Short handed or heads up. Lose aggression and lose 'em all?

I've finished in the money the last 16 out of 20 SnGs i've played (some were heads up), and i noticed a pattern in losses and wins. Correct me if i'm wrong.
When you are in the bubble, but especially when you are in the money, the first to lose aggression usually finishes last. I learned how to play short handed game and heads up from Ripptyde. It took me a while to take full advantage of Ripp's style, but it's worked wonders eversince i managed to put it to work. Getting in the bubble, playing when in the bubble, getting in the money, playing when in the money, i had plenty of help from many other's here at FTR. After all, you have to get in the bubble at least, to be talking about short handed play. But as far as short handed and heads up plays are concerned, Ripp's style really suits me.
Everyone's got their own style and strat, but i believe aggression is the key ingredient when short handed.
I understand that there's more to playing short handed, but no books or change of gameplan made me a better short handed player until i learned aggression.

Yea I agree thats why a lot of people say it's mostly like when it comes down to 3 final players because they are usually going to bluff each other a lot and the cards are significant to the outcome on who wins.

But I agree, when you are aggressive you tend to place better. I also notice short stacks seem to almost always lose no matter what hand they have preflop (AA, AK, KK vs anything the chip leader calls with)

Just watch out for people who let you bluff all your money to them ;)

In No Limit Hold 'Em, the aggressor always has an advantage.

If you're the first to bet at the pot, the worst case scenario is that you get re-raised and might have to lay down your hand. Another player could fold his hand (quite possibly the best hand) to your raise. Or, he calls it.

Being the aggressor pays off.

I think you guys all have good points. I mean, there's really no wrong way to play poker. There might be a bad play, but nothing wrong with playing differently. For example, most people play AK and AQ with 3x BB raise preflop, i usually slowplay them. I tried playing both way, i have more success slowplaying it. The past 30 SnG or so, i had a great deal of success slowplaying AK and AQ.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Toasty

Just watch out for people who let you bluff all your money to them

---

You are right Toasty, can't get too greedy.
But still, i think it's better to be the first one to signal strenght than be the last. In my experience, people don't want to mess with the aggressors when short handed. Pick the wrong spot to steal the blind and you can say goodbye to plenty of your chips, but you can't be too picky either. Wait for position to steal and someone calls you with marginal hand because some of them think of the button raise as an automatic steal. Raise often enough and sometimes they may call a legitimate raise when they are holding J8 and you with your pocke kings. Like Toast said, you don't want to bluff all your money to them, but you usually want to be the first or second most aggressive player on the table.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VeraN

when it comes down to 3 final players because they are usually going to bluff each other a lot and the cards are significant to the outcome on who wins.

---

At the beginning of a SnG, there are more players with more cards and smaller pots, but often more profitable pots (less % of your money in the pot)

But look at how many hands make it to a showdown late in a tournament, or make it to the river. Less and less the further you go.

Aggression is key. But usually if a hand does make it to a showdown, 1 player is all-in, so make sure you are careful trying to bluff someone out of a pot. If it costs you, it will cost you BIG.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VeraN

I also notice short stacks seem to almost always lose no matter what hand they have preflop (AA, AK, KK vs anything the chip leader calls with)

---

I believe there's a thread about them here, but Ripptyde often talks about leverage. How a big stack can call AI from a small stack with any card. Most of us play that way when we are big stacked too, especially at stars where big stack really is big stack. At PP, even the big stack will pick his spots to call AI with rags. Also, AK is still a drawing hand. Great hand, but it's a hand that in any given play can be beat by pocket 2s. When you go AI with AK and short stacked, it's really a coin flip. When i'm short stacked i seem to get beat often when holding great hands, it's probably because we remember bad beats much more vividly than we do the great wins.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xeqtr

In No Limit Hold 'Em, the aggressor always has an advantage.

If you're the first to bet at the pot, the worst case scenario is that you get re-raised and might have to lay down your hand. Another player could fold his hand (quite possibly the best hand) to your raise. Or, he calls it.

Being the aggressor pays off.

---

I believe that's why you need to play aggressive even when you are medium stacked. Medium stack don't mean much when the blinds are gigantic. When short handed, i believe (if i have to put a number) 7of10 times people fold to respectable raise preflop. The only way to survive "the attack of gigant blind", is by getting back what was stolen from me. But i think you avoid stealing from the severely short stacked, they have no choice but to AI.