Originally Posted by grunta0
I am currently reading "Elements Of Poker" by Tommy Angelo and in a section of this book he alludes to bubble play which reminded me of this post from a few weeks ago.
First of all what I meant when I said I "Bubbled" was that I missed the money by one. (ie. tourney pays 15 players I come 16th). Tommy disagrees with this view and says the bubble could actually start earlier (in this case maybe five spots before the payouts begin). Do you take the bubble as the exact changeover from losers to winners or agree with Angelo?
He also says it is more important to reach the bubble than the final table (for the obvious reason that you need to go through the bubble to get to the FT.)
It's not usually the exact bubble that matters. Players tend tighten up near the bubble. The more places pay, the farther from the exact bubble play will tend to tighten up (at least in non-micro MTTs). It also depends on how many players are short and how short they are. If noone's short, then it's not going to change as much until closer to the bubble.
I agree that it's more important to reach the bubble. One point I kept trying to make in another thread, is that there is now no separation between bubble and FT in the mid-stakes MTTs. This changes the dynamics appreciably, at least to me.