blonde poker forum

A tight ST tournament, 5 left with blinds of 300/600. Top 3 get paid. Usually the bubble has burst in these things by the end of the 200/400 blind round at the latest.

You have a stack of 2.4k in the big blind. UTG goes all-in for 1.4k, button with 4k flat calls.
You have 3d 6d, it's 800 to call. A call would leave you with 1k what do you do?

Button is quite loose passive, you feel he'll check down most holdings after the flop with a player all-in.

I'd flat call if I was sure that it would get checked down.

But I'm not really sure about this 1.

My head hurts.  ;tk;

fold

clear fold.

You have to beat 2 players and the price is way too high

I fold here too, what would you do here if there were 4 left instead of 5?

4 left i am leaning towards the call, but i think its probably still a pass.

The fact that you want the pot checked down when you are holding 6 high says it all. Horrible situation to be in, but it is just unplayable.

fold for me too, its a losing hand imo

The button is likely to check it down, doesn't mean you can't bet if you hit a flop you like.
You guys would still fold with 4 left?

The button seems quite happy to let you into the pot from the big blind. He'd have gone all in himself if he wanted to shut you out.

You'll miss the flop completely 2 times out of 3, and if you hit you still can't like it that much unless you've fluked a monster aka 'a big blind special'.

Is he folding for an all in  from you of 1,000 making the pot 5,500 anyway?

Call, your odds are just too good.

If win then you have enough chips to take control of the tournament.

If you miss the flop and the other guy bets you can safely lay it down and still have 1,000 chips. It does not make difference if you have 1,800 or 1,000, you have to win the next time your involved.

Diffrence is when u have 1k and double u have 2k, when u have 1800 and double you have 3600

Not likely, fair point.

With 4 left, I see this as a chance to increase the chances of the bubble bursting, and if you get lucky take down a pot that you can win the tournament with. I call, only if I have a read on the button that he is passive.
With 5, easy fold as that 800 chips are so important as they mean that a raise on subsequent hands, your opponents might fold to. With 1k left no-one can fold.

Your getting 4/1 on the call and probably an extra 1k if you win. Thats more than enough. Unless there is another chronic short stack then you have to call here.

Grovel......grovel...... :o

Having spent a couple of minutes playing with the twodimes poker calculator, I think Wardonkey's right. Even with an overpair  and 2 overcards it seems the pot odds (4.625 to 1 ) are sufficient. I was surprised as I thought the presence of a third player would have a bigger impact. In fact he hurts the best hand most, probably because 63 is such junk anyway  :D

That takes us into the realms of the changing value of chips and I have no idea how to calculate the impact of that.

Not sure about winning and taking control though - there's 6,900 chips unaccounted for - is there a 'nitpick' smiley?

With 6k you can usually take control in these things. The fact that the other guy has 6k shouldn't matter to you after you nick the next set of blinds playing your "rush"

The pot odds are undoubtedly there but it's not really about that.

With blinds of 300/600 the difference between 1k and 1.8k is so so big. With the former you're resigning yourself to playing a pot to showdown, with the latter there's still a chance you can pick up the blinds (and antes that I forgot to mention) without contest.

Your on the small next, if you don't play that you have 1100 chips, who is going to pass for an 500 chip raise? When do the blinds go up? The difference between 1000 and 1800 is not so great. Either way you are in the pooo!

You'll have 1475 chips (sorry about no mentioning the antes earlier) if you pass and pass your small blind, not 1100. People can fold to a 850 raise. (Most of the time they probably shouldn't but they can pass)
Most of the time, if it's passed to you you'll be raising in the small blind anyway, this raise will be a 1175 question rather than a 375 auto-call.

I maintain that the extra 800 chips make a big difference here.
Blinds go up in three minutes so still a few rounds to be played at 300/600.

That is what is important here. Chips change value shed loads in STT's this has to be a fold.

"chips change value....."

Explanation please Flushy. We all know what the phrase means, but many of us struggle to grasp it properly.

I can't right now, got Caitlins (Jane's daughter) birthday meal but when i am on later i will do my best to explain.

I agree that the change in value is significant, which is why I initially thought it was an easy fold.  Now I'm not so sure.

If there is no overpair, i.e. 4 overcards, the 63s equity gets close to 30% (unless I'm cocking up the calcs) which really surprised me until I realised where the second best hand's equity is coming from, i.e. from the best hand, not 63s.  Pot odds of 4.625 to 1 = 18% equity required (1/5.625), so the margin in this case is not trivial. In the case of one overpair it is roughly EV neutral. Across the whole range it seems that the call is +EV ignoring the change in chip value.

Whether this positive expected value is enough to counter the increasing value of each chip lost as your stack goes down is way beyond my capacity to even begin to estimate. Is anyone aware of any programs that calculate this 'chip EV'?

