Tremendous Bluff? Or Not?

[Longy]

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

Posted by: JungleCat03

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

....so being results orientated is ridiculous.

Posted by: totalise

how about this one, instead of the guy having 88, he has AA and you go broke

....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.

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.

[byronkincaid]

but you prob wont find that in many of the popular poker books

Chapter 7, Theory of Poker

[M3boy]

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

Certainly was a good debate.

[kinboshi]

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 .

[LuckyLloyd]

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]

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.

[byronkincaid]

LuckyLloyd posts good

[MANTIS01]

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...

pushing/folding here is an ICM calculation

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.

[Horneris]

The line villain took with 88 is unbelievably bad.

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.

[doubleup]

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.
 

[LuckyLloyd]

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.

[kinboshi]

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.

[LuckyLloyd]

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.

[Horneris]

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.

Douche.

[ChipRich]

 

[kinboshi]

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.

Yours were some of the best posts on the thread.