I am creating a thread to discuss Global poker tournament strategy. I would like the forum to feature discussion on a variety of topics related to tournament strategy.

First 3 topics-

Topic 1: Satellites

Which satellites do you grind? Which satellites do you think are most likely to get a seat and cash in the featured tournament?

Topic#2: Do you think there is a big difference in competition between mid-stakes tourneys-$11 and $ 22buy ins versus $33 plus? How much bankroll for each?

Topic #3: What do you think is the difference in level of competition between tournament and ring games?

1: Satellites: I tend to play more of them than I should. Not easy on the bankroll and you and I tend to do better in the satellite than the actual tournament. The easiest satellites are any one that you didn't just win the day before.

2: I only see a difference towards the final tables, however, it seems to me that the $110+ tournaments i see a difference where I run terrible (lol) and out played more times.

I definitely play out of my bankroll range more than I should and something I need to correct along with more studying. 50x the buy in is something i've heard in the past.

3: RNg vs tourney are two different animals if you happen to be at a table with someone who is purely a rng game player IMO.

Looking forward to others imputs on these topics. Thanks for starting the thread!

1: Satellites: I tend to play more of them than I should. Not easy on the bankroll and you and I tend to do better in the satellite than the actual tournament. The easiest satellites are any one that you didn't just win the day before.

2: I only see a difference towards the final tables, however, it seems to me that the $110+ tournaments i see a difference where I run terrible (lol) and out played more times.

I definitely play out of my bankroll range more than I should and something I need to correct along with more studying. 50x the buy in is something i've heard in the past.

3: RNg vs tourney are two different animals if you happen to be at a table with someone who is purely a rng game player IMO.

Looking forward to others imputs on these topics. Thanks for starting the thread!

Should be a good thread. From my experience almost all ring competition is way tougher. Any tourney level I've played at (have not played 110s or anything close) is super soft.

More or less half the prize pool goes to the top 3, so it's a significant difference perhaps most significant.

1: Satellites to the Scrimmage or other $215s

2: There's not much of a difference in that range of tournaments, but when you start getting to the $55s and above, you see a lot more bubble abuse and people reacting better to the abuse. Early MTTs are all the same for the most part, since there are so many satellites running.

3: Tournaments are softer than ring games to an extent. You won't always make the money in tournaments, but to sit down at an average tournament table vs sitting down at an average ring game table is a huge difference and the cash table is much more difficult in general.

In the immortal words of Elizabeth5579, " What the crap is going on here?"

Thank you for the comments, everyone.

I figured that I should answer my own questions for the thread:

1. It is weird- I started playing sattys only a few weeks ago, and I have only cashed in the main event a few times. I am going to try a few more weeks with some of the sattys and see what happens. It seems the best deal in my opinion for the sattys is the mini-blitz and the deep freeze sattys. On a percentage standpoint, there's the greatest likelihood of getting a ticket. For example, the deep freeze satty will often give 10 seats and there are 40-50 players to there's a 20% to 25% chance (not considering skill level). The Deep freeze also has a very nice prize pool.

2. There seems to be a slight jump in level of competition from $3-11 buy-ins and then from $11-22, but not too noticeable. I mostly stick with the $22 buy-ins and lower, myself.

For some reason, bounty tourneys seem easier than other types. Deep tourneys (without bounties) such as the Deep 11 seem to be the hardest level of competition in my opinion.

In few $33 and up buyins that I have played in, I did see a tougher pool of players. Although, a lot of people play junk pre flop and hope to hit 2 pair+ to crack big pocket pairs it seems.


In terms of BR, I keep about 50 buyins as well in my account, and then withdraw the rest whenever it goes above that (this could explain why I have not moved up to higher buyins). Still, I am not sure if I have the skill/ability level to play the $33 buyins and up consistently and still see a ROI.

3. The 0.05/0.10 ring games seem to be, on average, harder than a $5 buyin tourney but easier than a $11 buy in tournament. However, the .10/.20 ring games seem harder than any of the $22 buyin tourneys that I have played in. I dropped back down to 0.05/0.10 because I was not consistently winning in .10/.20.

I am a little confused by this post. Are you Elizabeth 5579? I have seen her/him finish deep in several tourneys.

To answer your question, I created a forum to discuss genral tournament strategy on GP (nothing too specific that you can use against me )

Great comments! How often do you get a ticket for the big tourneys (SC 110+) through sattys. Are there any days or times that are better to play than others?

I agree with you that tourneys are softer overall. Do you play ring games often or stick to tourneys?

Thanks for the post! I agree threebanger.

