An Online Sit 'n' Go - Part III

In my last column, we continued discussing an online Sit 'n' Go tournament. I had entered a $100 buy-in 10-player limit hold'em event, with the winner receiving $500, second $300, and third $200. When the column ended, the table had just gotten down to three players, so we were all in the money. The limits had just become $200-$400 with $100-$200 blinds. I had $4,465 in seat No. 4 (S4) and was leading after eliminating the fourth-place finisher on the previous hand. S3, on my right, had $2,760, and S10, on my left, had the remaining $775.

Three Players: With three players remaining we can expect everyone to loosen up (even more), since we are all making money and the prize structure is fairly flat. If the prize structure were less balanced – say, $600, $350, $50 – the third-place player might just fold all of his hands, hoping to somehow slip into second. With the flat structure, he might as well play and hope for the best.

As chip leader, I have a delicate balancing act: I want to be aggressive and keep the others off balance, but I do not want to lose the lead by letting someone win a big hand from me.

Holding the A 4 on the button, I just call the blinds. Most people raise here, but there are compelling reasons to call. First, A-4 is not a big favorite against almost any hand, and at least one opponent is certain to call in this shorthanded situation. Second, if the flop misses me and there is action, I can get away from my hand easily without bringing my opponents that much closer to me. Third, if an ace does fall, I may get extra action from the players who assume I would have raised if I had one. S10 raises out of the small blind, and we all call and see a 10 7 4 flop. S10 bets $200, and S3 calls. I have to call with my pair and big overcard. I could easily have the best hand here. The turn brings another 10, and S10 goes all in for $175. S3 folds, and I believe I must call this bet. The river 6 changes nothing, but S10 has the 5 5 to beat my fours. I was hoping he had big cards, but he didn't and stays alive.

I hold the Q 5 in the big blind, and the button raises, which means very little when threehanded. I call with my suited hand, and we see a flop of K 8 6. I miss this entirely, but I check and call, hoping that he has missed, and I can take it away later. The turn is the 4, so I make a flush draw and check, planning to semibluff check-raise (the opportunity presented to be aggressive with a semibluff is one of the reasons a suited hand matters shorthanded). But S10 checks, as well. The river is the A. Not sure what to do, I consider that if I check, I will have to fold to a bet, even though there is a good chance he would be bluffing. Anyway, if he has an ace, he might have bet the turn for value. So, I bet my queen high and he folds, so I get back some of the chips from the last hand.

Next, I hold the K 6 in the small blind, and fold to a button raise. I play a great deal tighter in the small blind when threehanded than I do in the big blind. Besides, I would rather see my opponents go at it for a while. Next, I have the Q 9 on the button. With two decent cards, I raise, and only S3 calls from the big blind. On the flop of A-6-5 rainbow, he checks, and I bet at it and get check-raised. I lay down my queen.

Back in the big blind, I have the A 5. S10, still the short stack, folds the button, but S3 raises from the small blind. I prefer calling to raising, as I do not want to build a big pot on speculation. He bets at the 7 4 3 flop, and I call with my double gutshot and overcard. I am inclined to believe I have the best hand here, and plan to raise on the turn if nothing scary comes. I follow the plan when the 3 hits, and S3 folds.

After a few more hands, the blinds go to $150-$300. S3 has just about caught up to me in chips, and S10 has $850. Even with $4,000 in chips, no one has enough chips to play two hands, and losing one hand played all the way to the river is enough to cripple any player. The balancing act between playing too passively and losing lots of blinds and playing too aggressively and losing a significant pot becomes even more important. Some people believe that at this point, the match becomes even more of a crapshoot, but there is still a lot of room for skill and judgment. Sure, luck always helps in poker, but wise decision-making also plays a role.

