MTT (Multi-Table Tournaments): Strategy for Early, Mid, and Late Stages

In short, this is a format where conditions change faster than we can adapt: blinds increase, effective stacks shrink, hand objectives shift, and as we approach payouts and the final table, chips increase in value. 

Therefore, the same hand and the same spot can have different values at different moments in a tournament. 

In this article, we will cover:

• which stages of MTT are useful to distinguish and how to understand which stage we're currently at

• why tournaments have two playing models (ChipEV and ICM), and how they alter ranges and aggression

• how position and stack depth determine our preflop strategy

• how to structure play in early, middle, and late stages

• how to approach the bubble and play the final table without chaos — through simple principles and clear rules.

Our goal is to create a comprehensible system so that at every stage we have the logic to choose a line and not lose EV* due to a poor context.

* EV (Expected Value) — this is the mathematical average of how many chips or money you will win or lose in the long run, making specific actions in specific situations.

What is MTT and why there isn't a single strategy

MTT — multi-table tournaments, where we start with equal starting stacks and conditions, but continuously encounter a changing environment:

• blinds increase → we need to utilise every possible situation to enter a hand

• opening and defending blinds start to offer tangible expectation

• in key stages, the cost of exiting the tournament rises sharply.

In tournaments, we need a scheme: focus points for each segment and which risks are justified based on stage and stacks.

* 3-bet in poker — this is the third aggressive action in the hand, also known as a re-raise. 

* 4-bet in poker — a re-raise to a 3-bet, hence the fourth aggressive action in a hand.

You can learn more about 3-bets in poker in this article, and more about 4-bets in this one. 

ChipEV and ICM – and why it’s crucial to distinguish them

These are the two main models applied in MTT. We'll explain them in simple terms. 

1. ChipEV — this is a model where we evaluate decisions through expected chip profitability. In essence: if a call/raise earns +X chips in the long run, we go for it regardless of short-term results.

ChipEV logic predominates in the early stage, throughout much of the middle stage — until payout pressure becomes decisive. 

Practical implication of ChipEV: we do not avoid profitable showdowns due to elimination risk if the big payouts are still far off and chip value tends to be linear.

2. ICM* (Independent Chip Model) — a model where chips do not directly equate to money. Losing part of a stack can cost more than an equivalent win, as we're paying not just with chips — but also with the chance of finishing in a higher position.

ICM is most prominent: on the bubble/prebubble, in the pre-final stage and on the final table.

* ICM in poker — a mathematical model that determines the monetary value of a player's stack at different stages of a tournament.

Practical consequence of ICM — ranges become more asymmetrical. Calls for all-ins need to be more rare and thoughtful, especially against those with larger stacks. Lead aggression becomes more profitable because the table is prone to over-fold.

How do we apply this without formulae? We don't need to calculate ICM on every hand. But we do need to recognise three markers:

1. How close are significant pay jumps?

2. Who covers whom by stack?

3. What's the table's state — are players playing aggressively or backing down? 

Five stages of MTT: a convenient model for decision-making

To make the strategy pragmatic, we need a comprehensible tournament map. We can use a five-stage model:

1. Early stage — from start to end of late registration — or to an average stack of about 50 BB if there's no late registration.

2. Middle stage — after late registration to the bubble.

3. Bubble — zone just before ITM — entering the money zone. 

4. Late stage (ITM) — after entering the money until the final table.

5. Final table — a separate game with maximum ICM pressure.

Next, we'll break down each stage so we can apply the concepts at the tables.

Early Stage

In the early stage, we have a rare resource for tournaments — a deep effective stack. This does not mean that we must play more hands 'because we can'. It means something else: we can create situations where weak players will face multiple post-flop decisions and therefore — make more mistakes. 

In MTT this is the most sustainable way to accumulate chips at the start of a tournament — not through forcing events, but through a systematic selection of favourable hands. 

To achieve this, we need to:

• frequently find ourselves in position against weaker ranges

• choose hands that realise equity* well, meaning not only that they have chances of improving, but can win sizeable pots

• value bet against players who tend to overpay 

If we keep this goal in mind, the early stage stops being a 'warm-up' and becomes a step where we lay the foundation for a future stack.

* Equity — this is the share of the pot that mathematically belongs to you at a given point in a hand, based on the likelihood of winning.

What is characteristic of the early stage? 

1. Deep stacks (100–300 BB). Depth dramatically increases the value of two factors: 

• position: in position, it's easier to control pot size and realise equity

• combinations: hands with good post-flop playability become more valuable, while marginal hands* without a plan become costlier in errors.

* Marginal hands — these are medium-strength hands that are on the edge between profitable and unprofitable decisions.

2. Cheap blinds. The cost of a single round is small. However, in the early stage, we are more likely to lose not due to blinds, but because of large pots with vulnerable hands. Therefore, our priority is not frequency of participation, but the quality of entering a hand.

3. More weak players. In this stage, more than in others, we see limps*, unbalanced calls to 3-bets, overvaluation of hands, and opponents eager to see the board development till the end. 

* Limping — this is entering a hand by calling the big blind.

Preflop play in the early stage

In the early stage, we play deep, so preflop decisions directly influence the complexity of post-flop decisions. Our aim is to enter pots in a way that often places us in comprehensible and profitable situations.

1. Early positions — careful ranges*

Opening from UTG/MP is an investment in a pot where we'll often be out of position. Hence, the requirements for a hand are higher.

In practice, this means:

• more frequently opening hands that hold domination: broadways, strong suited Ax, pocket pairs

• less frequently playing weak connectors 'just for the flop'

• avoiding spots where after a call we don't understand the plan for several streets.

An overly wide range from early positions leads to a multitude of complicated and minus EV decisions on the flop and turn.

* Range of hands (range) — this is the set of all possible starting hands with which a player might be in a hand, based on his actions and position.

2. Late positions — extend through playability

In position, we can play wider, because:

• we better realise equity

• we more frequently control pot size

• it's easier to continue aggression after a continuation bet*

But the extension should be structured. We add hands that can form strong combinations: suited connectors, suited broadways, Axs — with good potential and backdoors.

* Continuation bet (c-bet) — this is a bet made by a player who showed aggression on the previous street.

We discussed positions in poker in more detail in this article. 

3. Isolating limps

Limping early often implies a weak or unstructured range.

By isolating a limper in position, we:

• play heads-up against a weak range

• gain more value from the opponent's mistakes

• make better post-flop decisions more often.

4. More frequently use 3-bets against weak ranges

In the early stage, many players don't fold well to 3-bets and continue with dominated hands.

This gives us the chance to:

• 3-bet for value* more often

• build pots against weak ranges

• apply pressure to opponents who play 3-bet pots poorly.

The main thing is to select hands with good structure and to understand the continuation plan, rather than 3-betting automatically.

* Value — this is playing to extract payment from weaker opponent hands.

Middle Stage

This is a transition phase between comfortable depth and increased pressure zones. We still predominantly play by the ChipEV model, but we should understand: time starts working against a passive strategy. If in the early stage we could afford waiting, now each round of blinds affects the stack more significantly.

Our task at this stage is not just to survive to the bubble, but actively grow the stack using position advantage, table dynamics, and opponent errors.

The middle stage is characterised by several systematic changes.

1. The cost of the round increases. Antes and larger blinds make each missed spot more expensive. Passivity 'eats away' the stack faster than it seems. If we fold too often in late positions or don't defend blinds, our stack gradually diminishes without resistance.

2. Average tournament stack 40-80 BB, short stacks start appearing. This is a range where decisions become more sensitive. We're no longer playing depth of 150 BB, yet we're not in the push-fold zone. Errors here can cost a significant part of the stack, while well-timed aggression offers a steady chip boost. 

3. Steals* and blind defence become full sources of EV. If winning 1.5–2 BB during the early stage wasn't greatly impactful, now it's a systematic tool for accolating chips.

* Steal — an attempt to take blinds from a late position pre-flop.

4. Frequency of 3-bets and resteals* increases. Players begin to defend their ranges more often, and late position battles grow more intense.

* Resteal — a re-raise — usually a 3-bet or push* — against a player attempting a steal.

* Push — this is an all-in bet.

Bubble

Bubble — the stage just before ITM — entering the prize zone — when the elimination of a few players is rewarded with money. At this moment, pressure mounts: people fear making a mistake that will strip them of a guaranteed prize. 

Our goal on the bubble is to capitalise on field errors. The strategy strongly depends on our stack.

1. We are the chip leaders*

We can apply pressure because opponents do not want to be eliminated, calls against us become less favourable, and our risk is relatively lower.

But pressure should be intelligent: open wider against those who don't cover us, avoid large confrontations with those who do cover us, and fold more to 3-bets if we opened wider.

* Chip leader — the player with the largest stack of chips in the tournament at any time.

2. We have an average stack

The strategy is to attack shorts and those playing more passively, avoid aggressive play against big stacks, narrow call ranges against all-ins, especially when they cover us. 

3. We have a short stack

A short stack often wins on the bubble not by 'waiting', but by picking the right pushes — by position and against opponents prone to folding. 

Moreover, we understand that the closer we are to ITM, the tighter calls against our pushes, meaning fold equity* grows, improving push strategy quality.

* Fold equity — the probability of the opponent folding in response to your bet or raise.

We elaborated on fold equity in this article. 

Late Stage

After making it into the money, ICM pressure drops sharply as we've recouped our tournament investment, and reaching the stage where each player’s elimination costs significant money is still far off. At this stage, we play close to Chip EV.

It's worth noting that pressure rises as we near the final table: the closer we get, the swifter we transition from Chip EV to ICM strategy. The most considerable pressure occurs on the final table bubble, with 10-12 players left in the tournament.

Typically, in tournament poker, there are 9 players at the final table and being knocked out just steps away from the finish line is not just unfortunate but perilous for our long-term cash expectations. Therefore, one must be extremely careful playing two tournament stages: the ITM bubble and the final table bubble. 

But back to the late stage. At this game phase, we can build a stack through discipline, correct calls of all-ins, and targeted pressure on vulnerable stacks.

We choose actions considering pay jump sizes, stack distribution at the table and in the tournament, and our position relative to chip leaders and short stacks. 

1. Big stack

A big stack in ITM means the opportunity to gather EV through pressure, but it doesn't imply playing every pot. The most profitable model for a chip leader: medium stacks under pressure are the best source.

This is why frequent opens in late positions work best against medium stacks, 3-bets against those who open and then fold too much, continuation bets on textures where we have a range advantage, and sizings that prompt 'costly decisions' without needing to shove all-in.

Important — do not pressure short stacks without a reason and do not inflate pots against stacks that cover us. If a stack covers ours, we suddenly become vulnerable

Practical formula for a big stack: 

• gather blinds and small pots through frequency

• avoid large showdowns without a strong advantage

• attack those who must play cautiously because we cover them.

2. Medium stack

This is the hardest stack to manage, because we're simultaneously pressured by chip leaders and short stacks that start pushing and create complicated calls + payout structure gradually makes mistakes more costly.

Important — open and steal blinds from short stacks. We must steal and gather blinds because a medium stack 'melts' quickest. 

Important — we are not obliged to defend every blind. Blind defence in ITM should account not only for pot odds but also how well we can realise equity post-flop. 

3. Short stack

A short stack in ITM is a mode where every decision should be as EV-clean as possible — either push or fold. 

Where do errors arise? 

— Pushing 'because it’s time'. Players start pushing 'on the timer', not by the spot. This leads to pushes into bad positions, against players who call widely or situations where there's a risk of isolation behind.

— Ignoring who is calling. In ITM, call ranges depend on stack and psychology. A big stack might call wider because knocking out a short stack is a profitable investment. A medium stack often calls tighter, fearing losing and becoming short.

How do we choose push spots correctly? 

• position: late position = more fold equity, early = less

• type of blinds: who tends to fold more, and who calls widely

• stack interactions: if behind us is a player who might isolate broadly, our push loses EV.

Final Table

Here, ICM reaches its peak concentration. Often, the winner is not the one technically stronger post-flop, but the one who accurately understands the payout structure and distributes risk correctly.

At the final table, we're concerned not only with what hand we have but also in what context this hand is played. 

An error of 15–20 big blinds in the early stage might be unpleasant but survivable. An error of a similar scale in the final could cost a significant percentage of tournament expectation. 

What do we fix before making big decisions? 

1. Stack structure. We determine who is the chip leader, how many short stacks are at the table, if there's a clear gap between the top 3 and the rest and how close the medium stacks are to each other.

For instance, if there are two ultra-short stacks (5–10 BB) and we have 25–30 BB, our task is often to outlast their elimination, rather than getting involved in hands with equal stacks. If there are no short stacks and distribution is tight, the value of accumulating chips rises.

2. Stack coverage. The key question is who can knock us out?

If one chip leader covers us and the rest have smaller stacks, our strategy will be substantially different from a situation where two or three players cover us.

Example: we're second in chips, but the chip leader is significantly ahead. A conflict with them is a risk of finishing 9th instead of competing for the top-3. In such a configuration, we avoid marginal showdowns against him and shift our pressure to players we ourselves cover.

3. Pay jumps*. We assess how sharp the payout steps are, where the critical 'breaking' points are and if it's worth waiting out one elimination or whether it's more profitable to fight for chip leadership.

* Pay jump — the increase in prize payouts when moving to the next position in a tournament.

4. Types of players. We ask ourselves:

• who will more often play passively against pressure?

• who will call too widely?

• who is capable of aggressive resteals?

• who fears elimination against us?

If a player clearly plays to survive, they become our target for pressure. If an opponent is aggressive and understands ICM, we act more cautiously against them and choose cleaner spots.

Strategy by stack type at the final table

1. Big stack. We attack medium stacks fearing elimination, open wider in positions against those we cover, and avoid unnecessary conflicts against equal or stronger stacks if the risk isn't ICM justified.

2. Medium stack. The most vulnerable category at the final table. We pressure shorts if we can eliminate them, avoid marginal banks against the chip leader, and choose situations with minimal risk and maximum pressure.

3. Short stack. Discipline is particularly important here. We opt for pushes where there's fold equity, consider who will call widely due to coverage, and recognise that sometimes waiting out one more short stack elimination adds to our monetary EV.

However, we don't fall into the trap of 'waiting forever'. If the stack becomes critical, our fold equity window quickly closes.

Conclusion

If you want to better understand the nuances of playing each stage of tournament poker, apply to FunFarm — we've been teaching players to earn money consistently with poker for over 10 years.