7 | 1500 | 0.1000 | 0.1028 | 0.1056 | $20.39 |
| Player 8 | 1500 | 0.1000 | 0.1028 | 0.1056 | $20.39 |
| Player 9 | 1500 | 0.1000 | 0.1028 | 0.1056 | $20.39 |
| Player 10 | 0 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | $0.00 |
As you can see, you only gain $16.89 in equity, so you didn't really "double up," even though youdid double your chip count. However, the equity you lost doesn't just "disappear". There is still $200 in the prize pool, so that equity still exists. It goes to the other players. The other eight players that did nothing each gained $.39 equity.
To get to this point, you had to risk $20.00 to win $16.89 in equity. To counter this, you need to win 54.21% ($20/$36.89) of your allins at this stage to make this a break-even proposition, rather than the 50% that would normally do.
As a result, it's best to play a cautious game when the blinds are small, playing only premium hands and limiting position steals, continuation betting, and speculative play, in favor of hanging onto your chips so you can reach the final stages of the SNG, where aggressiveness is more appropriate. Survival is the most important part of this stage of the SNG, much more important than chip accumulation.
————————————————————————————————————-
The above argument is based on solid reasoning and mathematics, and because of this, it has become today's conventional wisdom. It's how nearly every SNG guide, article, post, or book written by nearly every SNG pro will teach you to play the game.
However, this argument has some holes in it.
Here are the holes in the reasoning:
– One of the most fundamental ways to increase your chipstack in a SNG is to play deepstack pots with bad players. If good players "know" to play very few pots and bad players play too many pots, then you are more likely to end up in a pot with a bad player in the early going. In a $20+2 SNG, the average player has a -10% ROI (because there is 10% rake), and the worst players sitting will have an expected ROI of -30% to -25%. Players like this generally fail to play good postflop poker, are easily read, make bad bets, and sometimes lose their entire stack with merely middle pair or a draw. Most of the time, this player will be among the first few eliminated. It behooves you to get involved with this type of player as often as possible. You want to be the one taking this guy's chips before they fall into a better player's hands and are tougher to get. You gain by losing less when you are beaten and gaining more when you are not.
– Due to conventional strategy, good players often won't risk it all without a monster hand and will often make a mistake by folding the best hand if you apply pressure. They are less likely to bluff out your continuation bet and less likely to continue with a medium strength hand, instead opting for the safer route of folding to survive. LAG play works best against tighter players that aren't ready to take a stand. You gain by earning pots at a higher frequency.
– Independent Chip Modeling shows that of your starting 1500 chips, your last chip is most valuable. When you accumulate chips, you cover more of your opponent's stacks, further protecting your last chip ("chip and a chair"). So later on in the SNG, if you take a bad beat or have a second-best hand against an opponent who slightly covers you, you still have a chance to sneak into the money with your small stack. Third place is a very important place in SNGs. By accumulating chips early, you gain by backing into third more often.
– You become less predictable. If your opponents recognize you as a good SNG player, they will often assume that you are only playing premium hands. When that assumption is wrong, you may get more respect for your hands than you deserve. If they know you as "too loose," they will pay you off with your better hands. I enjoy playing good twelve-tablers with 8-10% ROI when I sit, because I know I can steal their blinds with impugnity with a very small non-standard raise, and I know that when they enter a pot they have a premium hand, making them very easy to range and making it very easy to make an otherwise borderline laydown. This makes for easy chip accumulation.