In the small blind, I am planning to reraise the button with my Q J, a hand that plays well against lots of hands with which he might raise, but he folds. I raise anyway, and the short stack calls. The flop is A 10 10, and I bet, expecting S10 to throw his last $250 in with anything. Surprisingly, he folds and puts up $150 for the small blind. I have the A 5 on the button, and this time I raise, hoping to get heads up with the all-in player (yes, he does go all in on this hand), since he cannot bet me off my hand, which could well win a showdown without improving. Unfortunately, the big blind calls. The flop is good news and bad news. I get an ace, but the whole flop is diamonds. In this situation, most experienced tournament players check the hand out, hoping that one of the hands will be able to beat the all-in player. The actual dollar amount to be gained by either of us eliminating a player is usually more important than the value of the chips in the pot. Accordingly, S3 and I check, check the flop and turn, but I muck when he bets the river 2. I might have been able to bet him off his hand on the flop or turn, but then maybe S10 would have managed to beat me. Indeed, he has a small diamond to make the flush, and that eliminates S10.

Two Players: S3 has a small chip lead ($4,210-$3,790). Luckily, he makes a big error right away. I have the K 9 in the big blind and call his button (and small blind) raise. The flop comes K-3-2, and I decide to check and call all three streets. I am very likely to have the best hand, and I certainly am not going to lay down a pair of kings when heads up. On the other hand, he has shown from earlier play that he is capable of making several bets with little or no hand, so I decide that letting him bet offers me a chance to get him to cripple himself. He does have a nice hand, A-J, and although nobody has enough chips to play two hands, he bets the flop (good), the turn (marginal), and the river (silly) in spite of my calls. I can think of no hand that can beat A-J that I would lay down at that stage. As a result of this hand, I have gone from slightly behind to a commanding (I hope) 3-1 lead. I will try to do better with my lead than he did with his. [If you have read the whole series, you might compare this play to my play of the A J when we were fivehanded (Card Player, Vol. 16/No. 18), where I checked the turn and river and ended up having the best hand.]

I call from the button on the next hand, check the flop, and fold when he bets the turn, not wanting to bet with nothing and give him his chips back. Back in the big blind, I get the A 5, which is a pretty good heads-up hand. Of course, he raises from the button, and I call. We look at a 6 3 2 flop. I check and he checks behind me. I do not want to give any more free cards, so I bet the turn when another 6 comes. He raises! What should I make of this? Was he slow-playing on the flop? Is this a desperation bluff? Given his poor play so far, I am not inclined to give him credit for much. On the other hand, if I call twice and lose, I let him back into the match. I judge that there is a huge chance he is bluffing, and call the raise. The river is a 5, giving me two pair, but also putting a possible straight on the board. I clearly have to call again. In fact, it was a desperation bluff, as he held J-8. He has $10 left and I win it on the next hand to win the event.

Thoughts on the Tournament: This was just one of dozens of Sit 'n' Go tournaments that go on every day. The quality of play, especially for a $100 buy-in event, was uneven. Two major errors seemed to repeat, and they are closely linked:

• Squandering chips. In a tournament, it is generally more important not to lose chips than it is to win them. This means that in marginal situations, you are better off not making that extra bet or raise that might be a clear-cut play in a cash game. In our game, people seemingly could not wait to get extra chips into the pot.

• Rushing to get all in. I suspect that the players were panicked by the quick blind increases (every 10 hands), but they still played way too fast. Particularly bad was the practice of not leaving themselves a few chips. If you must go all in, fine, but you do not have to go out of your way to put yourself all in. I know it is annoying to lose a pot and have only two chips left, but that is infinitely better than losing a pot and having no chips left. (In another recent SnG, I did leave myself with two chips while missing a draw, got lucky, and managed to finish in second place.)

One of the most delightful things about online SnGs is that even though they take only an hour, they provide a broad range of rapidly changing circumstances. If you manage to go all the way in one, you will be playing at a full table and shorthanded, with small and large blinds, and with small stacks and big stacks. If you adapt well to these changes and handle your chips with a prudent mix of caution and aggression, you can do well in these limit events.