No Limit betting question

[Lebowski Brickowski]

My buddy took me to a long-standing tournament last night. This thing has been going on for like 8 years. It’s my first time to play there. I'm the "new-guy" last night

I’m a VERY inexperienced tournament player. I only have ever played small, neighborhood cash games.

Anyway, I won the whole damn thing.

But afterwards, my buddy jumped down my throat a bit about a move I made.

Brief rundown:
Final Table: 10 players

I have A 10 spades:

I raise and the short-stack calls all-in.

After the round, there are 4 of us left in the hand.

Flop is Q 10 7 w/ one spade

I figure I might not have the strongest hand but I have a decent draw and with a big bet I’m comfortable making it hard for someone else to try to hit his straight, and I’m comfortable going heads up vs. the all-in b/c he had been making terrible moves all night, throwing his chips around and catching some breaks. Also, I've folded every hand for the last 45 minutes and these people have already started respecting my pre and post flop moves.

I raise 10 thousand

Apparently, I should NOT have raised here. Instead, according to my buddy, everyone should have checked to the river so there would be the greatest chance of eliminating the small stack. Apparently, by opening up a side pot, I broke some unspoken tournament rule, especially seeing as how I didn’t have a monster hand.

I end up hitting the set and beating a straight draw who had the best pre-flop hand.

He couldn’t convince me that I made a breach of etiquette and that he wasn’t just upset that he folded his straight-draw.

Does this make any sense to anyone?

[Drachen]

My buddy took me to a long-standing tournament last night. This thing has been going on for like 8 years. It’s my first time to play there. I'm the "new-guy" last night

I’m a VERY inexperienced tournament player. I only have ever played small, neighborhood cash games.

Anyway, I won the whole damn thing.

But afterwards, my buddy jumped down my throat a bit about a move I made.

Brief rundown:
Final Table: 10 players

I have A 10 spades:

I raise and the short-stack calls all-in.

After the round, there are 4 of us left in the hand.

Flop is Q 10 7 w/ one spade

I figure I might not have the strongest hand but I have a decent draw and with a big bet I’m comfortable making it hard for someone else to try to hit his straight, and I’m comfortable going heads up vs. the all-in b/c he had been making terrible moves all night, throwing his chips around and catching some breaks. Also, I've folded every hand for the last 45 minutes and these people have already started respecting my pre and post flop moves.

I raise 10 thousand

Apparently, I should NOT have raised here. Instead, according to my buddy, everyone should have checked to the river so there would be the greatest chance of eliminating the small stack. Apparently, by opening up a side pot, I broke some unspoken tournament rule, especially seeing as how I didn’t have a monster hand.

I end up hitting the set and beating a straight draw who had the best pre-flop hand.

He couldn’t convince me that I made a breach of etiquette and that he wasn’t just upset that he folded his straight-draw.

Does this make any sense to anyone?


I have found that people who lose get angry. Especially when they fold a winning hand on their way to losing. It's best to use that for future rounds. If you fold a winning hand, and want to misdirect people about how you play, make it apparent what you folded after the hand is done, or lie and say you folded a bad hand, whatever suits your immediate purpose. It doesn't help you at all to get all pissed off. Anyway, you are there to win, not to make it more comfortable for other losers to feel better about themselves having a small hand in taking out the short stack. It sounds like you played this perfectly (especially the comment about how you had been folding hands left and right and now they respect your raises). Poker is a game of psychology as well as skill and luck, and as long as you followed the rules of poker (not some pussy extra kumbayah "lets take this guy out together" rules), then you have nothing to worry about.

[MannyIsGod]

Its kinda iffy. Middle pair isn't a very good hand with so many in the pot so I wouldn't bet because what are you going to do if you get raised? I think your play sucked and I can see why your buddy was annoyed.

The unspoken rule is kind of touch and go in this situation. With so many people in the pot you can't realistically expect everyone to just check it down unless they hit a huge hand.

On one hand though, if you want to be invited back its usually best not to stir the pot too much. Learn their unspoken rules and tend to stick to them or risk being told not to come back.

[MannyIsGod]

BTW, middle pair top kicker with a back door flush draw is not a good draw.

[Cry Havoc]

BTW, middle pair top kicker with a back door flush draw is not a good draw.

No hand is a "bad draw" if you play it right.

You always play the other people, not the cards. If everyone is limping in and trying to hang around, you are probably good to go. A 10 with that flop on the board has a number of outs if you're down early. An ace, another 10, a straight chance, and a flush draw. Even a queen helps him here if no one else has paired the ladies.

If no one else on the board was claiming the queen, he's very likely in good position there and a strong raise scares off any potential runner runner assholes on the river. More importantly, the flop likely means that no one has him locked out, unless there's a creeper hiding double Qs or 7s in the pocket. It's possible, but that's why you pay attention in a tournament like that, so you can make calls based on how other people have been playing it. It would be really hard to limp in with a set when there's both a flush and a straight draw on the board... if someone had three of a kind, they'd be pushing HARD to get people who were on the draw to knock them out of the hand.

Basically, it's a judgment call, and it's more about intuition. So if you think you had the hand won (or you could get others to fall out), even without the set, it's a good call.

As for the folkways of the tournament that your friend was claiming, screw that. You play a tournament to win. TO WIN. That's all that matters. As long as you aren't slow rolling someone, don't worry about it. People who need "help" (i.e., your check) to chop a cripple's leg off shouldn't be playing tournament poker in the first place.

[mookie2001]

need to get another GTG pokernight, i would have to show manny the INEZ SUPERSYSTEM

[MannyIsGod]

No hand is a "bad draw" if you play it right.

You always play the other people, not the cards. If everyone is limping in and trying to hang around, you are probably good to go. A 10 with that flop on the board has a number of outs if you're down early. An ace, another 10, a straight chance, and a flush draw. Even a queen helps him here if no one else has paired the ladies.


Sorry dude, but this is terrible terrible terrible. Passive players that limp in in live games almost always hang around - especially if they have any piece of the flop. Bottom pair, gutshot, backdoor draws - it doesn't matter - they're going to call.

Building a multiway pot with a marginal hand is one of the worst mistakes you can make in any no limit game.




If no one else on the board was claiming the queen, he's very likely in good position there and a strong raise scares off any potential runner runner assholes on the river. More importantly, the flop likely means that no one has him locked out, unless there's a creeper hiding double Qs or 7s in the pocket. It's possible, but that's why you pay attention in a tournament like that, so you can make calls based on how other people have been playing it. It would be really hard to limp in with a set when there's both a flush and a straight draw on the board... if someone had three of a kind, they'd be pushing HARD to get people who were on the draw to knock them out of the hand.



CH, you sound incredibly easy to trap. Why can't someone be holding Queen/Rag? Because no one bet? Why can't someone be holding a set? Why can't someone have KJ?

Why would you want to knock someone off a draw here? If you have a set you want a draw to come along every single time as long as you make it a mistake for them to call with your bet size.

In any event, you're essentially playing this hand as a bluff because you don't want to go to a showdown. Bluffing against 4 others in a NL hand is pretty damn terrible in almost every situation.



Basically, it's a judgment call, and it's more about intuition. So if you think you had the hand won (or you could get others to fall out), even without the set, it's a good call.


As I said above, if you're playing to make them fold then you're playing a bluff and bluffing into four others is just about one of the biggest leaks I can think of.



As for the folkways of the tournament that your friend was claiming, screw that. You play a tournament to win. TO WIN. That's all that matters. As long as you aren't slow rolling someone, don't worry about it. People who need "help" (i.e., your check) to chop a cripple's leg off shouldn't be playing tournament poker in the first place.