Finally, the counter-argument against the math:
Here's a typical SNG bubble scenario:
| Player | Chips | Prob 1st | Prob 2nd | Prob 3rd | Equity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Player 1 | 6000 | 0.4000 | 0.3070 | 0.2027 | $66.53 |
| Player 2 | 4000 | 0.2667 | 0.2855 | 0.2672 | $54.48 |
| Player 3 | 3000 | 0.2000 | 0.2368 | 0.2882 | $45.74 |
| Player 4 | 2000 | 0.1333 | 0.1707 | 0.2419 | $33.25 |
In this instance, Player 1's equity on paperis $66.53. In reality, it's much greater! If these four players were on equal footing, this estimate would be correct. Yet these players are NOTon equal footing. Player 1 is in control, able to raise/shove more often and bully the table. Player 2, and to a lesser extent, Player 3 and Player 4, all have a big problem. Making the money is of the utmost importance. Their hands are tied trying to make the money, so they have to fold much more often than would be appropriate in a cash game where cEV and $EV are equal. This equity calculation is based primarily on the fact that since Player 1 has 40% of the chips, he will win 40% of the time. However, the player with 6000 chips here, if he is talented and knows how to work his stack, should truly be able to win this SNG as much as 50% of the time, depending on the quality of his opposition and their ability to play. So a more truthful equity calculation, taking this into account, would look like this (this is an estimate based on experience because you cannot, to the best of my knowledge tangibly calculate TRUE equity with so many variables):
| Player | Chips | Prob 1st | Prob 2nd | Prob 3rd | Equity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Player 1 | 6000 | 0.5000 | 0.3054 | 0.1498 | $74.31 |
| Player 2 | 4000 | 0.2222 | 0.2944 | 0.2902 | $51.50 |
| Player 3 | 3000 | 0.1667 | 0.2351 | 0.3083 | $43.11 |
| Player 4 | 2000 | 0.1111 | 0.1651 | 0.2517 | $31.08 |
As you can see, there is a substantial difference. Player 1, who is able to bully, gains nearly $8 in TRUE equity over the on paperestimate, whereas the medium stacks, with tied hands, lose about $3 each in TRUE equity over the on paper estimate.
Of course, if you double up early, you are much more likely to have the lead with four players remaining than you would be if you passed up the situation, where you would be more likely to end up in one of the other spots four-handed. Therefore, it is my argument that while, after you doubled in the first hand, your equity on paperis $36.89, your TRUEequity is a great deal more than that because you will win more than the 20% of the time.
Therefore, it's safe to say that if you double up early, you will win significantly more than 20% of the time, so your TRUE equity is more along the lines of $39.00.(Again, this is an estimate based on experience because you cannot, to the best of my knowledge tangibly calculate TRUE equity with so many variables.)
| Player | Chips | Prob 1st | Prob 2nd | Prob 3rd | Equity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hero | 3000 | 0.2141 | 0.1866 | 0.1597 | $39.00 |
| Player 2 | 1500 | 0.0982 | 0.1017 | 0.1050 | $20.13 |
| Player 3 | 1500 | 0.0982 | 0.1017 | 0.1050 | $20.13 |
| Player 4 | 1500 | 0.0982 | 0.1017 | 0.1050 | $20.13 |
| Player 5 | 1500 | 0.0982 | 0.1017 | 0.1050 | $20.13 |
| Player 6 | 1500 | 0.0982 | 0.1017 | 0.1050 | $20.13 |
| Player 7 | 1500 | 0.0982 | 0.1017 | 0.1050 | $20.13 |
| Player 8 | 1500 | 0.0982 | 0.1017 | 0.1050 | $20.13 |
| Player 9 | 1500 | 0.0982 | 0.1017 | 0.1050 | $20.13 |
As you can see, this is still not a full double-up, and some of the equity is still going elsewhere, but the dramatic difference between cEV and $EV that was originally present is now gone. You only need to win that early all-in 51.28% of the time to show a profit in the long-run.
Here's what I am saying:
In a ring game, a $40 pot might be raked $1-2, yet nearly no expert advocates strictly nit-tight play. I recommend that you play early in a SNG like you would in a deepstacked cash game. Aggressiveness wins.
DO NOT pass up a 55-45 situation early in a SNG. You are at an advantage if you take this spot.
I expect this article to be highly controversial, and it's important to note that I am not saying that everyone should use a looser strategy. There are definitely qualifications, and if you ignore them, you are going to lose money trying this. Here are some DO's and DON'Ts, as well as a few replies to questions I often get from students learning this strategy.
DO use a looser starting strategy if:
– You understand how to play a chiplead late in a SNG. This strategy is especially effective at higher-limit games and against good players, because the endgame is more predictable.
– You are a good postflop player. Getting involved in early pots requires good postflop play and an advantage over your opponents in this area. If you can outplay them, you overcome the small inherant disadvantage in playing an early pot.
– There is a terrible player involved in the blinds, or in the pot. He'll be in a hand where he loses his chips soon, and it's nice if you are in that pot too.
DO NOT use a looser starting strategy if:
– You are a multi-tabler and unable to read your opponents because of this. In this case, it's better to pass up a few small edges, because you need to make fewer decisions per minute in order to avoid mistakes and maximize your hourly profit. It's okay to sacrifice ROI for the sake of more volume if you are able to do so. If this is you, don't bother trying this unless you are a SNG phenom.
