Do you keep track of average stack?

[proud2Bwhack]

Dig this story, not a legend but actually happened...

During wsop main event Johnny Chan fell below avg. stack or where he felt he needed to be in relation to the blinds etc., so he just went all in 4 times in a row without checking his cards making sure everyone could see that he was just randomly doing it. No one called him...

I could be wrong about it being Chan, but it was a very famous player, pretty sure it was Chan, and it was the 10k buy in main event. And he was like "I either get the chips I need to compete or Im out of here..."

 

[radartodd69]

I periodically check to see if I am at least an average chip stack. If I'm not, that means I have to look for some winning opportunities. Just because I go below chip stack, that doesn't mean play recklessly. Just means I should focus more.

 

[Betmakers]

I always watch the mid stack, but rather for the biggest stack. If I start to lag behind - I play more aggressively.

 

[krakenba]

No, I find tracking it rushes my decisions and makes me want to take pots that I shouldn't be going for aiming to get to the average. Especially in a large tournament, the average goes up so much so quick that it's hard to keep up unless you double up. I go by the median stack instead

 

[Empress]

Absolutely! Usually, like on ACR, I'll keep that "statistics" tab to see my position and the average stack size open instead of the chat window. The statistics don't really change how I play the game, but I like to keep an eye on the total number of players remaining and my position.

 

[pr0serbian]

I didnt pay attantion to that earlier but now i do.And as my stack is belove avarage more tight range i play.

 

[Poker Orifice]

Do you keep track of your stack size and how it compares to average stack and biggest stack of all the tourney players?

Most of the time the biggest stacks due to winning big flips are like 10 times the average stack. Are we good on staying close with the average stack, should we aiming to have double the average stack, of should we too try to risk some flips in order to get close to bigger stacks?


How is your stack compares to others when playing a tourney and what are your tourney results most of the time?

It's irrelevant information.
Instead focus on how many bb's you have in your stack & how that affects the range of hands we play from various positions & in various situations vs. various other stack sizes. Also keep track of all of the other player's stack sizes and watch to see how they're adjusting (or not) accordingly (it is a quick & easy way to see who knows wtf they're doing & who doesn't).


Nobody has any particular 'tourney results most of the time'.. unless they're a complete maniac and are finishing in the bottom 10% very often (there are types who do this though). OR they have a higher ITM finish than optimal because they're blinding wayyyy down in hopes of min-cashing too often.

 

[Poker Orifice]

This should't have any effect on how you play.Pointless.

Agreed 100%

 

[nonames45]

I compare my stack with 10BB if it is higher than this number, then my business is not so bad but if it's not so then I play very tight or fold or all-in.
* and yes I noticed when I see how many people are left in the tournament I'm getting nervous and making mistakes, and when I play, despite these figures, the game is much better

 

[ddg373]

Keeping up with the avg stack lets me know how far into the game I am. When a screen pops up and I see I have 20k chips, but avg stack is only 4-6k chips, it lets me know it's still early in the trny, where as screen pops up and I only have 6k chips with avg stack of 12k, I know it's getting late and I'm behind.

 

[Eric Salvador]

I only care in the early stages. Once it gets down to 100 or less players I like to find the largest stacks and subtract them from the field. Giving me a better idea of where I stand and what I need to do.

 

[acemenow]

Depends on the type of game but in any mtt I just look to be in the middle of the pack or better. R/A I'm looser if plan to rebuy/add-on

 

[shadow72]

Don't bother with the "average stack" as it can be very misleading. Break down the leaderboard into segments (I usually divide it into 9 segments) and base your style of play on which segment your chip stack puts you in.

 

[TeUnit]

I dont really look at the avg stack, I try to divide the tourney into 2 parts- no icm and icm. So when you are far from the money there is no icm, but when you get close to the money icm becomes very important.

 

[Dejange]

Contrary to some of the previous posts - I will say keeping a close look at average stack size is much useful indicator than the number of BB's we have. And why I am saying that? Because you are usually starting with 100 BB's or more, but during the game continuation - actually you advance with less BB's towards the ITM stage and FT.
In some tourneys - you are playing FT with only 10 BB's - and that is average for all on the FT! What kind of info you will get for your position and chances if in middle stage you have 30 BB's??? Are they enough to reach FT with the same game style? Or you should take more risk and widen your range?

I am comparing always my stack size with the average one, like many of others stated before, and that is providing me an up to date info - how I shall continue my play in particular mtt. Obviously, if I am on average or above it - things are going OK for me - I am still in the game! If below it - I should take more risk, bluff more and increase the stack somehow - otherwise I will be eaten soon by the blind increasing ...

