Very good information. Also, your decisions will change if you are trying to win your table, or increase a spot on two in the final table standings. I love tournaments - I just wish they started at the 26th hand.
The problem with counting in tournaments is the information you get from counting is almost irrelevant compared the the information that goes into proper tournament strategy. First, you can't really ramp your bets with the count without jeopardizing your tournament chip stack. You don't want to take on the swings associated with moderately increased bets until you have a reason to take the swings, and generally you are better with a few large bets than a lot of medium ones if you are looking for swings. So you can't really take much advantage of the betting information that card counting gives you. So that leaves playing information. You could use the count for play deviations on hands where tournament strategy doesn't dictate that you play a particular way, but that mostly happens on your minimum bets. On your big bets, you often need to play a specific way regardless of the count, and knowing the count is meaningless. Deviating from BS based on the count with minimum bets out is not worth much. If you are not an experienced tourney player already, you should really try to completely ignore the count and spend your energy focusing on other things, and thinking hard about how to bet optimally based on your opponents chip stacks and your position at the table. You'll get more benefit out of focusing on tournament strategy and thought processes than counting. The only time I've ever really made use of counting information in a tourney was when I was playing a tournament dealt from trackable 4 deck shoes. It's been a while, but as best as I remember, one round I used a very high or low true count near the end of the shoe, mid-round when there were still several hands to play, to time my large bets (either waiting for the next shoe or betting big immediately, I forget which). I also was able to cut a particular slug to the front for the final hand on one round, but again, I forget if it was a good or bad slug now. Other than that particular casino, I really try not to pay attention to the count in tourneys.
If it's the last hand and the only way you can advance is by doubling down your hard twenty (because you don't have the required equal amount for splitting) you do it and pray for an Ace.
If you had reason to believe that a max bet win wouldn't be enough on it's own, you probably would have been much better off to bet half of your stack to keep the split option open, especially if you planned to double any hand anyway.
I understand in general what you all are saying that exact play
with deviations is superior to card counting play in tourneys.
I guess I am in a different financial status.
I have ror to be concerned with my br.
do you give any thought to what these deviation plays will
do to your br. do you have a separate br for tourneys.
has your tourney br been in jeopardy.
does ror come into play at all?
Here's another way you can look at it. You know that at least one (if not more) large bet/bets will be needed at some point in your session to have one of the biggest BRs at the end so why not make it/them when you are playing at a larger advantage?Originally Posted by Nyne
Also, many of the events that I play in pay 2-1 for BJ's (rather than the typical 3-2) which many times justifies the last hand max bet.
we give a lot of attention to ror et. al. in our regular bj play.
should we not give at least some attention to these matters with our tourney play.
certainly we don't want to risk our br with these gross deviations which are very
large negative disadvantage plays.
this comment applies to the tourneys that require live action money chips.
should we not keep track of some parameters in our tourney play.
which ones??
there should be some science to this, not just do whatever is necessary to have
a shot at winning the table I think. maybe I am wrong but I am concerned about
maintaining a healthy br.
please advise.
I have seen very little attention if any addressed to the issue I raise.
everyone is only interested in their table tourney status, no attention
to br management on these tourneys. I think this raises a caveat.
Regarding your ROR questions, there are two kinds of ROR to consider:
- ROR at the table for which the consequence is not advancing to the next round or winning less of the purse, if at the final table
- ROR of your AP or tournament entry fee bankroll, for which the consequence is not being able to continue your AP activities.
The latter, is of course more devastating. They are different but still related and making better plays at the table will improve both because you will finish in the money more often and you will win more when you do.
Tournaments are a very high variance endeavour. Typically, even a skilled player will fail to cash in several, or even many, tournaments between payouts but, when they payouts come, they can be quite large. Entry fees can vary wildly as well. Based on the structure of the tournament, the size of the prize pool relative to the entry fees, the typical skill level of the competition and your own skill level, it is possible to estimate the overall EV and variance of a tournament for yourself. You can then choose to play only those events that are +EV for you. If you're in a position to get comped in, then it's guaranteed +EV.
Having said all that, I would not recommend trying to make a living from tournament play alone. I would consider it as a supplement to your normal AP activities. You asked if by own BR has ever been at risk. The answer to that is "no", mainly because I only play about 10-15 events a year and the entry fees are relatively small. In the range of $200 to $750. Even as a recreational AP, I can pay this rate of tournament entries and expenses from my other AP winnings. I have, however, also had some good success in the tournaments themselves and I can say that I have made more playing tournaments than from any other AP activity.
As implied above, ROR at the table can further be divided into two sub categories:
- ROR in a preliminary round.
The consequence is immediate elimination from the round. Other than its immediateness, this is no different than simply not finishing in an advancing position. That is, if you fail to advance with $10,000 on the table or $0, it doesn't matter. Failure is failure. Given that all failures are equal in this regard, you make plays that increase your chance of overall success (i.e. advancing) without regard to the potential severity of the failure. Having said this, there is still some balance of risk and reward. You want to save your big bets for when they are needed and when success will accomplish someething. You also want to get the most bang for your buck by making big moves late in the round and by betting only as much as you need to accomplish your immediate goal. Sometimes this leaves you with enough left over for a second chance.- ROR at the final table
The consequence of ruin at the final table, is that you will win only whatever the lowest remaining prize amount is. If you are last, then you have nothing at all to lose by trying to move up. Things can't get any worse. If you are in a middle position, then you have to weigh the consequences of dropping down vs the reward of moving up by calculating the EV of your move(s). You do this by estimating the probabilities of each possible outcome and multiplying them by the prize amounts for each result. Sometimes it is better EV to defend the position you have than to try to move up. Ego comes into play here, because some value the prestige of winning the tournament over the EV associated with the best move for their position. If you play a lot of tournaments, then the EV should be more important to you.
Last edited by Gronbog; 12-24-2013 at 12:54 PM.
The key phrase in your comment is "at some point". For me, the other considerations I talked about earlier are far more important when determining when to make that bet than what the count is. The goal is generally to win the bet, or not to lose it, both of which are quite different than maximizing its EV (which is what counting does) (and each even has its own altered basic strategy). These percentages just don't change much with the count.
A large bet has so much more value near the end of the round when in late position and when winning it will put you over the top and leave your opponents little or, even better, no time to recover than it does at some random point in the round when the count happens to be high.
Your comment about high-playing blackjacks is well taken. It can turn the game into a +EV game overall, but at one BJ every 21 hands or so, I wouldn't count on it as a way of padding my stack. I think of it as more of a Hail Mary in the event that a double win will suffice where a single bet win will not.
Most tournaments use tournament chips, not money as your bet. If you don't win the tournament you might as well bust out trying.
I was at a tournament recently where I was keeping an eye on the play at the next table. One guy had a huge lead and pushed in all his chips. All the tournament ploppies had already bet. Instead of thinking wow this is a great opportunity if the guy loses the last hand he is out they all tried to get all their chips in as well. One guy didn't but not because he was smart but he had bet less than half his chips. He doubled down for as much as he could just like everyone else. The difference is all he could was not all his chips. The dealer hit out to 21 and all but the guy who couldn't commit all his chips busted out on the last hand. He didn't have many chips left but all he needed was one chip to win the round and advance to the final table. Unfortunately at my table I busted out right at the end before the count down for the final hand. Like Gron said I saw a lot of whacky plays before it was time. Most of the time at my table the guy got lucky as is often the case. I kept waiting for the wild bettors to bust out but they kept catching a hand when the finally had all their chips committed.
Posting Permissions
-*-
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks