Download video: 1280×720 | 1024×768 | 800×450 
[Total: 23 Average: 8.4/5]
You must sign in to vote
MORE IN THIS SERIES : Part 2 of 4 | Part 3 of 4 | Part 4 of 4
Concepts In This Video: 3-Betting • Aggression • Bet Sizing • Board Texture • Bubble Play • C-Betting • Calling Ranges • Early Stages • exploiting tendencies • Flatting • Fold Equity • Hand Reading • ICM • low stakes • Midstages • Multi-Tabling • Poker Stars • Pot Building • pre-flop • Push Fold • Ranges • Shove Spots • Shoving Ranges • SNG MTTs: 180s • Stack Sizes: 20-40bb • Value Betting
Ranc1d
I railed you in a couple of these yesterday. Should be a good watch although personally I am not a big fan of the turbo format(I know a lot of people do love them though). Would love to see a similar video with the non-turbo 180s but I am sure u guys are already planning that right? 😉
Keep up the good work!
FkCoolers
I was listening through headphones and said “bless you” when you sneezed.
Wow. I’m getting a little too involved with these videos haha
3jersey3
thanks a LOT for doing this on request! great service!
lespaulgman
I am guessing that the thoughts and strategies in here are applicable to the lower 180 mans as well. Gotta try these outs.
dawhiteninja
Aftr watching this vid I loaded up 6 180s on Stars. Final tabled twice and took one down. Roll on parts 2,3 and 4!
RonFezBuddy
hahahaha maybe we should start demanding a cut 🙂
tlr230
I notice on table 4 around the 23:50 min mark you shove AJo utg with 11bbs pre antes…is this a correct shove and one you’d make every time pre antes?
HITTHEPANDA
Yeah with an m of 7 UTG I would shove AJ, as well as KQ and AT.
karna1983
With a M of 7, what kind of pairs would you shove?
wemlingerel
Wouldn’t it be better to have someone make a video for this type of game who is more profitable and used to the mtt sng game, especially at this low of stakes? I have an avg ROI of +26-28% in the 12-75 dollar mtt sngs (including 45, 90, and 180 mans) I see many points in these videos where I would play much different. I understand you are an amazing MTT pro but I feel like you assume these short stack mtt sngs are actually more volatile than they really are. On sharkscope it says you are down after 488 sngs but with an AVG ROI of +15%. In 600 sngs I am up apprx 5K and the first 475 or so were 26 dollar 45 seaters. My avg ROI is +26% and this is a pretty large sample of mostly all mtt sngs. I feel like I could offer a better perspective because I am so used to these stakes and size of mtt sng (esp in the 45 seaters) and would be happy to help.
Eric
Fulltilt Name: Tablecaptainn
Pokerstars Name: ericw123
Email: wemlingerel@appstate.edu
wemlingerel
*the first 475 out of the 600 i’ve played were 26 and 12 dollar buy ins.
HITTHEPANDA
Would you like to elaborate on the many points you would play different?
I understand your concerns however if you are so familiar with these stakes you would realize 600 sngs is a miniscule sample size and if you look @ my 12 180 graph(IIRC) the graph ended on a downswing where I eventually stopped grinding them to move onto other things.
Anyway, don’t want you to feel like you’re getting ripped off and I would love to discuss the spots you are questioning.
wemlingerel
I didn’t say I was getting ripped off, haha i’m a huge fan and the site has helped me enormously in large mtt. My sng sample size between pstars and FT is almost 1700, and the vast majority are 45 and 27 seaters so I think it is a pretty good sample size.
wemlingerel
I will elaborate on specific hands but will have to go back through it, my issue seems to be with the approach in general. With so little chips in play, while on the other hand having a reasonable blind structure I feel like I play a little more patient and focus more on avoiding large preflop showdowns. The players are weak, and the stacks are genearlly short throughout the tournament, but I don’t see the need for many of the open shoves with more than 12-15 bets. With my experience I have found that players at these stakes tend to make such tight folds (especially deep in the tournament) that percieved fold equity is actually more important than your real fold equity. Because of the overly tight play can actually make it very deep in these even when hovering around 6 to 12 bets and never getting into a preflop all in showdown if you pick your spots well.
