blonde poker forum

APAT hand, down to last few tables and Ive taken a hit and down to 12400

Blinds 800 1600

Le Knave has 14k and limps UTG .

I have  Jh  Td on the button and think I can see this flop for 1600 and call.

SB folds BB Checks

So 5400 in the pot now

Flop  Jc  7h  2h

BB checks, Le Knave checks

Now I am confident of taking the pot here and now so I bet out 5k (leaving 5.9k back so I cant pass)

BB folds, Le Knave moves all in instantly.

So I now have to call 5900 to win the pot of 27200 total.

What possible hand am I ahead of here?

Not alot me thinks and although I am getting almost 6-1 I think I only have 5 outs.

I CANNOT pass here for so much money in the pot and Le Knave knows it - so why does he move all in? (leaving 2k odd if he looses)

I thought far far too much here and should of called , reluctantly, but called.

I PASSED!!

He had 8 8

So, the question is, good spot to bluff or not?? And reasons please

 Th 7h 2s  flop

ul that le knave guy sounds like a right fish  ;) bet 3k on flop?

Sometimes ppl think they have the best hand when they are actually bluffing and vice versa.  Sometimes ppl assume that a button betting when checked to hasn't got anything.  In live play sometimes ppl don't pay attention to your exact number of chips.

rotflmfao rotflmfao rotflmfao rotflmfao rotflmfao rotflmfao rotflmfao rotflmfao rotflmfao rotflmfao

You have provided yourself with a convincing argument to call. Having mentally committed to not folding I don't think you have the depth of stack to give yourself the luxury of finding one of those times you make an inciteful fold. I think you know that the time to decide was on the flop. I agree with doubleup...giving everyone maximum credit is often a mistake...people can often do strange things with far less logic than you're applying to the situation.

The possibilty of him holding a number of draws make this decision a bit easier as well.

paul why bet 5k when you know you should of pushed in making it hard for him to call even with a hand thats beating yours

It was LeKnave as well.  He thought he was ahead!!

rotflmfao rotflmfao rotflmfao

Wow at this hand. Limping UTG with less than 10BBs is lol. Flatting the button here with J10 will not show enough of a profit over time. If you feel that UTG is really bad and weak tight and has limped in with hands they will fold, just make it 6k to go preflop. Or fold if you think that UTG, while bad, is the kind of bad that limp reraises whatever hand they like here.

On the flop you cannot fold. It's kinda sick spot because you only have top pair but the board has brought draws so you need to bet on the flop to extract value from the situation. When he CRAI you no longer have any decisions left given the price you are getting.

The line villain took with 88 is unbelievably bad.

I had 11.3 bb's.  Which makes it an amazing limp.


I heard it was an inspired play.

Truely inspired in fact because you knew how your opponent was going to think before he even thought it.....that must be a good weapon to have yes?

It was a joke, chill out.

OH NOES. i thought my 2 8's were good. i was wrong.

It was a mistake, i've made many, im sure il make many more.

I played in the cash game vs m3boy, he flopped top set  and moved in for £49 of his £50. I moved all in for £50 total and he thought about it and said "I dont know wht i beat here" before folding, face up......What a fish

You too,can learn how to fold the nuts, at www.m3boypoker.com (http://www.m3boypoker.com)

Iron, I know I made the mistake - trust me.

Le Knave - not a pop at you.

Linux - thx for the advertising, although the link will not stay up for long as it will be removed by the mods. And are you saying I was wrong to pass for my last £1 ? -  ;joestrummer;

With 11 BBs you should really only be pushing or folding. There is 2400 in the pot which represents a significant increase of your stack. Shoving 88+ or AQo+ UTG is going to be +cEV. And considering that in these APAT events the value comes from the seat added for first place; there is definitely no reason to pass up any edge.

Now, 88 should be about the bottom of your range for shoving UTG - so folding wouldn't be absolutely terrible. But folding definitely would be better than limping. 88 is going to play very badly in a multiway pot; and our short stack and bad position will create a huge possibillity that we make mistakes in a limped multiway pot - either getting it in bad or folding the best hand.

On the flop, this is one of the better boards for you, why check? You have the best hand here a lot and there are plenty of turn cards you don't want to peel off for free. Get some money in for value rather than risking it being checked around. CRAI here turns your hand into a bluff with no fold equity - which isn't desired.


I don't mean to offend; and apologise if my comments in my initial post were rather abrupt.

Posted by: MANTIS01

Posted by: LeKnave

I was also joking

The pass has already been discussed and concluded, but why are you limping with 7.75 BB's??  I wouldnt be looking to play ANY post flop poker with this stack size...

I was sitting to Paul's left in this hand...and let him vent at me during the break that came immediately after and, with all due respect to him, I listened to him talk himself out of calling..but then, I thought he was beaten too!

I, and at least 2 others I spoke to during the break who were at the table, thought that Le Knave had limped with a big pair...as soon as he did, I was immediately suspicious...perhaps that's why he did it? Inspired play pre-flop or tremedous bluff after..I dunno.

As for Paul limping into the pot...at the three APAT events we have been on the same table, he plays aggressive poker pre-flop with a tremendous range..I never know where I am. I usually think he's rasiing into my BB with trash (as per normal) ;D but I don't usually have the stuff to push back...until I do, then I get chips.

My two cents, I know you said that you were aware that you made a mistake, but regardless of that, I'm quite surprised someone of your calibre is asking a question like this Paul, you knew the answer before you called and after you folded, I wonder if the post is more for another reason.

Ugh this is not a pretty hand.

M3boy fold preflop or shove. Bet flop looking to get it in, call turn raise obv.

Le Knave shove preflop, bet flop, I actually don't mind the turn m3 looks to be betting an inferior hand after the flop check.

???? No other reason.

I genuinely could not make up my mind at the time weather this was a good spot to CR or not.

I ONLY EVER raise with high pocket pairs (occassionally AK) - everyone knows this  ;whistle;

Longy, I agree with you 100%.

Eh, just noticed that OP has 12400 to start the hand? hdgwhdsggdshffghfs

SHOVE OR FOLD PRE. Now that you did limp, when check raised please recheck your hand to confirm that you have teh top pair. Then call.

I actually would be very interested to hear explanations from the two as to why they want to limp in here? Seriously, I wouldn't do what they did like, ever - but there must have been thought processes behind it??

My thought process.

Stack size so small that one more BB of my stack doesnt make that much diff as the only move I have is all in or fold.

The limp in EP with that stack size screamed of a big hand, and looking at the SB and BB I knew I could see a flop getting 4 to 1. Unless they had a monster that is. At this point I am looking to flop big (not just one pair)

Ok, so now the flop. With 2 hearts on board I would expect a shove from EP with an overpair and a bet from the blinds with 2 pair. When they check I have now convinced myself that 10 J is ahead here. So I bet out half my stack - saying I am not folding for what I have left.

Then comes the CR - immediately I am still convinced I am ahead, but then doubts set in. I go back to my origional assessment of limping with a big PP - or maybe a small PP and has hit a set.

So now I have confused myself. Knowing I should of shoved on this flop and not let myself in this situation.

In the end I rule out an overpair (as I still think he bets the flop) and go for a small pair making a set and him knowing I cannot pass.

I said most of my thoughts outload at the table (trying to get a read). To his credit, he gave nothing away.

So there ya go.

BTW just noticed I am on Charmaine's account but cannot be bothered to type it out again lol

When are you going to give Paul lessons Charmaine?

p.s got any spare earplugs?

Come now Mr End - even you must admit you did not need any

Thanks.

Ok, as you probably realised when typing that out, you essentially overcomplicated a very simple situation. Simply put, after you limp and flop top pair the actual strength of your hand is too great to ever fold that shallow stacked. Irrespective of what you think he has, or might have - you just go back to the most basic level and ship it because top pair isn't a terrible hand.

You are incorrect about preflop IMO. Effective odds preflop are not a justification for playing J10 here. You cannot expect to ever win at showdown unimproved; J10 flops no pair, no draw most of the time; and because of your small stacksize your implied odds for when you hit, get it in and win will not cover the times you miss and fold or the times you hit, get it in and lose anyway.

