I guess my basic "thesis" here is just that playing "appropriately to the table," with reasonable and solid bets is the best way to go early. What precisely that means in terms of which hands when and all that is rather complex and debatable. But it just all boils down to +EV relative to the table you're at imo.

But here's the thing: In order to get optimal results, you need to be able to play short, medium and big stacks, although some players are certainly more skillful in one than the other.

Now, if you just don't get cards (or, really worse, flop decent hands on your good pockets) early, then at some point the blinds catch up with you. So, you play short-stack and try to double up. I had one last night where I did reasonably well after a long early dry spell. May have tried playing 2 hands that didn't hit until the blinds hit about 50/100. Well, then I doubled up, and before long I was in a pretty nice stack and made a good finish.

But, unless you get in a really bad way early, you can see a lot of hands to find your opportunities. And, of course, if your hands do hit early, you want to play them to the hilt (e.g., this morning I had a nice set early and tripled up--certainly not a bad start), as the big stack is certainly an advantage.

I guess what I'm really saying is that the early part of the tournament, with equal stacks, is simply the time to play "real poker"--not trying to artificially boost yourself into some kind of stack that you just "must have."

And, as to these river all-in-ers (after Flop's posted hand, I think I'm probably in error putting him into that category. What I'm talking about are these guys who suddenly move in their stacks of T1,200 on a river pot of T300 or so), I think the most important thing is to identify them quickly so as to be able to judge whether you can call that bet or not with your overpair or TPTK, etc. If they're doing it repeatedly, you probably actually can and should if the board hasn't gotten too crazy (like 4 cards to the flush or something).

Anyhow, this "river all-in" style is simply one I don't care at all to emulate without cards (and a pot) to justify it. If sizeable overbets aren't +EV in cash games as a rule, I see no reason why they should be in an early tourney context. The only real difference is that at certain tables you can actually get callers for your set, etc. with an overbet. But you also can't bank on making set, straight, flush, etc. early in the tourney. These hands are just rare, and you have to make do with what you get.

So, basically, I think you need to just play your cards early--as a rule (although here is where Flop and I probably do disagree somewhat) a little tighter and a little more cautiously than in a cash game. Then play your stack according to whatever the results may be after this phase. The most important thing, for me anyway, is just not to try to force it if the cards aren't falling well early. If you get crap, just fold it and buy yourself enough time to see some nice hands later, which, as a rule, eventually do hit.

Flop, in a sense you're probably right, and we'll definitely have to continue to explore this. I actually think our play probably differs in practice less than one might think.

The thing that I get into is that if I tell myself to try some LAG moves (e.g., 96o), I end up bleeding away my stack and get into serious trouble. I think it's because my mindset is just that I WANT all these pots and then end up getting over-aggressive at bad times. If my brain, on the other hand, is saying "be careful" here, I tend to win (obviously, also, the "be careful" message can be taken to extremes that also get you into trouble).

Anyhow, here's what I rather consider a "normal" tournament: I'm around 1,800 at the 25/50 level, a little over 2,000 when it hits 50/100, and then often just shy of 3,000 at 100/200 with antes. Then I either double up or go out. In any case, I do turn up the juice. But there's an enormous amount of variation here, and, depending on the specifics, I will start playing big stack earlier if I get it or try to double up earlier if I get into trouble.

Maybe we can also start discussing some other specifics of playability soon. Would be interested in hearing your opinion. One that I think I'm ready to scrap (after getting my AA outdrawn by KJs on the river--flush after hitting my set on the turn, horrible, horrible) is the AA/KK limp re-raise unless it's just a completely raise-crazy table. I may lose the damn things anyway, but I feel MUCH better about it if I can get so much money in when I'm ahead that they were at least making an absolutely horrible EV play.

Flop, the thing is that 96o, 94s, and 72o as HANDS are just always -EV. This of course isn't to say that you can't raise with them for +EV. In fact, I've re-raised with hands like that very successfully a few times--at the moment, I'm thinking of a situation where a big stack was raising some very weak hands but would wisely fold to re-raises.

You're just not playing these hands because of the cards but because of a particular situation.

Now, if you spot a promising situation early, great, play anything there, and you can make money. But if you need to have a real hand in order to play profitably at a certain table, you'll have more money at all stages by throwing them away rather than keeping them.

Where we may agree here is that there is a certain type of LAG against whom bluffs can be very effective. But the trash hands are all just flat out bluff hands, to which I have no objections. You're just not playing them at all for hand value, as you may various others.

I think it is possible to make hands like 94s +EV... but you'd have to be damn good because most of the profit is gonna be from stealing the pot on the flop after noone hit.