Also, because there is so few chips in play there isn’t as much of an advantage in gaining a large stack as opposed to a large mtt where there is many more chips in play, and infinitely more post flop play.
wemlingerel
This conversation might be more constructive over email, or in real time messaging if you would rather do that. So if you want to just email a skype or AIM name for some time when you can talk and aren’t too busy.. or just email to talk more about this stuff without it being on a post or forum thread. I find that a one on one conversation can be more informative instead of trying to talk with many people at a time.
Eric
wemlingerel@appstate.edu
wemlingerel
With the relative stack sizes and the low 3bet frequency I dont think the 12-25 bet shoves are necessary. I completely understand why this is a profitable move in large mtt when there are more chips in play and there is much more of an advantage in having a large chip stack.Considering the low 3bet frequency along with the reasonable incremental increases in blind levels the preflop all in shoves with 12-30 bets is not necessary and actually can take away from an edge you can have by simply being patient and waiting for late position spots (if you dont find a better spots to chip up throughout the sng). I feel like my edge is actually picking these spots better than the avg. or even slightly profitable players. I have seen plenty of players who are extremely profitable and consistently winning in large NL mtt but are break even or losing players in mtt sngs. I feel the most profitable approach is different from that of a larger mtt. Like i said, my sample size is actually 1700 or so , if you combine my pokerstars and fulltilt accounts and this is mostly all 27-45 seat regular sngs.This is not a “miniscule” sample size and I feel you would be hard pressed to find an ROI better than 28% at the stakes/sng size i play.
laydown666
The windows media file is only 30 mins long, I tried downloading it twice on different browsers. The iphone file seems fine but the resolution of that one is too low on my pc screen.. can something be done about this? Thanks in advance.
alaplancha
these comments are golden, lol. anyway thanks panda these videos are good and if anything I thought you shove too tight in some spots.
xxsosickxx
What are you reccomending as the min. BR to play these like 6 tbling? and what kind of downswings can be expected 20-30? Oh yeah, thanks, good stuff.
wemlingerel
This is exactly why I wanted to talk with him one on one. I realize Hitthepanda is an amazing MTT player, high and low limits. What I am suggesting is due to the structure, and stack sizes in these mtt sngs, along with the horrific play, I AM tighter and approach them differently than I would a larger MTT (with deeper stacks). I wanted to start a dialogue about this even if that means challenging the conventional wisdom of the High limit MTT players and how they approach the LOW limit MTT sngs. This is a perfectly reasonable conversation and im not questioning Hitthepanda’s prowess in No Limit Holdem he obviously is amazing at what he does. However, he is making a low limit mtt sng training video here. There are tons of profitable mtt players who are break even or losing players in a large sample of mtt sngs. On the other hand there are profitable Shorter stack mtt SNG players who are break even or only slightly profitable in larger mtt. There can be different approaches applied to these two forms of mtt, especially when you go down this low in stakes. So don’t simply scoff because someone questions something in these videos, this is an interactive site remember…
Having said all of this I do feel like I am much more used to the lower buy in mtt sngs and also much more consistantly PROFITABLE in them.. (after a large sample) even when compared to HITTHEPANDA. This says nothing about him.. just that he is too busy winning High limit deeper stacked MTT. So if i’m playing “too tight” then there seems to be something to it.. i do have a 30% ROI in 27-45 person mtt sngs after a sample of over 1700 sngs and including 26-75 dollar buy ins so perhaps I might have something to offer. You would be hard pressed to find a higher ROI after a signifigant sample size so yes these comments are “Golden”
HITTHEPANDA
First off, 1700 games is still not a significant sample size for MTT sngs. I highly doubt you’re a loser at them, however I don’t think you can call 1700 games here 100% set in stone true roi.
