WSOP -- 1st Hand

[boldie]

"Would you like to risk your 10k starting stack against having a 60k starting stack? All you have to do is guess heads/tails and be right on 2 out of 3 attempts. If you do not guess correctly, I keep your $10k and you do not play at all"

You say "Yes" without thinking?!?!?

Obv, only a complete donkey wouldn't take that deal!!!

If I could have that deal and that chance a 100 times then it's a no brainer and I'd have to take it.

Even if I could have that deal and that chance 20 to 30 times, it would be worth a risk.

If I could have 9 or 10 times it might be worth a risk.

But if I ever get the chance I'm only likely to enter a $10k tournament 2 or 3 times in my life - the odds don't look so good - how low must your faith in your post flop playing ability be to take such a risk?

OK, now say you only have 1 shot in a tourney like that...do you really think that you should not play Aces pre-flop if you only get 1 shot at something?

[Jon MW]

"Would you like to risk your 10k starting stack against having a 60k starting stack? All you have to do is guess heads/tails and be right on 2 out of 3 attempts. If you do not guess correctly, I keep your $10k and you do not play at all"

You say "Yes" without thinking?!?!?

Obv, only a complete donkey wouldn't take that deal!!!

If I could have that deal and that chance a 100 times then it's a no brainer and I'd have to take it.

Even if I could have that deal and that chance 20 to 30 times, it would be worth a risk.

If I could have 9 or 10 times it might be worth a risk.

But if I ever get the chance I'm only likely to enter a $10k tournament 2 or 3 times in my life - the odds don't look so good - how low must your faith in your post flop playing ability be to take such a risk?

OK, now say you only have 1 shot in a tourney like that...do you really think that you should not play Aces pre-flop if you only get 1 shot at something?

One shot ever.

(a) I'd rather rely on my skill on outplaying people over several hands than risking it all on one.
(b) If they were better than me I would still be more content knowing that they played better than me and took my chips through skill a bit at a time (or even all in one go if they went in post flop) rather than gambling all your chips when you only know 40% of your hand. Most hands get won by more than one pair - so why gamble when that's all you're holding?

One hand early in the tournament isn't going to win you the tournament - the same situation later in the tournament is an entirely different proposition. Then it is worth gambling a bit more because winning a single pot at a later stage could make the difference between a deep finish and winning the tournament  -  but early on, I'm too cautious to gamble.

This is me: -
 

[boldie]

"Would you like to risk your 10k starting stack against having a 60k starting stack? All you have to do is guess heads/tails and be right on 2 out of 3 attempts. If you do not guess correctly, I keep your $10k and you do not play at all"

You say "Yes" without thinking?!?!?

Obv, only a complete donkey wouldn't take that deal!!!

If I could have that deal and that chance a 100 times then it's a no brainer and I'd have to take it.

Even if I could have that deal and that chance 20 to 30 times, it would be worth a risk.

If I could have 9 or 10 times it might be worth a risk.

But if I ever get the chance I'm only likely to enter a $10k tournament 2 or 3 times in my life - the odds don't look so good - how low must your faith in your post flop playing ability be to take such a risk?

OK, now say you only have 1 shot in a tourney like that...do you really think that you should not play Aces pre-flop if you only get 1 shot at something?

One shot ever.

(a) I'd rather rely on my skill on outplaying people over several hands than risking it all on one.
(b) If they were better than me I would still be more content knowing that they played better than me and took my chips through skill a bit at a time (or even all in one go if they went in post flop) rather than gambling all your chips when you only know 40% of your hand. Most hands get won by more than one pair - so why gamble when that's all you're holding?

One hand early in the tournament isn't going to win you the tournament - the same situation later in the tournament is an entirely different proposition. Then it is worth gambling a bit more because winning a single pot at a later stage could make the difference between a deep finish and winning the tournament  -  but early on, I'm too cautious to gamble.

This is me: -
 

this is a fair point..OK say we're halfway through the tourney (still fairly far from the bubble though) 6 people push all in..now do you fold your aces if you have slightly above average stack but would get knocked out if you lose the hand?

[AlexMartin]

"Would you like to risk your 10k starting stack against having a 60k starting stack? All you have to do is guess heads/tails and be right on 2 out of 3 attempts. If you do not guess correctly, I keep your $10k and you do not play at all"

You say "Yes" without thinking?!?!?

Obv, only a complete donkey wouldn't take that deal!!!

If I could have that deal and that chance a 100 times then it's a no brainer and I'd have to take it.

Even if I could have that deal and that chance 20 to 30 times, it would be worth a risk.

If I could have 9 or 10 times it might be worth a risk.

But if I ever get the chance I'm only likely to enter a $10k tournament 2 or 3 times in my life - the odds don't look so good - how low must your faith in your post flop playing ability be to take such a risk?

OK, now say you only have 1 shot in a tourney like that...do you really think that you should not play Aces pre-flop if you only get 1 shot at something?

One shot ever.