You can shove though!! Because it is a big enough raise to carry enough Fold equity to fold out some better hands - and J10 has some equity against tight calling ranges. After the limp, there is now 4000 in the pot. Taking that would be huge for you. So it comes down to whether you think UTG is limping a big pair and won't fold; or is limping something like 88 and can fold.

But you just should not limp behind here.

LuckyLoyd I disagree about limping Preflop.

In a normal comp I would agree, but a good %age of the players are avergae standard in the APAT events - can easily pick up the pot with no hand in position.

I played a hand like this pretty badly in Vegas last year and Greg Raymour said to me that he has one golden rule, "If the bet or call is ever < 33% of your chips whatever the street, you must always push your whole stack in."

Eg. Pot is 3k, you have 9k, you don't bet 3k, you push for all 9k

In this case, M3boy would have won this pot, so I guess the WSOP champ is right sometimes.........

I've played APAT events before. Yes, the standard is terrible. But I'm afraid to say that what makes the standard terrible is the type of weak tight lines and poor shortstack play employed by you and the villian in this hand. Even if you are an astonishingly better post flop player than everyone else at the table you still will be unable to turn a profit from limping J10 behind here. You are too shallow to "outplay" people or get better hands to fold postflop.

And, in any case, given your other posts in this thread you have identified the UTG limper as a thinking player of some abillity. Therefore, I don't think that you can logically say that you expected to be able to will this pot into your stack on most flops. And, given it is an APAT event I think it is probably more profitable to shove preflop here than in most tournaments given that people's calling ranges are going to be so ridiculously narrow.

Ultimately, you can't have it both ways. You can't think "I'll limp because UTG has a big hand"; while also saying "it's ok to limp because I can pick up pots in position a lot on all sorts of boards". In an APAT event I'm shoving J10 here and chuckling to myself after the blinds dwell before folding and telling me they put down AQ or 1010 or something ridiculous.

Good luck.

Paul, I think the important aspect of this hand is your thought process and how this can hinder you at times.

I think LuckyLloyd is cock on the money with this....

The shortness of your stack takes away the luxury of such indulgent thinking imo. You are required to be more direct and basic with your thinking because needs must and all that. Your stack limits your choices and so you must be firm and direct with your decisions and stick to your guns.

In this hand your plan is to 1. limp looking "to flop big (not just one pair)" but when the flop hits you abandon this plan and one pair is now good enough. So the new plan is 2. Bet out half your stack and not fold but when your oppo plays back at you this plan is now put in question and you finally abandon it as well.

I agree with LuckyLloyd because sometimes a situation leaves you with little or no choice and a very basic strategy is the most appropriate one. I remember a hand you posted a while ago entitled "Making a mistake and face this decision..." where you had a pair of 9's and your plan was to check-raise all-in because you felt you had the best hand...but after you checked your opponent moved all-in and you didn't like it...it put doubt in your mind, you talked yourself out of it and folded the best hand. In all sincerity I think this is an area of your game to have a look at.

You are correct.

It is, and always has been a week aspect in my game - overthinking and overcomplicating certain situations.

One I am very aware of and working on.

Just Re Read whole thread.

Many thanks for all the comments - appreciated.

A nice debate as always.

For what it's worth, I think the main problem here is the call on the button rather than the final fold. If you think he is slowplaying aces, then why get involved with a hand as weak as J-T (odds of hitting a better hand are small) and if you think he is weak, then why not push pre-flop?

Nice to see you embraced the comments though, sign of a potentially top notch player.

if you put him on a set i suppose you can fold anything else you have the odds to call.

dont think im good enough to pass here whatever, i die with the hand if id played it the same way pre flop(which i doubt but thats not the debate)

I must say I don't mind the pre-flop call.

I think pushing all-in after another short-stack has limped UTG will often prove to be a big mistake so I would rule that option out for starters. You could fold...but you're in a position where you're going to need something to happen soon.

10-J is a long-shot hand whenever you choose to play it. So using UTG as protection...limping into a potentially multi-way pot...with a good drawing hand...and position...seems ideal for the current situation. You could really use a big pot right now and this hand certainly has the potential to do the job for you. The 1,600 you're paying for the flop doesn't significantly change your situation much at all...but hitting the flop hard would! Like I said I think the two short-stacks limping can help to get the cheap multi-way flop you're looking for and which is perfect for this hand.

That said...the mistake comes on the flop imo. You go there hoping to hit big...but you don't. It is now that you must decide if top pair is good enough...you're stack size forces you to. Do you stick with the original plan or decide to commit.

While it may be a quality fold if the stacks were deep...in this particular situation I don't think you have the luxury of such finesse. Most of your chips are in the middle, you're down to the felt, and you've been check-raised all-in by another desperate player on a drawing board. I think that not calling with a winning hand in this tournament situation is a bigger mistake than putting your last few chips in behind on the flop (still with a chance to win). Reading an opponent for a set and folding is an option you are not in a position to take.

Folding here means you will be all-in in the next few hands and you will probably find yourself in a far worse situation than you are now.

I honestly couldnt put it better myself

Paul I thought you were a much better players than this, I am disappointed.

Disapointed? How?

I have a flaw in my game of over analysing "certain" hands now and again - that I know and can admit

If you thought my game had no flaws, then I am very suprised, but flattered lol

Horrible spot to bluff. Oppo thinks ur passing now?

M3 Remember to keep your lines applicable to the level your opponents are thinking at. Deffo overthought, never knew you made mistakes. % off.

This is wrong I'm afraid. I don't have the time or patience to disprove it mathmatically right now - but I am failry certain that when one considers the actual strength of J10 in terms of times it flops something; our stacksize; effective odds; implied odds, etc - it can be proven with a high degree of certanity that limping it on the button here loses us chips in the long haul.

Of course LuckyLloyd if you consider that the ONLY reason to play the hand is to hit the flop hard then I agree with you. However, whilst this is the MOST desirable outcome...namely flopping strength and getting business...there is far more to it that just that simple equation (which no doubt could be proved).

Even missing the flop by a mile allows you to explore other possibilities. If it is checked to you...you can use your judgement to see if you can't buy the pot...why not?? I would much prefer to shove a flop that UTG checks to me rather than shove pre-flop against him. Pre-flop he is far more likely to call than after checking the flop imo. So if you factor into the equation all the other possibilities that are out there rather than just the amount of times the cards actually hit for you you get much closer to an accurate assessment of the situation. Yes, the bet is still a long shot but a cheap long odds gamble is worth consideration at this point in the tournament...no doubt.

So if 10-J works for you here it would be difficult to argue taking the gamble was wrong! Like you say most of the time it wont work but the worst case scenario is you drop 1,600 which doesn't really change much at all. The best case scenario is much better....

Unique tournament decisions sometimes come down to more than just mathematics....

Now I'm a mathematical player but i fail to see what you are saying here, are you suggesting that you going to pick up a vibe from the other 3 players in this situation that you can buy the pot with a bet if checked to, is this specific to live play or would you reccommend the same play in an online tournament.

I think as Lloyd has outlined that we are not deep enough to justify limping, you are playing a 4 way pot with a mediocre hand shortstacked. It is a hand that half hits flops and any bet as M3boy found out committs us to the pot as bet folding is a big mistake due to immediate pot odds.

Also this argument but only losing 1600 seems ridiculous as this isn't the point your stack after committing the 1600 to the pot makes the hand extremely hard to play, whereas if you flop a monster you will never get paid enough on average to make up for your investment.

I think a lot of you are missing a big point here.  Limping is ok as a gambling play i.e. you are willing to put your chips in with a bit of the flop in an effort to double up, knowing that you might be behind.  You can't apply cash game ev principles to tournaments when you have short stacks.

I'm also strongly of the opinion that LeKnave didn't think he was bluffing, but only he can confirm that.

Every hand of poker you play has to be viewed in light of whether it is plus EV or not. Cash games and tournaments should not be analysed any differently. And btw, if you want to gamble here for chips and a possible double up - I strongly suggest you push preflop.

Posted by: doubleup
This is pretty much what I am saying here Longy. Applying long-term expectation logic for a particular hand in any and every tournament situation stifles the creativity needed to get you out of the mess you're in here and now.

