Min-cashes, are they worth it?

[This Fish Chums]

So often people talk about the bubble and playing differently on the bubble just to ensure you get a min cash. Well, some of these strategies, especially the ones about tightening up, will result in your stack dwindling down even though you do safely make the money.



Well, I think I've come to realize there is a bigger question here. Is a min cash really worth the change in style? Let's say you're in an $11 tourney and a min cash is worth about $17.50. If you have the bankroll to buy into an $11 tourney, should you really be all that concerned with increasing your bankroll by $7.50 overall? it seems to me you should continue playing the way that would increase your stack size the greatest and not the strategy that overly protects your stack at the risk of moving to a much higher cash level.



Am I wrong in this mentality? I can see it definitely being wrong at the high stakes levels, but if you're playing for dollars or even cents I'm not so sure a min-cash is worth it.


Thoughts?

 

[Minus272c]

Gettin cash is always good for your bankroll
Getting min cash 20 times today, is better for you bankroll than playing
recless and getting no cash at all that day.

But i dont think getting min cash should be an objective when you
start the tournement, i would should focus on getting stacked.
That said, you can still play poker, and avoid putting your stack
at risk when your very close to the bubble.

I bet a lot of people are eyeing up the 1st price when they enter
the tournement, and that should be their main goal

 

[Alex70793]

If you play in the hope of getting into ITM you will often get into the minimum money, but very rarely and even never will take first place. And if you play in the hope of getting into the first place you will rarely get into the minimum money, but your chances of getting to the final table and getting the first place will be more than in the first case.
I think to start with the first option to build a bankroll

 

[paapcity]

I think it depends on your bankroll. If you have a decent bankroll managment, you should always go for the first place. So dont be afraid to bubble and play your cards as you would do in earlier stages. If you dont have a decent bankroll and happy with a mincash just fold your way into the money.

 

[ninjareal]

So often people talk about the bubble and playing differently on the bubble just to ensure you get a min cash. Well, some of these strategies, especially the ones about tightening up, will result in your stack dwindling down even though you do safely make the money.



Well, I think I've come to realize there is a bigger question here. Is a min cash really worth the change in style? Let's say you're in an $11 tourney and a min cash is worth about $17.50. If you have the bankroll to buy into an $11 tourney, should you really be all that concerned with increasing your bankroll by $7.50 overall? it seems to me you should continue playing the way that would increase your stack size the greatest and not the strategy that overly protects your stack at the risk of moving to a much higher cash level.



Am I wrong in this mentality? I can see it definitely being wrong at the high stakes levels, but if you're playing for dollars or even cents I'm not so sure a min-cash is worth it.


Thoughts?

Hi, bankroll here is the important point, and therefore I'd agree that playing for the final table & then the win should be the mindset, it's a riskier stratergy for sure , but why not ? One thing to consider though is your opponents range will be shove/fold only for the smaller stacks so you'd have to keep that in mind, most short players play very loose after the bubble, so you may consider waiting for them after the bubble than before ? Depends on the moment and the hands , I don't have a large bankroll at the moment, so i even fold AQ if others are shoving ahead of me ,
Just my 5c

 

[Dewitten]

The smaller stakes are to get in the bubble to , you could try to take advance of that , try to figger out wich players wait till they are in de bubble.

 

[FrothyGoodness]

Just depends on the what you see value in. Some people see value in playing multiple low buy in tourneys to cash out wherever they play so many at a time that instead of just 7.50 they are actually making $150. Just depends on how you overall view the situation , I always look at it for profit per hour So trying to just make the cash is never really an option for me. I'm always thinking 1st

 

[MattRyder]

If you're getting the cards - play them to the max. But, if you got to the bubble by playing crazy and/or by getting just plain lucky be aware that the further into a tournament you go, the more 'good' players you're going to be up against. That means 'crazy' and 'just plain lucky' won't work as well any more.

 

[smknginmaine]

U want the cash.... bad enough to fold or play too tight and miss chips, no. Around 2010 give or take a shift went around,
"play for the win" "who cares about min cash, the money is up top"
both true statements. but they seemed to really take with a lot of parrots.
More recently, past couple years maybe.... some super German math poker minds put to rest with numbers even argo pros couldn't argue.
Get the cash. yes, it's not an end all, and yes, pick spots, take advantage where you can. The win is worth much more. But you're ARE LOSING VALUE long term to disregard and just play for the win
can you make points to the contrary,sure. Should every rule be followed 100% -nope, other things to consider.
But research it. Not on here, opinions galore. Watch your step, lol.
but we all know 2+2=4 I can do that math and cannot argue with it.
I, myself, can't do the calculations backing the long term min cash value- or whatever you want to call it. But it's been done and the results are no less arguable than the simple 2+2

 

[smknginmaine]

Just depends on the what you see value in. Some people see value in playing multiple low buy in tourneys to cash out wherever they play so many at a time that instead of just 7.50 they are actually making $150. Just depends on how you overall view the situation , I always look at it for profit per hour So trying to just make the cash is never really an option for me. I'm always thinking 1st

Then your dollars per hour aren't as high as they could be or your sample size is too small. One or the other. PERIOD.

 

[FrothyGoodness]

Then your dollars per hour aren't as high as they could be or your sample size is too small. One or the other. PERIOD.

Not at all. I also don't play a lot of Micro tourneys. So my opinions are always different. Everyones opinions are different that's why its a forum , this is how I view them and if I was in the process of making an online bankroll , then sure min cashing is can be worth it but from my point of view ending a tourney at 90 an hour for 3 hours is a good day

 

[smknginmaine]

Not at all. I also don't play a lot of Micro tourneys. So my opinions are always different. Everyones opinions are different that's why its a forum , this is how I view them and if I was in the process of making an online bankroll , then sure min cashing is can be worth it but from my point of view ending a tourney at 90 an hour for 3 hours is a good day

Agreed opinions vary. From a pure math and statistical standpoint. You're missing money. It'snot an opinion. It's a fact. like getting the right price to case a FD to the river, gotta look at the math, if you know it, then use that with other factors to make your decision. Same thing here. I'm not discounting other factors, opinions, and preferences. Simply the mathematical answer.
Or screw the math and go with your gut, it works for a lot of folks, for a little while.
Fedor Holtz or Steffen Sontheimer play microstakes? lol. No, they also don't care much about opinions. or online tourneys more your thing. Ever heard of BenCB? 100000%
He agrees with what I'm saying. He's much much much better than you or I.
Thankfully I recognize that and listen to what he says.
Granted, the win is where it's at. And yes- many mistakenly over pucker around the bubble and miss out. And I could keep going and going. But 2+2 will still =4
Not really looking to argue opinions. Just putting the correct math out.
If you have red KK and get it all in pre and it turns out your up against black AA in a 9 handed game you have just over 18% equity. Unless you have a crazy read, or there are factors beyond the math- and there always are- you should never fold KK pre. Still, you should have the math in your tool bag. All I'm sayin.

 

[B1731898]

I just replied to a post where a guy had 88 with about 11 blinds left and they were on the bubble. First thing I said was, depends on how much the payout was...