Approach Four: Raising Based on Position
Pros: Increases the pot size when you have the advantage of position; allows a slightly wider raising range from late position since opponents are less likely to call bigger bets.
Cons: You may be pricing yourself into a call with a weaker hand when reraised; less payoffs for big hands when in early position.
This is a relatively common approach found in cash games, and can be quite effective in those. Unfortunately, in comparatively shortstacked tournaments, you have fewer opportunities to outplay your opponents postflop, negating the advantage. This approach can occasionally be used successfully in the early rounds, when stacks are 50 big blinds or more, but is ineffective in later rounds. Generally, this approach is shunned by better tournament players.
Approach Five: Raising Based on Stack Sizes
Pros: Puts exactly the right amount of pressure on an opponent's stack; accounts for effective stack sizes; more likely to get the chips in with a big hand.
Cons: Difficult to implement on the fly; often leads to big overbets or underbets; works best only against the best opponents.
In late position, you may find yourself in a position to steal, but a standard 3 BB raise will only require the big blind to commit 10% of their stack to defend. Alternatively, a 5 BB raise will force them to commit almost 20% of their stack to the pot, something they may not be willing to do. After that, a normal continuation bet is likely to be another 30-50% of their stack, so they generally must have some kind of real hand to get involved.
This is definitely a thinking approach that has some merits, but is best used in a variable strategy rather than as a main approach.
Approach Six: Raising Based on Stage of the Tournament
Pros: Gets more of effective stacks in the pot in early stages; accounts for antes; increased stealing ability in late stages.
Cons: Inflexibility regarding raise amounts for a specific level.
This is a very good approach, used by many of the better tournament players. In early rounds, when players are looser, the field is weaker, and the stacks are deeper, a raise to 5 times the big blind can be effective in building a big pot. In middle rounds, before antes kick in, these players may reduce their raises to three times the blind, but raise slightly more frequently. When the antes start, you will often see these players raising small, for 2.25 to 2.75 times the big blind, but much more frequently from late position, in an attempt to steal the blinds and antes. With typical antes equalling one-tenth the big blind, these players are risking about 2.5 BB to win a 2.5 BB pot preflop. Only a 50% chance of success is needed for breakeven play with these steals.
This is an excellent approach, as long as it is not followed absolutely, with no provisions for larger raises in certain circumstances.
Approach Seven: Raising Randomly
Pros: Impossible for opponents to get reads based on bet sizes; keeps opponents off guard.
Cons: Difficult to sufficiently randomize raise sizes; inability to adapt to changing table conditions.
A lot of players like to take this approach. A common play is to lump all raising hands together, then to determine the amount to bet based on some sufficiently random variable, like the second hand of a watch. For example, 0-29 seconds can be a 3x raise, 30-44 can be a 4x raise, and 45-59 can be a minimum raise. This yields a 1:2:1 randomization of raise sizes.
This plan has some merits, but simply raising randomly does not allow for changing table conditions.
In this series:
|
