I'm a marginally better than average STT player (6%-8% ROI, ABI $15, over 1,700 tourneys), and like most others, have noticed that even at lower buy-ins, players are much tighter earlier now than in the past.

Anyway, my question for the STT gurus is: why isn't this early tightness creating an opportunity for smart players to be more aggressive early to build a bigger stack for later rounds?

There's always a post somewhere saying that STT's are unbeatable now because everyone's playing so tight until later rounds. As poker players, aren't known conditions exactly what we're hoping for? Or, for STT's, is end game play such a huge factor that building more of a stack early is not (relatively) that advantageous?

When you are playing against a full tight table with low blinds, you are only going to get action against good hands. So you will just take the blinds down (which is all but meaningless) and then sometimes get into confrontations with better hands. Also, there will always be fish/donks that don't play conservatively early and don't know how to play endgame at all.

First off, the average player has got something like -7% ROI, so you're far better than average.

As for exploiting the tightness, well most of your opponent won't play very tight. So there's not much to exploit there. What you can do is take advantage of the few times you can make good use of the information that a fellow regular is on a very tight range.

Among the various pieces of nonsense that Daliman is capable of spewing is the concept that the early tightness of others can be exploited by "smart players being more aggressive" So, does that mean that you make a 3X raise from MP3 w/KJo ??...What do you do when the button comes over you with a pot-sized raise?..Call ?...Fold?..Re-jack?

The problem has always been & will always be risking alot of chips for a small return (the smallish blinds) when the usual thing that will happen is that you will be called or raised by better hands

Or - is "being more aggressive" mean that you re-raise an EP raiser with a marginal hand like A-rag? Geethat ought to work out well

You get the drift?....But go ahead & try your theory
Maybe you can end up like Suited66's

Agressive is good versus a tight table and passive is good versus an aggressive table.

I am rarely in SNG's anymore where there is a full table at the t100 blinds. I've gotten more aggressive as the STT players get tighter. Because they cannot get value any other way, they will play extremely passively with big hands - trying to check raise me - and then I pull my 6 outer on the turn for free.

I can post a bunch of hands where an aggressive style led to people stacking off to me. As soon as you get people to overbet or underbet their hands, you've won.

The more passive the tables get, the more aggressive you should be.

That's my two cents.

People are not playing optimally in early levels. They play a lot of tables (higher hourly > higher roi). However people who say stuff like raising t9s from the button is l1 are wrong.

I don't know what to make of this post...it was a question, not a theory. That's why I opened underlining that I don't have great STT skills or knowledge.

I guess the other responses confirm what I suspected in that, we can disregard the 'STT's aren't real poker' and 'STT's are unbeatable 'cause everyone plays so tight' rhetoric because those skills are just as apparent early on.

As well as great bubble play, I'd imagine the better players are exploiting this tightness better than most (even if that means using position to advantage and re-raising an EP raiser with AX against certain opponents).

Oh, isn't average 0%? Median's probably -%, but average should be 0. Am I screwing up my high school math?

You're forgetting about rake.

The average player does not have 0% ROI because of rake.

Its more like -9% in a normal SnG.

This is just wrong. I have played full ring cash and when you have a table of all nits playing 16-24 tables and 1 fish, you are in a great spot. You are often HU against the fish and the nits often are one and done.
One and done = one cbet and they give up on the pot, so floating etc is really effective.
Also, multiway, they check to the player in LP who can steal effectively postflop on the right flops.

Also, stealing the blinds is a signficant win. 30chips/1500 chips starting stack = 1/50 = 2% increase in equity approx., this is sig next to your roi.

Also, open limping pp from late EP on is often just wrong. Juicing the pot and setting yourself up to take it later is important, as is taking down the blinds.

this response doesn't even address much of what i said. the first part of my post was the flaw with this if everyone was playing tight, and then at the end i say this is basically never the case. I never open limp...so I assume that it isn't in response to me. If you raise and get played back at after a c-bet you are out like 270/1500 = 18% decerease approx. in equity. I'd rather play with 1500 chips all the time than 1530 most of the time and 1230 a few times.

grunch, how are you going to build a big stacks with low blinds and tight players?

Sure, you could lag it up and steal blinds, steal a pot here or there and get an extra 200-500 chips sometimes. But, you are going to be playing against much tighter hand ranges when called, so bluffing is going to be expensive and you'll often lose those 200-500 chips instead. It's been well documented that the chips you lose are worth more than the ones you gain.

You also ruin your image and reduce your fold equity when the blinds get bigger, which isn't a great scenario in sngs.

MS,

This is a particular spot that comparing it to cash is pretty irrelevant due to the fact that a major draw back to playing lag is that the chips you lose are worth more than the ones you gain, which is obviously not an issue in a cash game.

You are right however, that if the fact the table is tight leads to you being able to constantly isolate a fish, then the style is more beneficial. But that's more taking advantage of a fish, than taking advantage of the tight regulars.

You need a much larger edge in any given hand in a STT versus a MTT or a cash game because of the payout structure. That's why it is correct to play very few hands early on when winning the blinds isn't a very big edge.

I think you've hit a concept but are just looking to apply it in the wrong fashion.
Knowing your opponents is a big deal, for a v. basic example if you know that your opp. gives up to most cbets then cbetting more often is ok. Little bits of knowledge about players can lead to picking up small amounts here and there that you otherwise wouldn't get, but we still should only be in the pot with a strong holding.

The thing is playing marginal hands at early levels will usually just deplete your stack, and we need those chips, and a good image later on. It's a risk/reward thing and the reward just isn't there most of the time.

The truth is that most players at the lower levels just aren't any good, and we play tightly to exploit that . If you're constantly sitting with 4-6 nits at the low buy ins then it's time to start table selecting

At times I play the first 2 or 3 levels relatively agg. If you are going to play this way, much better to 3bet EP raiser with trash, than open with KJ. For some reason 3betting means 100% monster to a lot of nitty regs at the lower levels. Just do this in moderation (once or twice tops), otherwise they will catch on

people really underestimate that if you can make a +15cEV, low variance play every single SNG early it is going to boost your ROI by 1%. You really need to be good at spotting low variance spots though, because busting early is a disaster, but against nitty opponents these spots should be easy to find.

What? I want maths to show that 15 chips puts a percentage point on ROI because, dude, I'm calling bull**** on that.

Edit: and this is why: payouts are nonlinear: you simply do not increase your $ equity by 1% if you increase your stack by 1%. Among other reasons I'm calling bull****, obv., but that one is enough on its own.

against good sng players, you're only going to be played back at early on with hands that beat you. everyone (or at least the brighter sng players) has adopted this style. doesn't really matter if some fish have adopted this style to as they play so bad once the blinds get to 75-150/ 100-200. this is where you find the raises utg with ace rag and horrible play pre flop

When we start a $16, your chips are worth $15. If your ROI is 12.5%, then your expected value at this point is $18. Just saying, so that we don't think all chips are equal for all players.

wat?

You will make a bigger increase in your ROI if spent early levels of these getting good solid reads on players rather then trying to pick spots that will only marginally increase your ROI.

I dont see why you wouldnt be able to do both. As a matter of fact opening up your game would result (and demand) better reads.
BTW im not advocating playing more hands, I just dont see the connection between the two things.

There are better ways to obtain reads then spewing chips early.

OP has posted one hand in STTF guess what he was readless @ 50/100 blind level.

What better ways are there to obtain reads than being involved in hands with your oppponents? That OP posted one hand (nice sample size!) where he was readless dosen't prove anything at all.