(a) I'd rather rely on my skill on outplaying people over several hands than risking it all on one.
(b) If they were better than me I would still be more content knowing that they played better than me and took my chips through skill a bit at a time (or even all in one go if they went in post flop) rather than gambling all your chips when you only know 40% of your hand. Most hands get won by more than one pair - so why gamble when that's all you're holding?

One hand early in the tournament isn't going to win you the tournament - the same situation later in the tournament is an entirely different proposition. Then it is worth gambling a bit more because winning a single pot at a later stage could make the difference between a deep finish and winning the tournament  -  but early on, I'm too cautious to gamble.

This is me: -
 

Gives you so many positives its unreal though. Beat insurance, power, more choices from every decision from then on, greater implied odds versus deep stack american fish. I like to think of it as the first step to a 150k finishing stack @ end of day 1. Also, what leknave says is spot on about John Kabbaj and running bad, goes to next tournament. We shouldnt alter our strategy just because of stakes etc, we should make the call because its so massively +EV and in the long run is makes the most money.

[Royal Flush]

(a) I'd rather rely on my skill on outplaying people over several hands than risking it all on one.

How often do you get to 6x your starting stack?

[Jon MW]

(a) I'd rather rely on my skill on outplaying people over several hands than risking it all on one.

How often do you get to 6x your starting stack?

Irrelevant.

If the players I'm playing against are better than me, I'd rather they prove it by taking my chips through skill rather than luck.

Nobody wants to get knocked out - but if I have to be, then I'd rather be out played than out donked.

[Karabiner]

(a) I'd rather rely on my skill on outplaying people over several hands than risking it all on one.

How often do you get to 6x your starting stack?

Irrelevant.

If the players I'm playing against are better than me, I'd rather they prove it by taking my chips through skill rather than luck.

Nobody wants to get knocked out - but if I have to be, then I'd rather be out played than out donked.

If the players you're playing against are better than you, surely you would be better off gambling.

[Royal Flush]

(a) I'd rather rely on my skill on outplaying people over several hands than risking it all on one.

How often do you get to 6x your starting stack?

Irrelevant.

If the players I'm playing against are better than me, I'd rather they prove it by taking my chips through skill rather than luck.

Nobody wants to get knocked out - but if I have to be, then I'd rather be out played than out donked.

lolz

Obviously we are coming from 2 different points here, you are talking about playing a $10k event for enjoyment stakes, i am nowhere near having a bankroll to play a $10k event for a laugh so given my motivation is money i have to call.

[Jon MW]

(a) I'd rather rely on my skill on outplaying people over several hands than risking it all on one.

How often do you get to 6x your starting stack?

Irrelevant.

If the players I'm playing against are better than me, I'd rather they prove it by taking my chips through skill rather than luck.

Nobody wants to get knocked out - but if I have to be, then I'd rather be out played than out donked.

If the players you're playing against are better than you, surely you would be better off gambling.

hmm well yes, but ...

there is also a fundamental difference in approach depending on what you're hoping to get out of playing.

I'm not playing to make a living, I'm playing for fun.

If I have a table full of champions - it would be quite nice to outdraw them and win some chips, but it would be many, many times more satisfying to mix it up and play some hands - and win some chips this way. In the course of this, there is a fair chance that it would all go horribly long and I'd get knocked out - but at least I would have gone down fighting rather than just from shoving all my chips in pre flop and praying.


I can see how the different view point between the pro and the amateur is going to sometimes have a fundamental effect on strategy (the amateur is more likely to let the higher stakes get in the way for example) but shouldn't the pro's be the one's with confidence in their skill winning out over gambling?

EDIT: and if I was playing a $10k event for enjoyment stakes - it's because I've won a satellite (probably a freeroll)

[Royal Flush]

but shouldn't the pro's be the one's with confidence in their skill winning out over gambling?

A pro's biggest edge in a tournament is knowing he has to gamble and when to do so, a 40% shot at a 6x up is an edge no-one in the world has, so i would have to wing it in.

[MANTIS01]

Posted by: Jon MW

Nobody wants to get knocked out - but if I have to be, then I'd rather be out played than out donked.

I really would prefer to get out donked than out played every time. Playing well and losing is a more satisfying alternative than playing badly and losing imo. Also I don't think being out played constitutes having fun.

This is a massive tournament and odds are you are going to be faced with big and scary decisions throughout. Players forcing you to fold big hands right from the very start doesn't seem like the right mindset to get into for this. First hand or last hand doesn't matter so much really.

[LOJ]

KK goes in the bin.  Thats only cos Im scared money!  Might even turn my hand over before I decide to get a reaction out of him, heard u can do that these days.....

AA, OOOO tough one but I think I would call that one...

have i played you in Walsall festival? You deffo were not scared money and im still suprised at all the folders.

No dont think so.  Only played once in Walsall and that was the APAT thingy....

[LuckyLloyd]

CALL you nits.

[boldie]

CALL you nits.

WB Lloyd

[TheChipPrince]

Same question with Queens? or does the shove stink of AK and we dont wanna race?