Good move or donkish?

[Table Manners]

ok. haven't got the hand history for this one, but I'd like hear people's thoughts.

100k guaranteed on mansion.

Blinds at 50/100, I'm on about 2.1k.

I'm in the cutoff. MR.X on Button and MR.Y on BB.

MR.Y doesn't like limpers and MR.X steals/resteals a lot from the button.

It folds round to me in the cutoff and I've got KJ. I want to gain some chips so I consider the steal, but decided not to given I don't want to be facing a reraise from MR.Y or MR.X.

I decide to play them at their own game and limp with the intention restealing if one of them raises (which I expect them to do).

MR.X raises pot to 450. The blinds fold and I shove for another 1.65k.

MR.X thinks for a bit then calls with 66, I miss and am out of the tourney.

I figured my stack size was perfect for this move; the reraise would be 1 1/2 times the pot which I thought would be plenty to get rid of anything less than premium. What my move too obvious? I think I might well make that move with JJ-AA give then nature of the players acting behind me. Obviously if I'd realize the guy was gonna be willing to put half his chips in on a coin flip I wouldn't have tried the move

What do people think?

[MANTIS01]

OK

Firstly, I think the thought process you have here is an excellent one. You have assessed how your opponents are playing and have formulated a plan to combat them. Good stuff.

However, three things to note.

1. POSITION - The limp, re-raise all-in is a powerful move. However, I do think that it looses its effectiveness the later you are at the table. If you employed the same tactic under-the-gun, for example, I think that the 6's would fold here. Limping early gives a player the best chance of encountering a raise of some sorts when holding a big hand. I know this, you know this, and all the other players know this. When you limp in the cut-off you have just three players to act behind you. If you hold a big hand here you would need to be pretty certain that you are going to get the raise you are looking for. Actually, you are certain of this, but the point is that the button doesn't know this is what you are thinking.

He simply sees someone limp in the cut-off and feels he can take the pot down with his pair. If he was a seasoned player, was acutely aware of his current table-image and gave you credit for being a trappy player he may well fold. But that is a lot of ifs and this is the internet.

Because you employed this tactic in a late position he simply doesn't believe you (and rightly so), and feels reluctant to muck the best hand.

2. TIMING - Again, the later in the tournament this tactic is employed the more effective it becomes. In these big events and with a couple of thousand starting chips players have a strong inclination to gamble. Later on people still want to gamble in order to win but these feelings are tempered somewhat with a fear of losing. Stealing or re-stealing later becomes far more effective because of this. So if you did this when you were both sitting on 50k, again he would probably fold.

Right here and now he believes he has the best hand, he took the initiative in raising and he is looking to gamble. This combination means that he will call.

Even so, the situation is far from hopeless and you get the chance to gamble with K-J. So not a disaster.

3. HAND STRENGTH - You say that you would have made the same play with AA or JJ. All I can say is what a perfect strategy if this was actually your holding. If you had AA, you limp, you get the raise you expect and you sucker him in. Bloody good poker!

Great thought process then. But without the goods I think it is too late and too early if you see what I mean.

[johnbhoy76]

OK

Firstly, I think the thought process you have here is an excellent one. You have assessed how your opponents are playing and have formulated a plan to combat them. Good stuff.

However, three things to note.

1. POSITION - The limp, re-raise all-in is a powerful move. However, I do think that it looses its effectiveness the later you are at the table. If you employed the same tactic under-the-gun, for example, I think that the 6's would fold here. Limping early gives a player the best chance of encountering a raise of some sorts when holding a big hand. I know this, you know this, and all the other players know this. When you limp in the cut-off you have just three players to act behind you. If you hold a big hand here you would need to be pretty certain that you are going to get the raise you are looking for. Actually, you are certain of this, but the point is that the button doesn't know this is what you are thinking.

He simply sees someone limp in the cut-off and feels he can take the pot down with his pair. If he was a seasoned player, was acutely aware of his current table-image and gave you credit for being a trappy player he may well fold. But that is a lot of ifs and this is the internet.

Because you employed this tactic in a late position he simply doesn't believe you (and rightly so), and feels reluctant to muck the best hand.

2. TIMING - Again, the later in the tournament this tactic is employed the more effective it becomes. In these big events and with a couple of thousand starting chips players have a strong inclination to gamble. Later on people still want to gamble in order to win but these feelings are tempered somewhat with a fear of losing. Stealing or re-stealing later becomes far more effective because of this. So if you did this when you were both sitting on 50k, again he would probably fold.

Right here and now he believes he has the best hand, he took the initiative in raising and he is looking to gamble. This combination means that he will call.

Even so, the situation is far from hopeless and you get the chance to gamble with K-J. So not a disaster.

3. HAND STRENGTH - You say that you would have made the same play with AA or JJ. All I can say is what a perfect strategy if this was actually your holding. If you had AA, you limp, you get the raise you expect and you sucker him in. Bloody good poker!

Great thought process then. But without the goods I think it is too late and too early if you see what I mean.

Agree with that.

Would like to add though that the guy's call with 66 is pretty poor as he's getting less than 2-1 from the pot (If I've read this right)

From the way the hand has panned out then from his perspective he's got to think he is facing a bigger pair or two overcards.

His dream scenario is that you are holding 55, 44, 33 etc.. but that is wishful thinking on his part.

The fact is in this situation he is either going to be a slight favorite or a massive underdog. In the ong run he will not win enough times as a slight favorite to make up for what he loses when he is the massive underdog.