– If you don't understand late game play almost perfectly. If this is the case, much of your TRUE equity advantage is lost, and the on paper estimate is more accurate. Now your edge from playing pots early is nearly completely negated. Stay tight early while learning the game.
– A good player has entered the pot for a raise. Stay out of his way if you can. Due to conventional strategy, he is very likely to have a premium hand, and it will be harder to get him off of it, despite the fact that he may be more willing to fold than your Average Joe.
– If your ROI is less than 5%. While you may think that you are superior to your opponents, if you fall into this category, there are likely holes in your postflop game. Trust me when I tell you that you need to be a very, very good player to try a looser starting strategy.
– You are not a good postflop player. You need to be able to induce players into doing what you want them to do. In oder to do that, you must be able to put them on a hand and get inside their head to maximize value. If this is not you, stick to the conventional strategy.
Questions I expect to encounter:
Q: I have a skill edge. Won't my skill edge be more likely to manifest itself if I hang on tight early on?
A: Not at all. In fact, the opposite is true.
First of all, your skill edge is irrelevant when you consider that you can just join another SNG and have the same skill edge that you currently enjoy, should you lose.
Second of all, your skill edge is most effective in two spots:
– When the blinds are low, and the money isn't all in preflop or on the flop. At this point you are able to make more decisions and get more reads and reactions from your opponents. With each read, you are more likely to be able to determine the best course of action to minimize your losses or maximize your gains.
– When the blinds are high and it becomes push/fold. A chipleader with skill is very dangerous at this point in the game.
Q: How will this affect my ROI and $/hr?
A: You are going to see increases in three places on your SNG Finish Positions chart. 1st, 9th, and 10th (1st, 8th, and 9th in 9-man SNGs). You will also see a significant decrease in 4th and 5th place finishes. Your ROI will increase. Also, your average length of SNG will drop a little bit, allowing your $/hr to rise.
Q: What about my image? Part of the early tight strategy takes into account that you are tight early and catch your opponents by surprise when you switch gears. Before they realize what's happened, you have some of their chips!
A: It seems like a valid point, but it's false that your opponents are usually paying attention to your image. If you are playing in a game where they are, you should choose a different game. Also, if you are a regular at your game, your opponents will already know that you change things up later on, reducing the effectiveness of your gear-switch. In addition, a good player that sees you playing loosely early will assume you are a fish and act accordingly. It's also more likely that your truly good hands will get paid off. In addition, you will be able to see how OTHER players react to your raises now, so that you can prepare for how they will react when the blinds are substantial.
Q: Does this looser strategy translate well to 6-man SNGs?
A: Yes. First place gets a great majority of the money in these (65%-70% of the prize pool, depending on where you are playing). You need to win to profit, and to do so, you need to accumulate chips. Gathering some chips early can give you the edge you need to survive a bad beat or being card dead in the middle stages.
Q: Does it matter if the SNG is Turbo or Regular Speed?
A: Playing a turbo does limit the amount of time you have to try speculative plays. Try these only at the smallest blind levels. For more on this, check out my article: Successful Speculating.
Q: You mentioned that there have been other successful players who have adopted an alternate strategy. You just threw out a bunch of arguments but no guide on how to adapt. Could you explain in more detail what you mean by a "looser strategy"?
A: I'll present both sides of the story.
– Adam wrote this gem in 2005, but it still is a very good way to approach SNGs today, and it's still in the Strategy Archives for a reason: A guide to single table tournaments
– Alex (Epicatc) is a successful player who wrote this alternate strategy: An Alternate Take on Conventional SNG Strategy. This is a better guide to the types of plays and strategy adjustments that I am condoning/recommending under the right circumstances.
In closing, I'd like to point out that there is never a single way to play any form of poker. While many people suggest that SNGs can be a "solved game," there is no way that is possible. There are always thought processes to go through and counterstrategies to every strategy that is out there. There is also a meta-game. This game will evolve and re-evolve again and again, and keeping up with the times is necessary. This is more true now than ever, now that the gap in ability between players is smaller than it has been in a long time.
Good luck at the tables, and have fun experimenting!
Jennifear
Jennifear is a proud Contributing Writer for Pocketfives.com and a Presto Award Winner for 2006's Most Valuable Poster, as voted by the readers of PocketFives. She teaches private poker lessons, and you can find the details atJennifear's Poker Palace. A discount on these lessons is available if you support pocketfives.com by joining a poker site through one of their links.