In this unique situation you can use the UTG limp to get the cheap flop you need for this hand. That fact combined with my position and the real need to make something happen would make the limp appealing for me. With my current stack size my choices are beginning to run out so being pro-active and creative are starting to outweigh ABC poker and +EV long term play in my decision making.

In this example, seeing a cheap flop and committing with a piece of it after check-check is a better option than pushing all-in pre-flop with no pair no info.

Posted by: Longy
Pretty much yes. Using your positional advantage to assess the situation post flop and then decide how to act accordingly is pretty standard isn't it?? Your stack still has leverage and pushing with the additional information of check-check after seeing how your oppos act is a more informed play than just pushing pre-flop imo.

In saying the stacks are not deep enough to justify the limp with a hand that wont work often enough to justify it indicates that it is ok to make -EV plays when you ARE deep and actually don't have to. My point is that the shortness of the stack means exploring -EV plays cheaply is a territory worth consideration and something that is probably necessary given the circumstances.

If this last attempt at doing something a bit different doesn't work then I am now looking to push with a stack that is -1600 chips...this doesn't make much difference. The pre-flop push and a tournament life gamble should be a last resort not a default mechanism when you feel a bit pressured...and this limp could help you avoid that risky eventuality.

Posted by: LuckyLloyd
I am liking a lot of what you say LuckyLloyd but we are poles apart here. To say the decision making is the same suggests the factors that lead you to arrive at your decisions are identical in both. Well, the clock, increasing blinds, average chip stack, prize money ladder etc etc..mean the factors to consider in both formats of the game are significantly different...and if the factors are different then it stands to reason your thought process MUST be too.

So making a long term losing move is OK because it might get you out of a hole?

Posted by: Bongo

If you are in a hole there is no long term...because you're in a hole. Getting out of the hole is your concern at the present moment.

When the bubble arrives, aggressive players apply pressure more frequently. This is a unique tournament situation...and how best to exploit it is shaping the LAGs play...the long-term profitability of the move they are making is not. So in the same way...if you are in a hole and need to find a way out here and now...long term expectation may not be the immediate solution.

Interesting discussion guys.

Posted by: LuckyLloyd

Quote
Every hand of poker you play has to be viewed in light of whether it is plus EV or not. Cash games and tournaments should not be analysed any differently.

Now maybe you do have an argument that limpimg here is NOT a viable option, but this quote is so so wrong. Cash games and Tournaments are SO different.
Tournaments are about survival AND chip accumulation. Cash is totally different.

Posted by: Longy

Quote
are you suggesting that you going to pick up a vibe from the other 3 players in this situation that you can buy the pot with a bet if checked to

Again, you may have an argument that pushing is best over limping, but to say that "in position" I cannot get a read on players after a flop is nonsense. I had two ways of picking up this pot, one by flopping it, and one by taking it. I am in position.
Yes my initial thoughts were UTG had a big pair, but when the flop comes down it is a scary flop for an overpair and with the stack size of UTG, they HAVE to bet out here. When they dont, I can re assess the situation.

Posted by Longy
Quote

Also this argument but only losing 1600 seems ridiculous as this isn't the point your stack after committing the 1600 to the pot makes the hand extremely hard to play, whereas if you flop a monster you will never get paid enough on average to make up for your investment.


Like I have said, with the stack size I had, loosing 1600 in a "gamble" play was not too damaging as pushing all in with 1600 less makes no difference. The satck size is so small that it wouldnt matter to a player facing a calling decision for my stack.

I would rather push 6xBB into a flop that I think have missed my opponents, than pushing 7xBB preflop.

Seems most agree that pushing preflop is a better option, now this maybe true, but in this situation I took a calculated risk in order to gain chips. The SB or BB could of had a big hand here, and it would of only cost me 1600 to find out. Rather than pushing in preflop only for one of them to wake up with AA/KK/QQ and then my tourney life would be on the line and drawing pretty thin.


I like to play flops and read people - I am confident in this part of my game. I do not feel under pressure to push preflop with 7-8 BB's.

5xBB is my "pushing in and hope" stack ratio - maybe this is too low, but it is generally what I use.

My opinion of this hand was that I should of shoved on the flop

There is a long term, unless you never plan to play another tournament ever again.

The criticism of the limp in this situation stems from the fact that we are trying to get LUCKY. That said, I would like to know what the grand master plan is for our soon-to-be-over-tournament if we let this opportunity pass us by.

If we pass we know the next hand we play will be an all-in...so what hand is that going to be? Are we saying pass here in the hope that we get LUCKY enough to wake-up with a premium hand in the next couple of orbits...and we will be LUCKY enough to get action...and we will be LUCKY enough to win the race etc?

Alternatively...are we prepared to push with a weaker range instead? If so we need to get LUCKY that we don't run into a better hand when this happens.

If we push with the 10-J now instead we are hoping to get LUCKY that we don't run into a monster UTG right now.

The logic that committing just 1,600 chips here in order to gamble and get LUCKY is poor play seems a bit ridiculous. Especially because the alternative presented is to wait a few hands longer and then commit everything in order to gamble and get LUCKY. Limping here gives us one last chance to avoid that far riskier eventuality.

Posted by: Bongo

Regardless of the number of tournaments you play in the future you will NEVER find yourself in this unique situation again. I don't go for long-term tournament logic...never have.

I can confirm that - he told us that he thought he was ahead.  Which made it more amusing.  Made for a good thread though.


I'm with Mark and Paul on this one with regards to tournament decisions being more than just a consideration of EV as you would in a cash game.  There are many times where you'd be willing to risk your stack in a cash game, knowing that even if you're rong, in the long-run it's a +EV move.

In a tournament, a wrong move signals the end of the tournament - you don't get the chance to reload.  Yes, there's the next tournament, but there are a finite number of tournaments you can play - and there are certainly a finite number of times you can make a decision that ends your tournament. 

And there's a finite amount of times you can reload in a cash game...

I think anyone who plays a tournament is going to find themselves with a short stack at some point, and playing to get the most money out of the tournament, rather than just gambling and trying to get "lucky", will leave them with more money.

Of course.  But if you can win £50 in a cash game now, or in two weeks - it's the same (of course there's opportunity cost, but ignore that for now).

If you win some chips in a tournament now, you might be in a position to do well and cash/win.  Lose your chips, and you might not be in that situation again.  In fact, you might be in a similar situation, but it will never be the same. 

Take the discussion about KK first hand in a deep-stack tournament.  In a cash game, you might lose your stack, or you might double up.  If you lose your stack, you can reload.  Play the hand 50 times in the same way, and your results will probably reflect that it's a +EV move.  Do the same in the tournament, and different factors come into play.   

thats because you are looking at the blinds, cards, twiches, rips in the seat, bent nature of the cards, and deeming it an exclusive never to be repeated situation again. Granted, it might be true, but its not overly relevant. You will frequently in the future find spots that have a negative equity, will you take all of them, hoping to get lucky? Will you call with any two cards preflop when the stacks are deep, hoping to defy the odds and get lucky and then take the tournament by storm and congratulate urself for the previous play? Its a bad idea generally to try and defy math in any form of gambling, and poker is no dffferent, be it a cash or a tournament.

Of course, there are times when you should take -EV spots now

one of them is to make sure you dont take an even deeper -EV spot later, like posting the BB with a random hand when u get a hand UTG that is slightly better then random but has a negative equity if you push, take the spot that has a lesser negative EC

Another is that if your shortstack play is terrible, but you are a fearsome supremely skilled player when you get a deepstack, the value in taking the risk now can be made up many times over by your superior big stack play. Obviously, and the reason why poker is profitable, is that most people grossly over-value their abilities, they do this all the time, but especially when they have a big stack.

There are a couple more spots like this, but the above is a good start

It seems that the notion of "you might get lucky" is a fanciful way of justifying very poor play, and just a way of telling a story. Its very easy to flip it the other way and say "well I folded the 10/J hre, got AA, doubled up to 30k, then got it in with AK vs 99 and lost, but the other person had 29k, if I had limped with 10/J and missed, I wouldn't have covered the 99 person and I woulda been out, but instead i managed to creep into the money"


theres also only a finite number of times you can limp/fold your stack away pissing into the wind, sure sometimes u get lucky and spin up a stack, but you can take a stack of chips and go do the same at roulette, so why wait for a poker tournament to do it?

