I just got home from a tournament in which the qualifying rounds are seven player two winner. Starting bankrolls are 500, bet range 5-200. 25 hands. I used the usual early-to-mid-round strategy of starting off with minimum bets and only throwing out big bets if I get behind by almost a max bet. Actually I never did throw out a big bet until near the end of both qualifying rounds I was in. I lost both because by about the 20th hand BR1 was almost a max bet ahead and I was mired in crowds of three or four in a race for BR2, which effectively reduced it to a one-winner table. I've noticed this a lot in two winner tables. It seems most of my opponents are mid range bettors (25-75) and it always seems that one of them gets lucky enough to pull away and effectively turn it into a one-winner table. Question: Is it better strategy to risk challenging BR1 with big bets, or to let BR1 get away with it and play it like a one-winner table? Should I challenge BR1 sometime in the middle of the round, before their lead gets all the way up to a max bet? Is there some kind of correlating strategy I could be using?
I also have this same problem I played in the same tournmaent you talked about and ran into the exact same problem. Played 3 preliminary rounds (re-bought twice) and finally won the 3rd time by - would you believe - $5! Lost the next round (3 players advance) under pretty much the same circumstances as you mentioned for the preliminary rounds. Let's hope we can get an answer to improve our chances in their next tournament - free invitational on July 22 - are you going?
Go For BR1, or Battle For BR2? Toolman, I got my invite, and I'll be there. I suppose the choice between risking challenging BR1's max bet lead, or staying mired in a crowd trying for BR2 in a two winner table depends upon the relative risk. Your chances of increasing your bankroll by a max bet in a few hands when you're betting max bets are at least 44% because that's your chance of getting paid the first time you bet the max. That's got to be a better chance of success than being on the button on the last hand when you're in a three way battle for BR2. If you're playing last in a three way battle for BR2 you might have a better chance by just playing for BR2, especially if you're BR2 already. If you're in a two way fight for BR2, you're definitely better off in that fight if you'll be playing last, but you may want to challenge BR1 if you'll be playing first. This is especially true if you're currently BR3. Are there any probability numbers out there concerning button position, current bankroll position, and number of competitors playing for one spot? These probabilities would be critical in any decision whether or not to challenge BR1's max bet lead with a max bet of your own in a two winner table.
Hope the experts respond. Just a point of clearification to avoid confusion. That tournament date is July 15, not the 22nd. I can't add anything useful to your question. Let's hope the experts see this thread and respond with some usefull information.
2 winner tourney There is quite a bit to consider in your questions......assuming you are all talking about the same tourney. First....I saw the rebuys....if they are inexpensive and numerous ..it may be worthwhile to go for a big lead....and let the others play for 2nd....and leave you alone to coast.....second....if you are in a game where all are betting mid-range bets.....bet slightly less than they are to stay close ....win or lose. If you find yourself way behind but only to one player......you need to figure out ...where will you bet on the last two hands....how many of the others will have a clue of what to do at the end......then decide when to make your move for BR2 ......good luck.....remember though.....2 out of 7 is only 29%...all things being equal.....maybe some others will chime in with some other ideas.......
Cost of re-buys The entry fee was $40 and 2 re-buys were possible because space was available. The re-buys were no bargin - $40 each. Total prize pool was $10,000, 1st was $4,000, 2nd was $2,000 I believe. Don't remember the rest.
My Philosophy.. when two advance is to play for BR1 whenever possible. Having the lead going into the final hand allows for much better bet sizing, and a much better chance of advancing. Experience has also shown me that playing for BR2 will often leave me at BR3. But there are many variables to consider and I don't always use the same approach each time. I "judge" my competition and the betting order and play accordingly. If they are weak players and going for BR1 is a low percentage play, I'll at least consider playing for BR2 (all the while hoping to close the gap on BR1). When the opponents are strong, playing for second is suicidal. Likewise, when 3 advance, I'll settle for nothing less than being BR2 going into the final hand. You will probably notice that when 3 advance, betting is much more conservative and everyone is in contention until late in the round, if not the final hand. In these circumstances, I'll be moderately aggressive early to mid round. A half bet lead can be strong because much of the competition will resign themselves to playing for second and third, not wanting to risk their bank. In my experience, playing for the last qualifying spot will send me to the re-buy line (or the side line) too often.
