Constructive criticism required

[Jon MW]

I had one thought.

Technically I had more than one, but the others seem to have been covered,

...
He doesn't rate me, probably thinks I'll lay down most hands to a raise there
...

If he thinks you'll lay down most hands - would a check call slow him down on the turn, if he was just bluffing?

[LuckyLloyd]

I had one thought.

Technically I had more than one, but the others seem to have been covered,

...
He doesn't rate me, probably thinks I'll lay down most hands to a raise there
...

If he thinks you'll lay down most hands - would a check call slow him down on the turn, if he was just bluffing?

The fact that it is three way on a drawy flop makes check calling to induce bluffs or give him rope or whatever a non - runner. We are short enough that it only takes two pot sized bets for half our stack to be in the pot. And on this type of board, the more money that goes in on the turn or river with TPTK the less profitable it will be for us. Our equity is always going to be best on the flop because there is more gamble left in the hand so a wider range of draws and one pair hands will be willing to pay us off.

If we allow cards to peel three handed the more likely it is that we aren't best at showdown - and the less likely opponents (even spewy morons) are to be bluffing.


If we were headsup against this Nav fella, a check / call line may be very viable - even preferable. As is, I like playing for stacks now.

[byronkincaid]

LL I've never seen anything written about SPR in tournaments. Do you think it applies the same as it does in cash? If so why is an SPR of 10 good to get AI here against 2 opponents with TPTK when it would not be in a cash game.

Has anything been posted about SPR on the tournament 2p2 forums? Got any links if so?

[MANTIS01]

There is a big difference between making a single play that will meet value criteria and formulating a strategy that is right for your particular tournament situation.

In this hand you have half the tournament average and this is a situation that requires drastic improvement. How are you best going to get that result? While raising pre-flop is the value play that can be deemed correct in isolation, is it the answer here?

There can be no argument that raising with A-Q and getting a call from 5-6 is good for the stats. But how good is it for you here specifically? After you have raised pre-flop a c-bet of say 3k into a 4.4k pot on a likely missed flopped gets as many chips into the pot as you have left in your stack and so your are flirting with pot-commitment by leaving yourself around the miserable 7.5k. Given the read that your oppo is loose-aggressive and doesn't rate you, the c-bet will be a fundamental requirement of raising pre-flop because if you don't bet he will. So if the raise pre-flop is the first stage of a stop & go play, and your are committed to this, then ok. But to raise pre-flop because the value suggests you should and have no accompanying post-flop commitment strategy is flawed thinking with regard to your stack size and tournament position...and that's whether the very act of raising is the correct move or not.

With 12k you must have a strategy to use those chips to change your situation. The stop & go play is a fair strategy and raising pre-flop is the first stage of it. To just raise, might be statistically correct, but just being statistically correct doesn't change your tournament situation and so there must be a wider reaching strategy to do that.

The merits of checking pre-flop, not risking chips that you don't have to risk, and trying to win a big pot by trapping mean this strategy is open for some consideration. I have used both strategies to good effect and both have their advantages. To say that not raising is wrong can be statistically proven for sure but we are talking about a tournament rescue package. And it is this complete package that is the priority, not making one statistically correct play.

In tournaments you will have the need and opportunity to get creative at times. Creativity will be stifled if you use +EV plays in isolation of complete strategies, particularly when we're talking about rescue strategies.

Something I know Lloyd is going to love....

1. +EV concerns long-term profit

2. Tournament players cannot expect to make long-term profit

So if you want to dabble in the creative when you're getting a bit desperate then ok. Alternatively, if you want to play the hand aggressively then fine, but you must be committed to the aggression. Both plays are valid, but more importantly it is the whole strategy that has to be judged when your a shortstack...not just each contributing part.
 

[LuckyLloyd]

LL I've never seen anything written about SPR in tournaments. Do you think it applies the same as it does in cash? If so why is an SPR of 10 good to get AI here against 2 opponents with TPTK when it would not be in a cash game.

Has anything been posted about SPR on the tournament 2p2 forums? Got any links if so?

Are you referring to the ideas in Flynn's recent professional no limit hold'em? If so, I can't comment because I haven't read all of it.

On a general level, I am always think that there should be no difference in your decisions on the basis that a situation is in a tournament or a ring game. If it's plus EV, it's plus EV as far as I'm concerned.

And, I think it is never going to be a huge mistake to stack off with TPTK on a drawy flop or go broke JJ+ aipf when playing 30 BBs or less. This assumes that we aren't on a pay or sat bubble of course (which isn't the case here).