E&OE.......caveat emptor.......etc, etc.......if this is complete b*****ks

P.S. I'm bottling out of explaining why chips change value as TK has volunteered you for the task  :D

Edit: 'chip EV' is actually the opposite of what I'm trying to describe, which is the proportion of the prize pool the chips are worth. Help!

Me too, don't fancy explaining it and as Royal Flush says he's up for it later, who am I to steal his thunder. :D

Right....


Here goes, we agreed in the first example a fold was pretty much the wise option.

The 2nd example appears attractive but i will try to prove it is wrong. (with 4 left)

So with 4 left we have 2400 left, UTG moves in for 1400 button 4k and so the small blind the rest (10,200 i am assuming it was 9 players and 2k, it doesnt really matter, point is he has a big stack)

Now UTG moves in for 1400, his holding doesnt have to be very strong, he will have to post away over half his stack in the next 2 hands, and he can still force a fold as long as no-one has a hand. The button then calls, leaving 2.6k, so he is willing to make himself a short stack with his holding, with 2 players still to act.

Now we have this decision we have 1800 left, its 800 to call.

If we fold what happens?

If the UTG wins he is on 3700, the button will be on 2600 and we will be on 1800 in the SB, this is not a nice scenario, the SB is hardly likely to give us an easy time when he knows no-one is likely to risk the bubble. However if he folds we can nick the BB from our SB position, the BB would have to call 1500 to win the 1200 already in, and given the tight situation its a good chance he will fold. We will be back to 2400 and be on the button, not a bad situation.

If the Button wins, he will be on 6300, the button will be on 10k and we are in a poor spot with 1800, however we are now assured of 20% of the prize pool. And with 1800 we can still double up to a resonable stack, if we move in the next hand we might get a fold, if we dont get a fold then we will be out a little more than half the time, but double the rest of the time, 3600 vs 10k vs 4.5k, and now we can play. Hyper aggresive whilst the 10k waits for us 2 too fight.

Now if we call....

We cripple ourselves, left on 1k. However we are in a very nice pot, 4500 with 1k back. However we have 63 sooooted. Not exactly a monster, we have no idea what we are looking to flop, and we dont have enough to protect our hand post flop, i am thinking that the button has a pair above our 6, or worse still 66, then 2 overs against the UTG. I fancy our equity here is about 20% so we are getting the 'odds' to play (ignoring the reverse implied odds of the 1k left)

HOWEVER, if we lose this hand 4/5 times we are down to 1k with 300 in the sb str8 away, now if the button wins the hand then at least we are in the cash, but with no real chance of better than 3rd (excluding a card rush) if the UTG wins the hand we are in deep shite. We have no chips and no FE, we are almost certain to bubble.

If we win though we are in a very good shape, 5500 against a 2600 and a 10k, however what does that buy us? i fancy its a 2nd place really, some of the time we will win it, some of the time we will come 2nd. So its fair to say out prize pool equity is something around 30%.

By calling and making this 4-1 gamble, all we really do is increase our expectation by a few % even though we more than double up. This is the nature of STT's, the CL has 10k, more than half the chips in play, however the MAX he can win is 50% of the prize pool. So each one of his chips is worth far less than the 1800 we have.

Now i would present the arguement that our 1800 chips with say a 60% chance of seeing the SS go out and thus gaining at least 20% and a chance to win more (remember we can make players fold with this stack, we cant with 1000) this 4-1 shot only increase our equity from the low 20's to the low 30's

I know thats not a great explanation of 'chips changing value' i have used an example which tied my hands somewhat but i feel i cant explain it anywhere near aswell as someone like skalansky (do a google search for how he explains it) hopefully if you have a vague understanding of it my example might have made it a little more clear.

In the actual tournament in question there were 5 left and I folded.

I was confident this was correct but was unsure of what to do 4 handed. Flushys certainly given me some food for thought. Players started with 1,500 chips rather than 2k so I think winning the hand would give nearer 40% of the prize pool equity rather than the 30% Flush said.

Yeah with 5 left its a clear fold i feel, with 4 left chip equity comes into.

The actual chips etc are not important, its just an example that shows when you are getting 'pot odds' but a call is clearly -ev at the same time.

Hit the nail on the head.

And where has the 'missing' prize pool equity gone? To the short stack(s). If a shortie sneaks into 3rd place with a single chip or 0.001% of the total chips he gets 20% of the prize pool. That single chip is 'worth' 4000 'starting' chips if there are 20,000 chips in total.

I can picture the shape of a two-dimensional graph of chip EV versus prize pool EV (although I wouldn't know how to calibrate the axes of the graph) but how do we deal with a multi-dimensional problem where there are multiple stacks interacting with each other?

We guess, its about as simple as that, you have about 20-30 seconds to make these decisions and you have to figure it out in that short time, i think those who play a lot of stt's learn when the right time and wrong times to call are. It takes experience though, and everytime you find yourself in a spot like this then it pays to wrok through the scenarios after.