My original point was more directed at the effect of blinds/antes on the tournament stack.  If you have 10bbs and lose 3 of these while waiting for a chance to double up as a 2-1 favourite, the ev of your stack is 9.33bbs.  So you can either adopt the approach of pushing a lot to try to avoid the losses each round with the downside that you are eventualy going to get called by a better hand or take any opportunity to see a flop cheaply in the hope of getting a situation that might show some profit.  If you played short stacked cash you could lose these 3bbs, but top-up and therefore show a  small profit when you put your 10bbs in as 2-1 favourite.

Posted by: totalise
Yes, but you are taking the logic you use for this one very specific situation and suggesting that you "could" use it as a general rule of thumb in other completely different situations. You could...but I wouldn't recommend it.

Most of the time your stack size will be comfortable and using +EV plays to maintain the status quo is clearly the best strategy. However, when you are short-stacked and detached taking on a cheap long shot is now something to consider. You wont be able to do it again and again...but right here and now you can afford it...you have the protection of the UTG limper...you have position...and you have a good drawing hand. So your unique situation and these unique conditions mean that the play is wothwhile.

Kessler threw everything at Calzaghe in the last round because he needed a knock-out...most of the time that would be a poor strategy.

The QuarterBack throws a Hail Mary pass when his team are behind and time is running out...most of the time that would be a poor strategy.

Tournament poker is a sport...not a maths exam.

Like I said before...What is the solution to our current tournament predicament that doesn't rely on luck any time soon?.....don't try and get lucky now...wait a bit and then try and get lucky...seems to lack any real substance imo.

Why would they normally be a poor strategy?

In my mind because they don't significantly increase the chances of success in the long term, but carry significant downside.

e.g. The Hail Mary pass will not be successful as often as a shorter pass, so by using it you gain the small chance of scoring and at the cost of a higher likelihood of losing possession.

It is a good strategy at the end of a game because:
1) If you don't score you lose.
2) At the end of the game the downsides are minimised, easier passes won't get you a goal, giving up possession isn't so as earlier in the game either.

I don't see this correlating to the tournament situation at all. It would possibly apply if it was the last hand, and you were in last place, and the payouts weren't proportional, but that's not the case here. We're not running out of time. We're running out of chips.

I think a more accurate comparison, and I'll use the sport of boxing, would be to say that Kessler is starting to tire, so he starts flailing his arms around aimlessly in the hope that he somehow knocks Calzaghe out before he runs out of energy completely.

I agree, limping into many pots and folding is a bad idea - and one I do not do.

On certain occasions however, I will limp - in position, against a certain oppo etc... - not very often as this would be a tournament disaster - granted.

This was one of those occassions I considered that limping in would pay good dividends, and was not costly in relation to the F/E of my stack size.

Blimey...worn from reading this one lads!  lol

Sooooo, the long and short of it...you were just fierce unlucky in that hand?

No, he played it badly.  As did LeKnave!

The Hail Mary is a high risk-high reward play so most of the time it would make no sense to rely on it. But there comes a time when playing sport where a high risk-high reward play becomes more appealing. In American Football that time is usually when time is running out...you are behind...and you need to make something happen.

In our tournament situation here...time is running out...we are behind...and we need to make something happen. So the high risk-high reward play is absolutely something to consider, as it is in any other sport. To be a slave to long term expectations and statistics at this point in time is not a good idea.

However, here is a statistic for the maths guys. Seeing a flop with 10-J then folding and pushing with something else gives you 2 chances to win. Just waiting to push only gives you 1 chance to win. Mathematically you are TWICE as likely to win limping with 10-J...lol.

Good discussion thou...

Untrue.

No, I made the mistake of not pushing all in on the flop, then another mistake by not calling the all in

The discussion now is the potential of limping with J 10 with a short stack

the above is more applicable when you dont have any other option... when if you dont take that play, you are almost certain to lose. Its like having a stack of 2k and posting a 1k big blind and calling blind, .. not having an over-rated hand on the button when someone limps UTG, where u suspect he has a big hand, and u have circa 10bb



dont stop there, with 10 BB you can attempt to see the flop with your next NINE HANDS!!!!! and then push allin, that gives you 10 ways to win!! 



no, at least as far as im concerned, the discussion is on the potential of limping in with 10J, given what your read was of Leknave and the liklihood of him having a big hand. There can be times when limping here is ok, given this "read", this isn't one of them.

Why is this not one of them? I was trying to "make" things happen.

Calculated risk of flopping a monster and a certain double up or just loosing one big blind (10xBB or 9xBB isnt that much of a difference). My perception of the UTG's hand changed when they checked a dangerous flop.

We all have different opinions of certain situations - it is good to see others opinions.

In this thread (and the stickied thread at the top of the forum) there is a lot of thought processes along the lines of the above being aired out. Which is bad - because in disagreeing with me here you are taking the losing side of a very fundamental argument in relation to tournament theory which has been dealt with on a lot of other forums a long time before now. I'll start a new thread tonight or tomorrow to discuss an overallo mentallity and approach to tournaments. For the moment, maybe consider the following thread:

http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/1030662/site_id/1#import

That is a three year old discussion - but the point still holds: most people are nowhere near as good as they think they are and simply cannot afford to pass up any equity edge.

Posted by: totalise
Yes you could, but if you did that you would be applying the logic you're using for this unique situation to other completely different situations (fewer chips/different circumstances etc..) and as I have already said...that is not good tournament strategy.

Posted by: totalise
I agree. The Hail Mary play is the last desperate roll of the dice when you have no other choice...as is the short-stack all-in in tournament poker. So why employ the Hail Mary strategy (all-in) when you DO have other choices...namely limping here. You can take this option and STILL use the Hail Mary (all-in) if it doesn't work. Why go straight for this last resort move when you STILL have other options to explore? Yes, your moves are increasing in risk but that's what your position in the game dictates...until finally you put it all on the line. But you aren't forced into that situation just yet. What other choice do you have now other than the all-in or one last speculative limp? The fact you have another choice suggests the Hail-Mary all-in isn't appropriate just yet. I still haven't heard another viable choice from anyone??

Posted by: LuckyLloyd
Wow. I look forward to this debate. Personally I enjoy the difference that exists between players...always have. So this will be fun. Tournament play is a WORLD away from cash play...different games entirely...I doubt I will be on the loosing side of this argument Lloyd...whatever some people on other forums say:)

I like a good debate.... continue!!

i don't mind the limp here, i've used it many times to good effect. If i retain enough chips to have some fold equity whilst making up my mind to get all my chips in within the next round or maybe 2 if this hand doesn't gain any chips.

on the flop i might raise less to induce a bluff but i certainly ain't ever folding to leknave or anyone else here after my bet.

That's one key point here ;D

Although vaguely interesting (altho I'm almost certain I read it at the time) I can't see what this has to do with the debate.  In a cash game everything you do should be ev+.  In a tournament you sometimes have so little chips you have to make plays that would not be correct if you could maintain your stack size.  The correct play will yield the best return in both cases, but there are clear differences in what you would do with a small stack in a cash game and a tournament.  I really don't see how you can disagree with that.

When all is said and done taking the risk by limping with the 10-J WAS the perfect play for this particular situation. Now whilst I know the last bastion of the +EV long term strategist is to cry "results orientated". My reply is...EXACTLY.

It really is ok to knowingly step outside the maths because your unique tournament situation dictates this is a neccessary risk...get the result you need...then retreat back to the safety of the numbers game.

In this paticular situation you go for a high risk-high reward play...you flop top pair...after the UTG checks (information you have from playing your position...A fact you considered before the initial limp)...all the chips go in and you double through an over enthusiastic pair of eights. Absolutely perfect for the situation you were in....you needed a result and you got one...while only risking 1,600 chips. In an instant your whole tournament position has changed.