Anyway, I understand your concerns, and I agree that at some tables you can definitely minraise/fold stacks that are as low as 16-17bb. However, shoving a wide range in a lot of the spots I did that I assume you are talking about is going to be unexploitably +EV. That does not mean that in some spots at some tables it’s more +EV than minraise/folding. Just like in mtts, you should adapt to your current table. A problem with adapting though, is that (at least in my experience) when grinding these I would play up to 35 tables at once. It’s hard to know if minraise/folding a stack under 20bbs is going to be a smart play with so many erratic players, so going ahead and taking the definite +EV spot is never going to be a bad thing.
wemlingerel
Username Games Played -Av. Stake – Av. ROI
(sng only)
Tablecaptainn (Ftilt) 665 $32 29%
ericw123 (pokerstars) 1,034 $19 26%
Total Profit: $12,209
Sharkscope.com
I posted my stats above.. and I also looked you up to find you are also quite profitable in mtt sngs..and stats that more closely resemble mine.. than HITTHEPANDA’s FYI (you wont be able to see this because he “opted out” of having his sharkscope stats shown after i said something. So lets not just pretend that the TPE pro can learn nothing from us looowly members who are actually sometimes more in tune with the stakes and tournament style.
wemlingerel
Yes.. thats fair. espsccially when your talking turbo 180 or 90 mans.. so i guess we are kind of talking apples and oranges with the sample sizes.. i mean for reg 27-45 i think 1700 is pleeenty.. and you will se no signifigant downswings on my graph. And to the point on the super multi tabling.. I totally see what your saying. If someone has the BR though I dont see why you wouldnt just up the stakes and play half as many tables and have more of a short term edge… its not like the quality of play is any better in the 75 dollars. But yes that last little post I typed was more to the guy who just laughed off my comments and said they were “golden, LOL”
wemlingerel
I appreciate your response though.. I was just trying to start a conversation about this because more and more I have been finding quite profitable MTT players (consistantly profitable over a large sample) then when you control for SNG’s only they are break even or losers over thousands and thousands of sngs (also works the other way..some mtt sng players are consistantly profitable, while breaking even or losing in mtt in the long run). I have just found this intriguing.. and I feel like there is something to be said about a different approach or “style” of play being more applicable to a mtt SNG as opposed to a larger-deeper stack MTT to explain for these inconsistencies in profitability. Just wanted to get your thoughts on it.
wemlingerel
^^
this post was for alaplancha and I said it before you posted anything Panda.. For some reason It got shoved down below what we were just posting. Just letting you know I didn’t randomly post my stats after we were posting just now.. haha
benpprice
im on a 2k downswing atm in the 12s, and even players like bfizz11 and mi_turtle have gone 100 games! i’d look to have bout 150 buy ins for the 180s imo
pokeryjj
from my experience, you are right. Panda shoves too light with too many blinds.
And I agree with you that your approach should be more adaptable to those MTT SNGs.
ac2763
I think wemlingerel needs to be medicated.
VZ2
nice
kringle87
I’m a little weary that HITTHEPANDA has opted out of shark scoop and has not defended himself against wemlingerel. This seems like a site where people can be honest about their success and weaknesses.
Croc1
I am new to this site and certainly not a poker pro, but as a business executive I am very confident in the teaching pros here at TPE.
HITTHEPANDA is currently back “on” with SharkScope and his stats are jaw-dropping. However, there is only one stat that I give a hoot about and that is total profit. This guy has close to $600,000 in profit from just PS and FT sites alone! That is what I am here for…profit (as a side job) and the “Panda” obviously knows how to attain a level that I can only dream of. I seriously doubt he has the time nor inclination to “defend” himself against well-meaning (although flawed) reasoning that challenges his skill and humility.
I have never met the “Panda” and I am not looking for brownie points; however I happened to watch these videos and peruse these comments and figured the record should be set straight for other newbies (like me) who come later.
Regards to all.
Croc1
kleopl
I have to agree with wemlingerel. HITTHEPANDA is great player and I love to watch his videos, but in this series he’s not presenting optimal style for playing 12/180s. His style is of course simple and profitable, great for playing 30+ tables, but you can have much bigger ROI in this donkaments.
nevertilt22
wow these comments are tilting considering the video was not a bad video at all…. 500 sngs is a huge sample size? 1700 is a huge sample size? What kinda rocks are you smokin wemlingerel? Maybe stop posting your SHORT-term sng results and talkin trash on a teaching forum and pay attention to the site pro who is up millions? Jeez.
Mr ZN
With all due respect to the panda I was having the same thoughts that wemlingerel brought to the table when watching the video. Different approaches will lead to different styles, but discussion is always beneficial and I really appreciate all points brought forth. Think for yourselves.
Palmerjay
Loved it!