I'm not convinced. I'm still calling.

You can only win 50% of the prize pool though....if this was a 1 seat sat then yes i would call aswell.

I'm off to have a lie down in a dark room with a hot towel wrapped round my head while I visualise the 40-dimensional shape you get in a MTT paying say 20 places on a non-linear scale with 40 players left with stacks varying from 0.00001% to 50% of the starting chips.

And then I'll link relativity, quantum mechanics and gravity before nipping out to collect my daughter from the pub.

On second thoughts........I'll just guess  :D

The theory of gravity often bears its ugly relevance upon my chip stack. If I play deep stacked poker in space, will I be able to hang onto my chips better?

You are in a bad situation and most times will not make any money here.

The best chance you have is to call here, give yourself a decent chance at 1st or 2nd, if you win, rather than 1/2 a chance of scraping into 3rd, which you might have a chance to do even if you lose.

Just claim to be an existenalist then none of it really matters.

On the side of quantum mechanics, do you think that its like schrodinger's cat when you have AK vs QQ?

I love that analogy. It's perfect when observing others. Unfortunately it breaks down when I am holding one of the said hands, when it becomes as predictable as a TK HU match  :D

I think he means you lose quite a few...

I was looking forward to my first red card, but the ref seems to have bottled it. Oh well, next time I'll give it the full Lee Bowyer, that should do the trick  :D

Bottled it? I just forgot to add it.

 :redcard: :redcard:

schrodinger's cat, isn't one of those "if a tree falls does it make a sound if nobodies there to hear it?" sort of jobbies?

I've read the schrodinger's cat thing a thusand times, & I still cant quite grasp it!

The theory it is said to prove - that photons & sub-atomic particles, seemingly huge distances apart, are somehow linked or connected in some way, in that if you interfere with one, there will be a  simultaneous & instantaneous response in the other, which is simply beyond the imagination of us mere mortals, & is rather spooky, in fact, I'm not sure I believe it. Understand it, YES, believe it, not sure.

But how that ties in with that cat, is another matter. The cat (hypothetical cat) is placed in a box, with a particle of radioactive substance, and some nasty acid in a phial. If the radioctivity degrades, the acid is released, & the cat dies. If it does not, the cat lives. 

The lesson, apparently, being that the cat is both 100% alive & 100% dead at the same time, as we can prove neither. WHAT?

Charlie & Angell don't like Mr Schrodinger.

Thank you, kind sir. I feel like a true Blonde now.


That's the one. No-one fully understands quantum theory and all its implications, including Stephen Hawking and his peers. The rest of us have no chance.

The Quantam Theory thing, which, by the way, is utterly fascinating, yeah, I can GRASP it, though I'm not sure I accept it.

I just don't get the connection between that & Schrodinger's cat, I cant see how the cat thing relates to the matter it's trying to prove.

From short stacks to quantum mechanics,eh?

Only on Blonde.......... do I qualify for the 'thread hijack of the year' competition?

And no, I'm not going to even attempt to explain Schrodinger's Cat - it would only expose the fact that all I know is already in this thread......... ;scarymoment;

Nah, I think we've already eaten most of the meat of this thread already.

I'd say it's more of an enviromentally friendly thread recycle.

I remember it too and it was sort of explained to me, though i can't remember much.
Bit too deep for me these days.

It's a fantastic book, its not so much to do with the schrodinger problem, but more a discussion on particle wave duality.

Tikay another good book is, schrodinger's kittens, bet they took ages thinking that one up!!

But yeah the basic idea is that the cat is both dead and alive untill you open the box to check. In the way way that your AK has outdrawn QQ untill you deal the flop!

I like the one that renders movement impossible.

On the idea you can get infinately small pieces of space. If a particle moves from A to B it will pass a halfway point. Travelling from this halway point to B it will meet another halfway point and so on an infinite number of times. A particle, by definition, cannot move through infinite points so, in theory, nothing can move, ever.

Lol yes, unless the universe is not infinite, and infinite is indeed a known sum

And particles, allegedly, disappear from Point A & arrive at Point C simultaneously, without passing through the space between. It's all just beyond my tiny mind. I mean, I can't get through the entrance door on this - how do they KNOW that it's the same particle that pops up in the other place, for starters?

But I DO heartily recommend Bill Bryson's "A Short History of Nearly Everything" which does at least attempt to put this, & other stuff which is normally way above regular folks heads, into lay language. It really is THE most fascinating book, & I recommend it to anyone. I would have learned more at school from this single book than I did throughout my entire "education".

It's maybe not the greatest book ever written, though it's probably the book that has impressed me more than any other, but Chapter 9 - "The Mighty Atom" is without doubt the most fascinating, jaw-dropping, mind-blowing chapter of any book anywhere. In my opinion, I hastily add.