While the point that this wont work most of the time is a fact...you needed it to work NOW...and it did. I think trying to console yourself that you passed pre-flop...didn't double through...but that's ok because most of the time you would have done the right thing is really not viable under short-stack tournament conditions. You STILL need to double through in the here and the now...but now you will be risking ALL your chips to try and achieve that eventuality...and you will STILL need to get lucky in order to get there.

If you are going to use "LOOK AT THE RESULT! LOOK AT THE RESULT!" as justification for losing plays, it would probably pay to look at the result of this particular hand and conclude that the result was less than perfect (for M3boy at least - LeKnave was probably fairly pleased with the result.)

I would definitely say limping TJ is a losing play here, stack size at <8BBs is too shallow to generate any kind of good implied odds to flop a big hand and too shallow to "outplay" opponents often enough with position to be profitable.

You have a stack that can put people to a decision preflop - just about...use that now, rather than weakly limping off chips that can be used as a weapon.

Incidentally against half decent players if you limp on the button here, you will sometimes be punished by someone in the blinds who will apply a limper's tax and then you face the almost criminal siutuation of voluntarily putting chips into a pot when you have less than 8 big blinds and not seeing a flop...

The result was J-J Vs 8-8 after the 1,600 had been invested. Paul has already stated that his mistake was not following through after check-check and that is a different issue. The 1,600 was risked to outflop your oppo and you did...what happens after that is up to you. Folding the best hand doesn't detract from the fact that you had the best hand.

I don't really get why we are thinking that 1,600 chips is going to change somebody's decision to call an all-in though. What hand folds pre-flop for 12,400 but calls for 10,800?

Half-decent players will be wary of the UTG limp and will only raise with a hand that would have called your all-in and is why I suggest limping is reasonable. And although you don't have the stack to outplay your oppos check-check-push is a better scenario than UTG limp then push pre-flop imo.

If you are going to be results orientated, which pretty much every great poker player I've ever listened to suggests you should not be, then you can't conveniently ignore the bits of the results that don't fit in with your analysis.

Ok, so you want to have your cake, eat it and regurgitate it for the masses to swallow too. By now, no one wants the cake, let it go and flush it down the toilet where it belongs!

Shakespeare once said "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." That's far too highbrow and pretentious to be used in poker hand analysis. I prefer to tell a different story.

Once there was a man in a village who had a turd. People turned their nose up at his turd, but he thought he could turn them round. So he spent all day dressing up the turd. He put a white shirt on it, crisply pressed trousers, a neat, smart tie, a small turd-sized tuxedo, a small pair of glistening black shoes. He carefully placed a little wig on its little turd head, did the shiny little buttons up on its jacket and stood back to marvel at how well dressed, dapper and debonair it now looked.

He invited people round to see the transformation. People flocked from near and far. Many were impressed and liked the shininess of the buttons and the sartorial elegance he had brought about in his creation.

 Eventually the wisest man in the village appeared.

"What do you think!" asked the man eagerly!

"Looks like a turd in a suit to me" answered the wise old man.

No, all that shows is that you don't understand the maths.

Great story JungleCat.

The result for ME in this hand would have been a double through, the result for other players would be different. Whilst I have an interest in how others play this hand with regard to strategy I am primarily concerned with what would happen to me in this example...and as such I am satisfied that the limp with 10-J would have been...well perfect.

So, if we leave the result aside for a second and just look at the strategy instead. I have read how many players think pushing pre-flop is the right move e.g.

Posted by: JungleCat03

Now I must be missing a trick. Because in this thread 10-J has been categorized as a "weak" and an "over-rated" starting hand that will "loose" most of the time...and putting 1,600 in with this hand is just downright weak. So you know what...let's put ALL our chips in with it....real lol factor about that strategy right there. Just close your eyes and put all your chips in the middle in blind hope. Yes, that's right, putting 1,600 with this hand is ridiculous but putting EVERYTHING in with it is pure genius.

My way, I get to gamble with the hand for 1,600 and what's more I am giving myself an opportunity to use some semblance of poker skill as the hand progresses e.g. assessing the texture of the flop, watching how my oppos re-act to the flop, judging how they behave when betting or checking before using my position I secured pre-flop to make an informed decision about what to do next. In this particular example after the check-check I would then use this information to rule out UTG holding a monster and commit.

The alternative strategy I have been presented with in this thread is close your eyes and push because your stack is still quite big. Forgive me for not falling in love with this profound alternative just yet. It is based on nothing but hope...particularly that UTG is going to fold. What are you going to do if you get called...hope to flop something...a hope you wouldn't even pay 1,600 for a moment ago....real lol factor once again.

The push strategy is pure irony through and through. Why not just push blind every hand from now on...hey you've got enough chips to put people to a decision. Don't try and use your poker skill from now on, just push, just push when you don't have to, because risking your tournament life with "weak" hands when you really don't have to is fun...and simple too.

So while the poo story was funny JungleCat give me something a bit better than close your eyes and hope and I will take it on board, but quote Shakespeare if you want, I did an English Literature Degree and know a thing or two about the great man.

There are different types of poker player, back to the left-right brain stuff. So I appreciate where the maths guys come from when they say the things they do and I think that's ok but we are never going to see eye to eye.

A firm characteristic of maths guys is this....


It's called inflexibility of thought. Maths guys always do this...because maths is their crutch. So when you get into a tournament situation when flexibility of thought and creativity is required the maths guys stumble. This is why good cash game players generally struggle in tournament play. Bongo I learnt the maths inside and out during my first year...but in this tournament example the creative limp works and the other options don't....show me an equation that proves otherwise.

I used some creativity and came up with this:

limp = wrong :P

Actually I've not really thought about the hand too much, more the concept that ev doesn't apply.

The point is that you can apply maths to the situation, and if you apply the right maths, with the right values for the variables (UTG's range, Other's calling ranges), you can start to calculate EV for the situation. This would be a different calculation than you would use for cash, for sure, but you could still apply maths and make an estimate for the EV of each play

This thread has gone of track a little bit here. Paul's original question was Good spot to bluff or not?, almost every post has given a view that doesnt provide the answer Paul is looking for i.e why is leknave limping with 88 and why is Paul limping with 10 j etc.

My view is that its not a great play by either. (Post flop) Leknave has made a move on Paul without really considering that Paul has more than half of his stack in the pot and cant fold leaving himself less than 4BB, And for Paul he SHOULD NOT have folded in this spot, as he has acknowledged as he was getting 6-1 and had top pair and passing here he is more or less out of the comp with such a short stack.

So in answer to your question Paul IMO it was a bad spot to Bluff.

Also a bad spot to fold ;)

Wow, you can be crossed off the list for people i would stake to play sng's (a good test of shortstack play). Seriously some of your comments in here are mixture of bizarre arrogance in your own opinion of how to play the hand and a complete lack of understanding of what push/fold strategy is about.

I actually advocate folding here given the read that UTG has a hand and we have little fold equity against Le Knave. Well alas you are right cos we win the hand right, oh wait pushing probably wins the hand as well, as our j10 wins the race against 88 and we are dodging 2 outs on the river.

The bolded paragraph is nothing short of ridiculous nonesense, pushing/folding here is an ICM calculation and nothing like preying while pushing our chips in. Guess what I and many others have made a wage out of poker based on ICM calculations, you sound like one of those players who has a go in the internet chat box that I don't know how to play poker cos i correctly pushed a marginal hand.

good cash game players dont struggle in tournament play,  tournament players struggle in cash game play. I will offer the opinion that you have no idea about the math in poker, I dont mean pot odds and other 1st tier math, I mean proper math, because if you had any idea about the proper math/logic in poker, theres zero chance you would make the statement above. This isn't debatable. Its fact.


how about this one, instead of the guy having 88, he has AA and you go broke... thats a pretty good equation. Poker is sickeningly easy to analyse when you know the results of the hand, and it just so happens that this hand has all the components of a longshot parlay that "justify" the limp with 10J in this spot. thats luck, not judgement. Theres so much luck involved in poker, you should be trying to mimize the luck factor, not hop on its coat-tails and hope that one time it spins up into a big stack.

Jesus....Paul...see what you started?

No-one better have an opinion different from anyone else here! "Conform to my way of thinking or be flamed"

"Resistance is Futile"
[/ducks for cover]

One of the funniest things I see in poker is....

