Attacking the big stacks?

[rokwell]

I have been reading a lot of articles in the different magazines and a lot of the analysts talk about the big stacks muscling everybody at the table picking up all of the dead money raising almost every hand. This strategy makes sense nobody wants to get involved with their blinds against the big stacks and run the risk of being eliminated.

However, the point of a tournament is to amass as many chips as possible, so that being said wouldn't it make sense to attack the players with the most chips. Now i now this sounds crazy but the big stacks feed off of the smalls stacks because they will submit. Now the way i figure is that the big stacks while playing lots of hands, playing their position, and using their stack size likely have weaker hands, but everybody is going to fold anyways so it does not matter what they hold. Most people with smaller and medium stacks are more likely to be holding better cards when they raise since they are only playing a fraction of cards dealt.

I would propose to play back at the big stack from the blinds and from the button simply because i believe that there is a lot of fold value in re-raising a big stack who more than likely has weaker cards. And i am going so far to say that one would not need premium cards to play back because, just as it so does not matter what the big stack holds it does not matter what you hold cuz hey they are going to fold anyways. And if they don't they would be hard pressed to call a big bet on the flop without a monster due to the strength that you have represented. This play obviously would not work against a medium stack that raised because the medium stacks playing tight are likely to hold premium cards and may be willing to go the distance, so the fold value of this play is lost against the small and medium stacks. However, I do not think the large stacks will invest chips in a busted blind steal and run the risk of getting committed and doubling up a medium stack when they could just fold and try for the blinds on the next hand.

These are my thoughts, I have yet to apply this theory, but i would love some feedback to let me know if i on to something or completely off base.

Cheers!
Rokwell

“You shouldn't underestimate an enemy, but it is just as fatal to overestimate him.”
-Patton-

[frob23]

Depends on how the big stack is playing, stack sizes, and bet sizes... but I find that it's typical for the big stack to be making bets that are large enough to offer proper pot odds to be up against a stronger than average hand if one of the short/medium stacks was to push. It's not always the case but it's the case often enough. So before you go three-betting light for a large portion of your stack... ask yourself if the big stack is going to have the odds to go in as an underdog to a strong range of hands.

I have personally found myself accidentally committed against a certain player even putting them on a really strong holding. And it happens a lot. Part of the power of the big stack is the threat that you're probably priced in for a call regardless of what the little stacks do. It's not always true... but it's true often enough.

So, it's not doomed to fail... but you need to watch the price you're offering.

[gamer4life27]

I see a lot of flaws in your thinking. For one, big stacks all play differently. Some can just sit back, let the smaller stacks fight it out, and then wait untill they make the money or close to it, and they have a good position to get more chips.

Some big stacks play very aggressive, like you explained. But those players arn't playing the big stack properly. Because most big stacks, play selective agressive. Meaning that they pick there spots to be agressive, and if they get into a conflict with a smaller stack, they can be in a good position to knock them out. They play a wide range of hands that have a lot of 'flop potential'. Meaning suited connectors, small pocket pairs, high cards, connectors, high suited cards, etc.

I have been playing for quite some time now, and I find most big stacks play that way. Because no one wants to get into a conflict with a bigger stack.

But the reason why big stacks bully other smaller stacks is because there's usually a prize close, and everyone wants to make the money. So they use that to there advantage, and makes them get more chips. And by the time a smaller stack stands up for themselfs, they got so much chips from the blinds that they are basically freerolling. Meaning that if you started with 100k as a big stack, blinds at 500/1,000. You have stolen 5 rounds of blinds, meaning you have an extra 7,500 in chips. You keep raising to 4x-5x the BB from 4,000-5,000 chips. After one hand, a shorter stack moves all in. You can either call them, or fold. If you fold, you still have extra chips from just the blinds even after losing that big bet.

So bascially, the big stacks use agression to there advantage because no one could fight back, even if they wanted to. It would be very hard to fight back at a big stack bully without them fighting right back.

[frob23]

Originally Posted by rokwell However, the point of a tournament is to amass as many chips as possible, so that being said[. . .]

This isn't necessarily true. The point of a tournament is to finish as high up into the money as possible. If you're second in chips for the entire tournament and go broke on the bubble... no one is going to give you a reward for having as many chips as possible. In fact, the person who was folding every hand and being blinded out has now been rewarded despite not getting nearly as many chips as was possible.

Yes, having more chips typically increases your equity in a tournament. But often, the risk you may be taking is not worth the equity increase... especially if it comes at the risk of bringing your equity down to zero (busting out).

[Vito_Nuccio]

Thanks for the post and welcome to rakeback.

I like your idea in part due to the aggressive style. I can fold many many hands, but when I am in a pot I am in there swinging, monster or rags. You should not be afraid of playing against one of the chip leaders. But you should be very aware of the situation. Do not play back just because they have chips, do it for the correct poker reasons. Is the leader a maniac, rock or somewhere in between. Obviously if a rock you will not be re-raising with junk. If you have a maniac (I like to call them an ATM since they will probably supply money to all) then your reasons are perfect. Someone in between will take some thought.

Like all poker decisions, the moment dictates action. Take all factors, throw them into your poker brain and spit out a plan of action. Listen to your instincts and act.

Thanks,

[Brooklynbum]

How do you define a big stack?

Let's say I had 10k in chips and the blinds are 500/1000.

Another person had 50K in chips, does that make him/her a big stack compared to me?

For example I was playing a MTT online and I shove with 66 behind two limpers.

I'm short stacked with 7k in chips and one of the limpers has roughly 20k in chips. He calls with J/10. He says he was the big stack and had to call.

I counter that if a hand is good enough to call an all-in with then it's good enough to raise with. Besides I told him/her you weren't really a big stack.

Would you consider this player a big stack?

Just curious.

[Vito_Nuccio]

Originally Posted by Brooklynbum How do you define a big stack? Let's say I had 10k in chips and the blinds are 500/1000. Another person had 50K in chips, does that make him/her a big stack compared to me? For example I was playing a MTT online and I shove with 66 behind two limpers. I'm short stacked with 7k in chips and one of the limpers has roughly 20k in chips. He calls with J/10. He says he was the big stack and had to call. I counter that if a hand is good enough to call an all-in with then it's good enough to raise with. Besides I told him/her you weren't really a big stack. Would you consider this player a big stack? Just curious.

50000 to 10000, close.... I would call him a big stack. Would have 40BB even after paying you off.

As for the guy with 20K to your 10K, not a big stack at all. There is no rule or reason to say he has to call half of his stack with J10. He can let his 1000 go.

If you can switch places with someone by doubling up, the other was not a big stack comparitively to begin with. If they can take the hit and still have significant power, then they are a big stack. Determining what the magic ratio number is is open to interpretation. Every one will have a different opinion as to what that number is. Also there are big stacks in relation to your stack and big stacks in relation to the blind levels. The other player may be a member or one, the other, or both. You will need to determine the particular situation and label accordingly.

Later,