 

[Poker Orifice]

Contrary to some of the previous posts - I will say keeping a close look at average stack size is much useful indicator than the number of BB's we have. And why I am saying that? Because you are usually starting with 100 BB's or more, but during the game continuation - actually you advance with less BB's towards the ITM stage and FT.
In some tourneys - you are playing FT with only 10 BB's - and that is average for all on the FT! What kind of info you will get for your position and chances if in middle stage you have 30 BB's??? Are they enough to reach FT with the same game style? Or you should take more risk and widen your range?

I am comparing always my stack size with the average one, like many of others stated before, and that is providing me an up to date info - how I shall continue my play in particular mtt. Obviously, if I am on average or above it - things are going OK for me - I am still in the game! If below it - I should take more risk, bluff more and increase the stack somehow - otherwise I will be eaten soon by the blind increasing ...

how many bb's you have in your stack & how that affects the range of hands we play from various positions & in various situations vs. various other stack sizes. Also keep track of all of the other player's stack sizes and watch to see how they're adjusting (or not) accordingly

 

[klada152]

Contrary to some of the previous posts - I will say keeping a close look at average stack size is much useful indicator than the number of BB's we have. And why I am saying that? Because you are usually starting with 100 BB's or more, but during the game continuation - actually you advance with less BB's towards the ITM stage and FT.
In some tourneys - you are playing FT with only 10 BB's - and that is average for all on the FT! What kind of info you will get for your position and chances if in middle stage you have 30 BB's??? Are they enough to reach FT with the same game style? Or you should take more risk and widen your range?

I am comparing always my stack size with the average one, like many of others stated before, and that is providing me an up to date info - how I shall continue my play in particular mtt. Obviously, if I am on average or above it - things are going OK for me - I am still in the game! If below it - I should take more risk, bluff more and increase the stack somehow - otherwise I will be eaten soon by the blind increasing ...

Agree plus i check shortest stack when i'm short and in the bubble.

 

[8bod8]

rather than average stack I look at a number derived from m-ratio, sort of indicating the number of hands/rounds I can expect to play. This determines the range somewhat.
The relative stack sizes at my table are much more important in MTT's than average stack or m-ratio.

 

[rafbam]

it's one off the factors to considder a fold ore not if I doubt, and have a (for me) 50-50 ore 40-60 chance of winning.
Sayed this, I don't mean I'd go all in faster but Its something that I look for if I'm way down, I would be easyer to take that risk than when I'm above average.

 

[PuMa8818]

undoubtedly, I follow the average stack and feel comfortable when my stack is 2-3 times more than average) But everything changes in hyper tournaments where the average stack is 8-10 bb. Then no longer to fun)

 

[Awrpze]

I don't bother checking the chip average. Even though it's nice to know where you're at, if you focus too hard on that, you'll stress yourself out and under-perform. I just focus on playing the best I can with the stack I have.

 

[bbennie1]

Some tournaments have antes, so it's better to include that as well. I read Phil Hellmuth's book "Kill Phil" and he breaks it down to CPR (chips per round) and CSI (chip status index).

For example, blinds are 200/400, ante is 50 with 10 people at the table.
CPR= 200+400+ (50x10) = 1,100
With CSI the key numbers 4, 10 and 30 and they show your strength in the tournament, by multiplying those numbers with the CPR.
If your stack is less than 4xCPR, you're small stack. (e.g. 4x1,1000=5,500)
Between 4xCPR and 10xCPR, medium stack.
Big stack is between 10 and 30.
Huge stack is over 30xCPR.

 

[Poker Orifice]

rather than average stack I look at a number derived from m-ratio, sort of indicating the number of hands/rounds I can expect to play. This determines the range somewhat.
The relative stack sizes at my table are much more important in MTT's than average stack or m-ratio.

Yup! this ^

 

[Poker Orifice]

I read Phil Hellmuth's book "Kill Phil" and he

Did you really read it? Did you read the front cover or the Intro.?

Because it's not written by Phil Hellmuth... it's actually not written by any Phil.
"Kill Phil" is written by Rodman & Nelson

 

[bbennie1]

Did you really read it? Did you read the front cover or the Intro.?

Because it's not written by Phil Hellmuth... it's actually not written by any Phil.
"Kill Phil" is written by Rodman & Nelson

It's not written by Phil Hellmuth. I didn't read every letter in the book so I guess I didn't really read it no. Just the 95% that's important.