Posted by: JungleCat03

....so being results orientated is ridiculous.

Posted by: totalise

....but being potential results orientated carries much more credibility....lol to that. And anyhow, the players that push pre-flop are the ones that go broke, I however, can get away on the flop for a mere 1,600...sweet.

There seems to be a lot of speculation about my arrogance, my ability in science-based subjects, what I type in chat-box's etc...which is ok I suppose although it is based on nothing of real substance. But why don't you guys post YOUR thoughts about strategy rather than just responding to mine....and if you do want to respond then tell me WHY you think that way. Please be aware that projected insults are a sign that the argument is being lost.

I'm sorry totalise but your post is just plain infantile. How can someone of your standing post something that basically reads...I'm right, you're wrong, you can't count, so there. The reality is cash game grinders despise luck for obvious reasons...but when you become short in tournaments it is necessary to look for spots where you can get lucky...because you have no "play" left in your stack. And by the way, when people object to my thoughts it fuels my belief that I have a real edge...what would I do if everyone thought the same as me...I would have no fun.

Wow. What a great thread.

BEST.DEBATE.EVER

'Tis that, and from such a bad play from Paul (and LeKnave)! 

We were at the bar during the break soon after the hand happened.  Paul was funny.  Don't know if he was angrier that he made the laydown or that LeKnave actually thought he was ahead.

I must admit though, one of my major faults is that I give opponents too much credit. 

great hand and great posts.

I think some good points have been made by both sides of the argument, in truth I think calling with j 10 here if you think the guy has a big hand is a great play IF you are deepish stacked, you might just bust him for very little risk. With ten BB it is pretty marginal.

Thewwy once told me to get into pots cheap when people flat call in early position as you might get a chance to bust a big hand.This is prob the reason he does bust so many big hands with rags but you prob wont find that in many of the popular poker books.

The prob with calling in this hand is exactly what happened, if you think he has a big hand and you flop enough to make you want to proceed in most pots what do you do? Was your read right, can you win the pot here, are you being slow played? but that is why it is ok when you have enough chips to make a bet, find out where you are and then pass if re raised by the player you originally thought might have a big hand. Move on to the next hand.

In this hand having that much of my stack in the middle I would have to call to the all in on the flop.

Interestingly I think the 88 utg has played the hand far worse than Paul(fold apart) but we aren't dissecting the value of pushing utg with 88 with 10 bb. Poker really is a great game innit, both players have made pretty big mistakes in the hand yet both could have won the pot.

I really can't get my head around your views Mantis.
Yes you can get away for 1600 and you will have to most of the time, this is an unprofitable play in the long run .
You can obviously look to win individual pots rather than making good decisions and am sure you have got lucky in the past but you are I'm afraid being short sighted, if these are the kind of decisions you make in a tournaments you really are going to require luck.
To say Cash game players struggle in Tournys is a strange one too? based on your theories I guess you don't play cash, certainly not profitably.
You seem to me ( I may be wrong ) that you are the kind of player that I come across all the time in tourny's, you win the pot but don't see the mistakes because you think rakeing the chips in and stacking them up means you played the hand well. Poker as they say is about opinion though so you just continue with your theories mate I hope it works out for you.

Regarding the opening post I think it obvious that it wasn't a good bluff, Le Knave thought he had the best hand and it was bad play all round. We are all guilty of that.  

Sigh I think this is going to my last post in this thread as we are never going to agree. I have posted my thoughts regarding strategy in this thread and then responded to your thoughts. In case you missed what i said.

I believe its a push fold situation as we don't have enough chips to get the required implied odds for our hand and any attempt to steal the pot is going to commit to a pot where we almost certainly behind.

Going with M3boy's read im in favour of folding as he feels Le Knave is limping a big hand a good percentage of the time. Therefore we don't have the required fold equity and out hand doesn't play well against his perceived range, though j10 doesn't play as bad as ax against a tight range.

I stick by my criticism of your reasoning and feel alot of what you wrote is fluff and nonesense. While maybe went to far to say you abuse people in chat boxes it was simply a comparison with many a losing player who doesn't understand equity situations in short stacked tournament play and not suggesting that you actually abuse people in chat boxes.

While Totalise will defend himself im sure i fail to see what is infatile about his post and he was simply casting doubt over your mathematical background in regard to equity situations like this one. To be fair he isn't the only one in this thread who has questioned it and im not convinced either based on your post so far on this forum.

Chapter 7, Theory of Poker

I would again like to thank everyone for their contribution to this topic.

Certainly was a good debate.

Paul, I would like to thank you for the entertainment!  I'll get you a beer at the next one ;D.

No, you see if there is one misconception more prevalent among weak players when they stop to think about poker is the misconception that:

"Ah shur you play the game your way; I'll play the game my way. It's just different styles and opinions. Shur it's all luck at the end of the day anyway".

Now, if you bother to open an account here and look into the Hand analysis section I will assume that some part of you wishes to rise above that mentality of the poker "players" that inhabit the games in your local pub, club or casino.

POKER IS MATHS. It is a game to which numbers can be applied. Fixed hierarchal value of starting hands; exact odds of one hand outdrawing another hand; the ability of exactly working out your precise price and pot equity when you place chips in a pot; the ability to narrow down your chips equity when you compare your hand to a range of hands; the ability to take actions that will dictate the price available to yourself on later streets; blah, blah the idea should be clear.

Ring games are about winning chips. Yes, we can reload. Yes, those chips have a tangible cash value. But you try to make the best play that will win you chips in the long run. Tournaments are also about winning chips. No, you generally cannot reload after the first few levels. No, you cannot cash out immediately. But you are still involved in a game where the object is to make decisions that provide you the greatest chance of accumulating chips.

Now, every time you make a decision at a poker table (cash game or tournament table) if you could see your opponents cards you could automatically work out whether or not to make that play. Because you could see whether the play had a positive or negative expectation in terms of chips in the long run. Obviously, this isn't possible in practice (unless you play at absolute poker lol) because you cannot see your opponents exact holding. So, what you need to do is guess at a range of hands your opponent could play in a given situation and compare how your hand fares against that range. The more often you do this; the more often you play against a particular opponent; and the more information you receive - the narrower you can make the perceived range.

Now other factors that need to affect your decision making is your implied odds (i.e. the total amount possible to win if you get paid all the way or if you can win further bets on later streets) and your fold equity (i.e. the chances you can make your opponent fold a better hand and win the pot without showdown. These values become more important the bigger the effective stacks. And the higher the potential created by implied odds and possible the FE the more profitable it becomes to speculate and play pots with a wider range of starting hands. Because we can afford to lose more small pots in the hope of winning a big one that will leave us profit in the LONG RUN.

Conversely, the smaller our stack becomes the less willing we should be to play pots multi way with weak hands because we can no longer afford to lose pots of any size.


In tournaments you will more frequently be in scenarios with reduced fold equity and small implied odds. As such, you should generally be less willing to give away "easy chips" - by that I mean limping into pots or calling raises with a wide range of hands in the hope of hitting good. It becomes more and more incorrect to make preflop plays that are speculative or negative EV because you do not have the combination of implied odds and fold equity that make up for it post flop. Our FE is reduced to preflop shoving; and the smaller our stack the greater our reverse implied odds become.

Now, in cash games we know that each hand we play will not need to be our last as we can easily find another game or reload into that particular game. But every hand you play in a tournament will not be your last hand of tournament poker ever!! We will play many tournaments. Many more tournament hands. And we can either play a hand correctly or incorrectly - ultimately giving ourselves the best chance to maximize our expectation in terms of tournament chips in that given hand. As such, the way we play each hand of each tournament will either be plus cEV or negative cEV. cEV = $EV unless you are in specific satellite or pay bubble situations. And, when we analyze how we played each hand the cEV of our actions can be calculated - with a greater degree of accuracy once we have a greater degree of information.


SOOOOO:

Saying things along the lines of:

- EV doesn't matter because this is a tournament;
- EV of this hand is different BECAUSE it's a tournament;
- It's ok to make a  negative EV play here because it will help me win the tournament;

is L O L.

LuckyLloyd posts good

ok just to clarify and simplify what my reasoning is...