[The_Diamond]

i like the play. horrible raise and horrible call by the 66.

[boldie]

OK

Firstly, I think the thought process you have here is an excellent one. You have assessed how your opponents are playing and have formulated a plan to combat them. Good stuff.

However, three things to note.

1. POSITION - The limp, re-raise all-in is a powerful move. However, I do think that it looses its effectiveness the later you are at the table. If you employed the same tactic under-the-gun, for example, I think that the 6's would fold here. Limping early gives a player the best chance of encountering a raise of some sorts when holding a big hand. I know this, you know this, and all the other players know this. When you limp in the cut-off you have just three players to act behind you. If you hold a big hand here you would need to be pretty certain that you are going to get the raise you are looking for. Actually, you are certain of this, but the point is that the button doesn't know this is what you are thinking.

He simply sees someone limp in the cut-off and feels he can take the pot down with his pair. If he was a seasoned player, was acutely aware of his current table-image and gave you credit for being a trappy player he may well fold. But that is a lot of ifs and this is the internet.

Because you employed this tactic in a late position he simply doesn't believe you (and rightly so), and feels reluctant to muck the best hand.

2. TIMING - Again, the later in the tournament this tactic is employed the more effective it becomes. In these big events and with a couple of thousand starting chips players have a strong inclination to gamble. Later on people still want to gamble in order to win but these feelings are tempered somewhat with a fear of losing. Stealing or re-stealing later becomes far more effective because of this. So if you did this when you were both sitting on 50k, again he would probably fold.

Right here and now he believes he has the best hand, he took the initiative in raising and he is looking to gamble. This combination means that he will call.

Even so, the situation is far from hopeless and you get the chance to gamble with K-J. So not a disaster.

3. HAND STRENGTH - You say that you would have made the same play with AA or JJ. All I can say is what a perfect strategy if this was actually your holding. If you had AA, you limp, you get the raise you expect and you sucker him in. Bloody good poker!

Great thought process then. But without the goods I think it is too late and too early if you see what I mean.

Agree with that.

Would like to add though that the guy's call with 66 is pretty poor as he's getting less than 2-1 from the pot (If I've read this right)

From the way the hand has panned out then from his perspective he's got to think he is facing a bigger pair or two overcards.

His dream scenario is that you are holding 55, 44, 33 etc.. but that is wishful thinking on his part.

The fact is in this situation he is either going to be a slight favorite or a massive underdog. In the ong run he will not win enough times as a slight favorite to make up for what he loses when he is the massive underdog.

I don't necesarrily agree that his call is poor. He could be thinking that Table manners was on a steal just hoping to get some more chips (which is what he was) How many chips did the Villain here have? If he had already stuck a decent % of his stack in he was never going to go away.

I also don't like the thinking of limping here when you have JJ+ when you KNOW your oppo is likely to reraise you if you stick a raise in. (This was after all the reason for the limp-all in in the first place.)
If you had a premium hand here you would have to lead out expecting a reraise and then move all in (or call an all-in) and you would not have done it with a  limp-reraise. This would have gotten you more chips if your opponent did what you expected him to do.

I really am starting to hate the limp-raise/check-raise strategy. The more I think about it (and admittedly the more I read supersystem) the more I think players who employ this strategy ussually have fairly weak holdings.

The call with 66 was not as bad as people think it is if that player was aware of his own table image and of your likely train of thought. He read the situation perfectly and didn't mind getting into a race. If he had the chips to be able to afford it (or not enough to fold) he is perfectly justified in making it.

[MANTIS01]

I agree with this sentiment

I don't necessarily agree that his call is poor.

I believe that poker enthusiasts place a bit more emphasis on the mathematics of the situation in tournament play than they need to.

If you grind out a decent profit on the daily cash game scene then probability and long-term profitability are your bread and butter. However, if you carry this mentality forward into tournament play, particularly in the early stages, you will be doing yourself a dis-service.

It is hardly relevant whether the general concensus feels a certain call was "poor" or not. A call has been made. Your tournament is over.

I have a hard time appreciating the concept of long-term profitability in tournament play. A particular tournament begins, finishes, and then the universe re-sets itself.

What occurs in an individual tournament is exclusive to that particular event.

For instance, Jamie Gold could fail to cash in every tournament he enters over the next decade (and probably will), but he will still be a profitable tournament player. It is notoriously difficult to be a winning tournament player because you can't call it a day when you're ahead. You have to get in there and gamble from start to finish. If you take your foot off the accelerator you are doomed.

Reasonable players know this and so when a tournament starts, and the value of their tournament life is low, they are looking for opportunities to gamble straight away. A marginal advantage is sometimes as good as it is going to get. When the tournament gets deeper very good players continue with this aggressive gambling mentality at the expense of their more conservative opponents.

Knowing this means that you as a player can give aggressive opponents enough rope to hang themselves early on. So I like the limp raise move here. But only with the goods. As Boldie said, it is starting to look a bit weak. So a decent move with strength then.

As always though it is vital that your opponents and their individual personalities are appreciated early. In this example Mr. Y "doesn't like limpers". With that knowledge I limp with big hands all day long here, when the blinds are still small, and let Mr. Y try to bully me out of the pot. So rather than focussing on the maths I think good tournament play requires you to focus on the person! A will HE fold if I check raise all-in mentality....rather than...a am I denying him the correct odds to call one.