What level of tourneys and/or ring games do you grind?

Another topic:

1. How does your strategy for deep tourneys (like the deep $11) differ from deep bounty tourneys?

2. For rebuy tourneys like the brawls, how many rebuys do you invest before you give up? Do you change your strategy based on how close it is to the add on and how big the chipleaders stacks are?


3. What do you think are good hand ranges for the early stages of a rebuy tourney vs. the later stages (but pre add-on)?


4. What training software, books, or youtube videos would you recommend to improve one's tournament play? Are there particular GP Poker School Articles that you found particularly beneficial?

Hello everyone!

For sattys I'd say the best value ones are the night freeze, mini blitz, deep eleven, huntsman, hunter, and deep freeze. If you have a decent bankroll it's probably worth trying to get in to the $33 sunday scrimmage satty. And I'd say the easiest sattys are the lowest buy in ones.

There are definitely more solid pros in the $33 and up. Sometimes $22 can be super soft

I can't speak on the talent levels of different cash games. I just know good cash plays are really talented lol.

enjoy this meme: https://i.redd.it/u82gzztfrpr51.png

it's the shoev for me

There is an epic thread by that title in the main Global Poker forum.

That was a great meme, Karben! Thanks for the post!

I normally don't look for satellites except for Sunday, I usually just buy in to the $110s.

I mostly play ring games, I only play 2-5 tournaments a week.

Get it in with the worse hand and you'll win, I almost always get KOed when I get it with a dominating hand, i. e: AK < Ax, Pair < smaller pair, Over pair < top pair, Set < pair w/ backdoor draw, ect....

...just kidding, though I had a very cold streak in tournaments where this happened almost everytime for a good 100+ games and recently won a SnG where I got it in in bad spots heads up, only to suck out and win. It is the nature of the beast.

1. The ones I get from promotions.
2. There's a little bit of a difference, the play's definitely a little better in the $33s. I have 100+ buy-ins for any MTT tournament I buy in.
3. I find typically cash game players at a buy-in level are better than tournament players at that same buy-in level.

ahweiss123, are you having fun discussing Global Poker Tournament Strategy with yourself(s)?

Sure am!

"Topic 1: Satellites

Which satellites do you grind? Which satellites do you think are most likely to get a seat and cash in the featured tournament?"

Controversial opinion - I gave up satellites.

"Topic#2: Do you think there is a big difference in competition between mid-stakes tourneys-$11 and $ 22buy ins versus $33 plus? How much bankroll for each?"

There is a definite difference, which is very apparent if you look players up on sharkscope, or merely observe who you see more often and how they behave. The proportion of winning regs goes up more and more as you rise in stakes. I currently mainly play $33 to $110.

"Topic #3: What do you think is the difference in level of competition between tournament and ring games?"

For whatever weird reason it's become the PC thing to always say that cash players are 'more skilled'. Logically, we can infer that they are about equal. First of all, winning cash players aren't crazy. If tournaments were much softer than cash at comparable stakes, it would be poor game selection to play cash and players would migrate until it equalized (also vice versa). Second of all the skills and player pools overlap. I do agree, of course, that some people are very good at one but not as good at the other, but there is a lot of overlap.

If someone is saying that 10NL players are highly skilled compared to Deep $11 players, for example, I would tend to dispute that.

I would strongly disagree about your last point. There are a ton of reasons cash players play cash even though comparable stakes have softer fields in MTTs. Some of those reasons are the inverse reasons of why so many entirely recreational players play MTTs that are theoretically way beyond their pay grade. The 10NL player pool on Global, and anywhere else I've played (Ignition, ACR) is wayyyyyyyyy tougher than the $10 buy in MTT pool.

That's not to say there aren't strong players at $10MTTs who can certainly play 10NL, but there's just a fewer grinders and more recs.

"I would strongly disagree about your last point"

Of course you would. To do otherwise would be to concede that you might need to rethink your original post.

However, we're at an impasse. You didn't offer any method of quantifying what you mean as equivalent buy-in or even how you measure "skill" across different formats.

I didn't go into depth either but at least I backed my point wy point with a logical observation. Some players consistently make money in tounaments. If cash players are routinely better then cash players would be expected to play more tournaments until it equalizes.
Of course, I could still be wrong too. I have the benefit of a logical explanation on my side but I didn't provide e idence either.

Anyway, I noticed that the title that attracted me was "Global Poker tournament strategy discussion". Some no evidence pissing contest about whether "cash players are 'more skilled'" is not a dicussion of tournament strategy. I wasted my time here. Everyone have a nice day.