1. I think my stack is getting dangerously short but is still just too big to be happy pushing pre-flop with a marginal hand, like Paul I prefer a slightly shorter stack to do this. I feel pushing should be avoided because the fewer times you risk your tournament life the better.

2. I cannot raise with a hand without committing to it

3. Pushing with a hand takes EVERYTHING out of your hands the moment your chips cross the line...there is no skill in this move and for me should be a last resort.

4. The UTG limp gives me the certainty that I will see a cheap flop, without it I fold

5. Calling with position allows me to use my own personal skill set, namely reading behaviour, to arrive at a play I am comfortable with. For me this is less risky than shoving pre-flop and also a more informed play for me.

6. I am aware that my tournament position is not healthy and I am looking for a way to reverse this. Considering I am not happy with a pre-flop push with my stack size, but am happy with my post-flop play I feel that the limping option is one that I want to explore.

7. Having relied on +EV plays thus far my tournament is in jeopardy and so I feel looking for a different answer should be considered

8. If it doesn't work I drop 1,600 but I have a stack I am more comfortable pushing pre-flop with

9. I don't advocate this play at every stage in a tournament. I advocate this play for the unique conditions I have set out above.

10. I am aware it wont work most of the time but I am getting desperate...but not desperate enough to push all-in.

This is what I think and am obviously comfortable with it.

To suggest that I play every hand like this, I am a loosing player, I don't know what I'm doing, I am abusive, I don't understand the maths, I fail to appreciate +EV situations, I must get lucky making crazy plays all the time, I fail to see mistakes etc etc...is genuine madness to say the least. My views are backed by more substantial logic than these opinions I think.

If you have been making +EV plays and you're in a mess then maybe it's time to try something a bit different. Remember, you are in trouble so what are you going to do? Stick to the text book until you get anted away or push and hope a better hand doesn't call you? Trying this one time before you push doesn't make you a fool but risking your tournament before you have to does. This is my view. But then again for me Tournament poker is a sport (millions of people agree) and maths is one component of that sport...to say it is maths and nothing else seems like a statement a maths guy would make.

I am genuinely interested in this though...
If we as players are inputting the data regarding our opponent's range etc..then this equation is only as good as the quality of your information and that comes down to your judgement, which clearly could be wrong, so while you feel you are relying on maths actually you are relying on the quality of your judgement and that isn't maths...it's poker. Please show me how you work out whether it is mathematically correct to push here and how it isn't fallable because I am genuinely interested.

Only just seen this thread. Its Great.

I dont see why his line is unbelieveably bad. I dont see how T 7 2 is a bad flop for 88 at all. Id be like "shippp, only one over"

Theres so many hands Paul could have, lots of people on here are being results orientated i think.

And even if hed called, LeKnave would definetly have hit at least One Eight, probably Both coz thats how he Rollz.

I really think you Mantis flamers are overlooking a major issue here.  You reject limping as a strategy out of hand and mantain that push fold is the only option.  The only strategic defect in the ICM push/fold model is that it does not take into account the depletion of your stack by antes/blinds.  It only provides the correct decision at a point in time.  It can't be faulted for this, but that doesn't mean that it is the only viable strategy or even a +ev strategy when the blinds are considered.  There logically must be a transition point before which push-fold is not the best strategy - it clearly isn't the best strategy with say 30bbs.

Also, if you could see your opponents hand or have a very good idea of their range, you would almost never raise preflop but rather wait till the flop before making your decisions to avoid elimination.

I think that a lot of you are not considering the difference between information available in the live environment and the tell-less world of the internet.

All these things taken into account there must be a point where for some players it is a superior strategy to want to see flops cheaply rather than be blinded away until they are forced into pushing with a mediocre hand.
 

ARRRGH!! THE EFFECTIVE STACKS IN THIS HAND ARE LESS THAN 10 BBS!! LIMPING UTG FOR MORE THAN 10% OF YOUR STACK WHEN YOU ARE NOT DELIGHTED TO GET IT IN NO MATTER WHAT IS RETARDED. LIMPING FOR ONE EIGHT OF YOUR STACK TO TRY AND SEE A FLOP WHEN YOU THINK UTG LIMPED A STRONG HAND IS RETARDED.

TALK OF TELLS AND LIVE POKER AND DIGGING YOURSELF OUT OF HOLES BY SEEING FLOPS FROM A LESS THAN 10 BB STACK AND THIS WHOLE DISCUSSION IS UNBELIEVABLY OUT OF THIS WORLD RETARDED.

Some great points in this thread, but the need to class someone as an 'idiot' or 'retarded' is hardly the most intelligent way of getting your point over.

Sorry. I'll exit stage left.

Douche.

 ;iagree;

Yours were some of the best posts on the thread. 

what a shame.

TAG's, LAG's, Maniacs, Rocks, Calling-Stations, etc etc....

If there is a Holy Grail of poker strategy then why do so many different people approach the game in so many different ways?

Take a look at religion, the biggest cause of conflict in the history of mankind....Why?

Because if two people passionately believe in two different Gods then they will gladly kill each other over a fact they can never prove. One feels threatened by the others passion in their own beliefs because at the end of the day there can only be one true God right? Bit ridiculous really.

Passionate poker players seem to follow this trait when debating the game they love. But in reality there isn't a fool proof method of play that guarantees results. That's the only real fact in the game...although maths guys will protest otherwise (please see paragraph above).

I do think Lloyd raises some convincing arguments with his retard post though...especially considering capitals were used to really hammer that message home.

What a great thread.

Guys, this is a terrific debate, thanks to all of you, but lets go easy on the name-calling. That's never gioing to win any debate, & this is a terrific thread & debate. Mantis & Totalise & Lucky Lloyd & so many others have given us much to think about, but just because some hold differing views on what is the way forward, there's really no need or justification to descend into profanities & name-calling. How on earth does that further the excelllent debate?

Thanks.

because some people like to win and some people dont care about winning. There are many different ways to play the game profitably, and there are many ways to play it unprofitably. The "holy grail " is one of expectation.. there are many ways to play the game with a positive expectation.





Wait, you have just used a stupid religion analogy in a thread about a hand of poker, and you are mocking someone elses attempt to give a convincing argument?

Yes, lets stop the name calling please - i do feel somewhat responsible - and I'm fragile enough as it is.

With our stack sizes and the action preflop (and seeing the flop) one of us SHOULD of doubled up - NONE of us should EVER escaped away after this flop.

Leknave COULD of been ahead, ie I have a flush draw or smaller pair or just trying to nick it - so to answer my own question, I do not consider what LeKnave did to be a bad play.

I should of NEVER folded.

That is my honest take on the situation.

I still maintain that limping with my stack at this stage is not a terrible play, as pushing with 7xBB or 8xBB does not affect my F/E. I was trying a high gamble play WITHOUT risking my tourney life in a spot where I considered it would work.

Pushing preflop (as it turns out) woud of worked better for me - but that is results orientated.

Great debate and some good points of view put foward - but thats what they are , points of view.

I consider this situation that there is no right or wrong in limping here, just different views.

Aint Poker great?

Remember, keep it civil please guys . TY

Why would you ever back any horse other than the favourite because the favourite will win most of the time...that's why it is the favourite

No totalise, I am making a point about people. How this is considered stupid is anyone's guess. Also I never mock people, but if Lloyd feels mocked then I will withdraw my comment about the capital letters.

Lloyd - most of the points you have raised have been valid ones imo.

Except the above.

I am more than happy to see flops with 10xBB stack. Although 10xBB is short stacked I agree, I do not feel under pressure to commit my tourney life.

I would like to hear others views on this. What is your cut off point where you look to shove preflop ?

comparing the "odds" of a horse race is nothing to do with the odds of a hand of poker, for pretty obvious reasons.

what I am sure of is that no winning professional gambler will take a £20,000 betting roll, put £1000 on a horse at 5/1 even though its true odds are 20/1, and justify it by saying "if I win this, I can spin up this £5k into a nice big sum, and £1k out of £20k isn't *that* much"

The point I was making is that I think this depends on your hand-reading and ppl reading abilities.  For me I go more less into push fold at 12-15 (I dont actually push but I'm not folding to a rr).  I think this is big failing in my tourny game and do think that if you can successfully find a way of seeing flops rather than going into push/fold as long as possible you will have a greater ev.