And of course, against certain opponents, going broke here in a limped pot may be terribly incorrect. That doesn't seem to be the case though given the description of the villians involved.

[LuckyLloyd]

Something I know Lloyd is going to love....

1. +EV concerns long-term profit

2. Tournament players cannot expect to make long-term profit

You have to be levelling right? I mean you can't have that many posts on a strat forum and seriously write the above?

And you write ALL those words to essentially say:

- Have a plan for the hand;
- Stick to it;

The rest of your post seems to be indicating that you should pass up +EV or take -EV if it fits in with some magical "overall" strategy. Gibberish. Play every tournament hand in the best manner possible and you will be the best tournament player possible.

[byronkincaid]

Tournament players cannot expect to make long-term profit

hellmouth must be heading for some serious downswong then

[ifm]

Mantis, OP refers to 24k being the average for the FINAL not with 3 tables left.

I think you played the oppo here Richard or actually played badly because you felt oppo believed he could outplay you.
End of the day you shouldn't ever get 'em allin with TPTK in an unraised pot especially as you are above average and have 30BB's. Unless you're in the rebuy stage
How many words was that?

[boldie]

Something I know Lloyd is going to love....

1. +EV concerns long-term profit

2. Tournament players cannot expect to make long-term profit

Please elaborate on this one if you could...especially point 2 is baffling to me.

Why can't tourney players make long term profits?



And to say that in this situation the raise pre-flop is the wrong play to make against this oppo is beyond me..

We know several things;

1; You are ahead pre-flop against this oppo when you hold AQ more often than not.
2; He is likely to call when you bet.

I generally find that raising pre-flop when you're ahead/ a favourite is not a bad idea in tourneys..or in cash if you know that you will get called. In fact raising when ahead/ a favourite is a pretty good idea anytime if you know oppo is likely to call you, isn't it? (disclaimer..in a sat it's different)

I really think that not betting when you hold a premium hand like AQ against a serial limper/ calling station is the biggest mistake you can make in any poker game whether it'd be cash or tourney as you're not making the most of your opportunities. And to defend it is borderline disgraceful. OK so you're OOP here which might make it tricky but that is the ONLY argument for not raising here..and I think it's a pretty weak one.

[LuckyLloyd]

End of the day you shouldn't ever get 'em allin with TPTK in an unraised pot especially as you are above average and have 30BB's.

Nope. That sweeping statement is wrong.

[MANTIS01]

should be no difference in your decisions on the basis that a situation is in a tournament or a ring game.

You have to be levelling right? I mean you can't have that many posts on a strat forum and seriously write the above?

This really is gibberish son. But it does show your lack of sensitivity for unique tournament situations and how best to cope with them. You will always be able to justify a single play by using the statistical argument but by placing so much emphasis on the simplicity of a one-size-fits-all strategy your mind will forever be closed to the creativity needed to formulate those mystical "magical" strategies that seem to be fantasy to you right now. Your reliance on maths as the ONLY answer is stifling your creativity LLoyd and this is a shame because I can sense your creativity bursting to come out.

The Americans steamed into Iraq because it was the right thing to do...and created a right social mess because they invested no thinking into their longer term strategy. This is like raising pre-flop without a specific plan of attack. Foresight is needed in tournaments...especially when you have few chips.

With regard to Helmuth, sponsored entry into every tournament allows profitibility much easier to achieve I would think.

[ifm]

End of the day you shouldn't ever get 'em allin with TPTK in an unraised pot especially as you are above average and have 30BB's.

Nope. That sweeping statement is wrong.

Appologies i meant on the flop.
Care to elaborate if you still disagree?

[byronkincaid]

With regard to Helmuth, sponsored entry into every tournament allows profitibility much easier to achieve I would think.

ok hellmuth bad example. how about jason strasser and alec jacob then. nobody in their right mind could say they're -EV donkament players.

[ifm]

With regard to Helmuth, sponsored entry into every tournament allows profitibility much easier to achieve I would think.

ok hellmuth bad example. how about jason strasser and alec jacob then. nobody in their right mind could say they're -EV donkament players.

Flushy, Pab, Moorman, JP?

[boldie]

With regard to Helmuth, sponsored entry into every tournament allows profitibility much easier to achieve I would think.

ok hellmuth bad example. how about jason strasser and alec jacob then. nobody in their right mind could say they're -EV donkament players.

Flushy, Pab, Moorman, JP?

annette15 anyone?..I think she's done allright out of tourneys, no?