I know plenty of professional gamblers who go through the card having lost only to choose a value outsider in the last because the price is right for their current situation.

However, anyone who holds the view that the long term solution is the answer to each and every short term problem is certainly entitled to that opinion.

i dont usually comment, but feel i have to here, only read page 1 of the replies, but this is UNBELIEVABLY bad from op.
its shows a complete and utter lack of knowledge of tourney poker.

u are being offered 6/1 on the call,,,,,,,,and have only 4 bbs if u fold here.
u have made a standard bet from the button to take the pot,
first villian can easily think a mid pp is good.
second, villain can easily have a draw. (fd is out there)
thirdly, u usually have 5 outs here when behind, this gives u a 4/1 chance to win the hand, u are being offered 6/1, if villian SHOWS u AA here, its an insta call.
EVEN if u are dominated, and have 3 outs, u are just over 7/1 to win the pot........again given the relative chips positions vis a vis winning the tourney, if u are SHOWN AJ, its still prolly a marginal call.

Lastly, limping along here with JT is this position, given the relative stack sizes and utg limp is absolutely shocking poker.

Some general questions.

With the exception of Lloyd and Robbie can the players who have comented on this thread who are making their way to Waterford for the BigSlick event please identify themselves - Im lead to believe that a number of you are coming over?

Secondly, and with reference to my first question above, do you guys play cash games?

Thirdly, do you play cash games online? If so, site and sn please.

Isn't the key word there value, i.e. +ev?

If you had bothered to read the whole thread, you will find that I have said most of that already. 3 outs if I am doninated? I think you mean 2 outs (ie he has a set) - 3 outs if I hit runner runner FH is true.

But thanks for repeating it.

Can we all agree in 3 bullet points what we should learn from this thread?

1, m3boy is tight as f*@%
2, LeKnave is a Kipper
3, Mantis and LuckyLoyd secretly fancy eachother

I was thinking of going but if its going to be populated by w4nkers like you, I won't bother.

Guys keep it civil please

terrific thread full of strong opinions, lets not spoil it

ta

Let's say after the limp with 10-J the sb raises pre-flop and you have to fold. The next hand you pick up Aces and limp again. The sb who is now on the button and who is aware you have a tendancy to limp-fold when you get short raises it up again and you get paid. Over the course of the next few orbits, when you limp, people are wary of raising because they have seen you have a tendancy to limp with strength. The limp with 10-J has bought you things that are difficult to quantify.

Now while this is only a minor point to bring to the debate it is worth some consideration. The future implications of your present actions go to make up the whole tournament experience. In chess, players often sacrifice a piece or two in order to achieve a greater goal. So when you focus on people, behaviour and their tendancies you see that your actions have a good deal of bearing on theirs.

Manipulating your image and behaviour means an investment now sets up a later payday. I don't love the maths because it is difficult to factor in all the permations that every action will bring later in the tournament. And it is why I am more inclined to say poker is a game that involves people as a more important entity than numbers. Why advertise a bluff if you don't want people to believe that is your tendancy...when in reality it isn't...and how would you formulate an equation that shows exactly how much that advertisement is going to reap in the future?

Mantis - there really isn't any point.  The pushbots are unwilling to enter any sensible discussion as to whether there is any place for limping when you have 10bbs, although this is a valid strategic discussion.  They prefer to pick on some parts of your posts that maybe aren't quite correct instead of looking at the general meaning of what you are trying to say. 

Logic dictates that there must be a point when a seeing the flop strategy is superior to an allin strategy.  This might be a fixed point, but I think that in the transition between the two there must be situations that allow you to use either profitably.  I'm pretty sure that LeKnave's hand was a push as it is profitable to play it that way and I can't see how seeing the flop is going help him much.  Whether the JT hand was a valid limp I don't know, but folding is the only other option which seems like a bit of a wasted opportunity.

so people are trying to point out where someone is wrong, rather then playing a guessing game as to what someone is trying to say? I'm sure you can see why this isn't in the least bit stupid

of course, and logic dictates that there must be a point where seeing a flop is inferior to folding or pushing


okay, but poker is about finding a spot with the highest EV, not about finding spots that have a positive EV


the JT wasn't a valid limp, because of what M3boy said about his read of the UTG limper.  Clearly in some contrived spots limping with 10J will be the best play, but it takes some imagination (whcih we have seen a lot of in this thread) to justify it

hi mantis,

its not hard to factor in the future permetations of action, if you know the right math. The whole point why this is bad "advertising" is because the stacks are so shallow. I know we can contrive all sorts of fanciful examples to  try and justify our opinion, you did it above, where u said "lets say we make a negative EV play, and the next hand maybe we hit a >200/1 shot and get AA, and then not only do we hit a long shot like that, we also hit another long shot in that the SB decides to raise us".....we can all tell stories about unlikely occurances that turned out good!!!!


you seriously over estimate how much people give a crap about image/behaviour, most people, especially amatuers, dont care about this stuff. They play their cards, and be damned about anything else


because u cant afford it, and most people dont care. This is the best equation... bad play + over-estimating your edge at poker = going broke... embracing math + finding positive ev spots = not going broke.

Well obviously thats the case, but which strategy is the more profitable?


Ah a minor concession at last.  ;)

But once again Totalise I have learnt nothing from you other than maths is good...which is something you emphasize in every post.

In this tournament my stack is in a grey area for ME. Too big to push and too small to raise. My particular skill set is image/behaviour and the fact you suggest most people don't give a crap about this gives me the very edge you insist I don't have.

Limping allows me to use my skill set but pushing does not. These are the only two choices I have if I want to win a pot. I AM genuinely interested to hear how you equate future permetations based on current actions...but you just say that's not hard.

It is crystal clear that my limping with 10-J here gets you forming very strong opinions about my play and yet in the same breath you suggest players don't actually give a stuff about that and just play their cards. My approach involves manipulating these strong opinions you say don't exist against the player that forms them.

Anyways, what is your particular strategy for the current tournament predicament, what is your way forward? If it is just wait to push with something then I really don't see how you can be so critical of trying something else. Also I think just saying most people are crap and don't care and just play their cards is a bit narrow-minded and doesn't really aspire to playing at higher levels in major tournaments.

While you may reject the notion that "playing" people doesn't work you can see how I have pushed your buttons throughout this thread. Rather than just trumpeting the maths, which I appreciate is standard for...er maths guys...tell me what you do from now on in to turn your tournament around. This is what I am interested in.

i think you have missed my post to doubleup, limping is only very bad here because of M3's assumptions about the EP limp in an earlier post. I still dont think its possible to outplay people postflop with 10bb, but I do recognise that in certain circumstances, its feasible to limp and turn a profit. This spot isn't one of them, given the reads


i am commenting in a thread from an ametueur tournament with amaetur players, its very likely that you can limp and then fold, and in 3 hands time, ask the entire table what happened 3 hands ago, and none of them will have a clue what happened. This is the audience you are trying to manipulate. this limp in itself doesn't make me form too many opinions about your play, but if you limp here, given the read of the poster, THAT is what helps me form an opinion. This is the distinction I think you are missing


When i post in a thread in PHA, I give advice based on the situation. It doesn't matter how you would play a hand in a higher buyin event, if they wanted advice on that, they would ask for it, and then i would offer it.


I dont know what id do, im confident enough in my own abilities that i can find spots in the future that mean i dont have to take negative EV spots now hoping to get lucky. EV manifests intself in many spots,this is the power math guys have over people that wave their hands in the air and claim to think outside the box,  its not dependant on the results of a given situation.

optimal strategy

[ ] limp 88 utg short
[ ] call an utg limper with JT from the button or anywhere with shallow stacks
[X ] never fold this hand after you have overlimped when you flop tp
[X] push 88 utg
[X] pass the JT to the all in shove
[X] find a hand to re-shove or raise and call a push (m3-boy)
[X] reading 2+2 too much

this is cold hard truth imo. llyold tried to explain it as best he could but his analytical posts fell on deaf ears.