In many situations you up your chances more by checking it down and almost always ensuring the player is knocked out then by chancing letting him basically quadruple his stack.

In fact I think its in most. You def don't have enough equity with middle pair TK to make the bet worthwhile when you consider that.

[Drachen]

No hand is a "bad draw" if you play it right.

You always play the other people, not the cards. If everyone is limping in and trying to hang around, you are probably good to go. A 10 with that flop on the board has a number of outs if you're down early. An ace, another 10, a straight chance, and a flush draw. Even a queen helps him here if no one else has paired the ladies.

If no one else on the board was claiming the queen, he's very likely in good position there and a strong raise scares off any potential runner runner assholes on the river. More importantly, the flop likely means that no one has him locked out, unless there's a creeper hiding double Qs or 7s in the pocket. It's possible, but that's why you pay attention in a tournament like that, so you can make calls based on how other people have been playing it. It would be really hard to limp in with a set when there's both a flush and a straight draw on the board... if someone had three of a kind, they'd be pushing HARD to get people who were on the draw to knock them out of the hand.

Basically, it's a judgment call, and it's more about intuition. So if you think you had the hand won (or you could get others to fall out), even without the set, it's a good call.

As for the folkways of the tournament that your friend was claiming, screw that. You play a tournament to win. TO WIN. That's all that matters. As long as you aren't slow rolling someone, don't worry about it. People who need "help" (i.e., your check) to chop a cripple's leg off shouldn't be playing tournament poker in the first place.


Thank you CH, perfectly put. If you want to get better, you want to play with people who are trying to win the tournament, not people who want handicapping rules to cover one or all of their lack of skill, balls, or intuition. Will you lose more playing with good players, yes. If you LEARN from that situation, then you will be better for it.

[MannyIsGod]

need to get another GTG pokernight, i would have to show manny the INEZ SUPERSYSTEM

Come to NM and I'll take you to the casinos around here. The locals...well...they might as well all walk around ATM signs around their neck.

[Muser]

You won who the fuck cares about some etiquette.

[MannyIsGod]

It really depends on stack size, but the reason that is a unspoken rule is because in many situations where you have a 3 way pot it is far more beneficial to all involved to check it down and maximize the number of hands at the end in order to knock out the AI.

You guys keep talking about playing "to win" but that IS the play to win a lot of the time. The more people you add to the pot the dicier it gets and if there is already an appreciable side pot then it also changes this (getting someone to fold and winning a side pot may appreciably increase your chances more than knocking a person out depending on stack sizes etc) but its typically sound.

[Drachen]

I had a guy offer to fight me because we were heads up, I was short stack (not by a ton though), and he kept pushing me out of the pot with crap because he was betting big. When he had a hand, he would bet more conservatively. He did this for 7 straight hands. I was tired of it, so I got a pair of ducks, he raised a huge amount pre-flop, then the flop came out deuce, K, J. He raised again, I reraised and then he pushed me all in. Yes he had nothing, I came out on top and he was on tilt so I took him out 3 hands later. He got all pissed about me calling his raise on a lowly pair of ducks, I told him that his cards had been showing for 7-8 hands already (then explained what this meant). He wanted to fight and ended up getting thrown out.

If I play the cards, I slowly blind out, unless I get lucky and pull a good (better) hand one of the times he pulls a good hand. If I play the player I win (and I did).

[MannyIsGod]

I had a guy offer to fight me because we were heads up, I was short stack (not by a ton though), and he kept pushing me out of the pot with crap because he was betting big. When he had a hand, he would bet more conservatively. He did this for 7 straight hands. I was tired of it, so I got a pair of ducks, he raised a huge amount pre-flop, then the flop came out deuce, K, J. He raised again, I reraised and then he pushed me all in. Yes he had nothing, I came out on top and he was on tilt so I took him out 3 hands later. He got all pissed about me calling his raise on a lowly pair of ducks, I told him that his cards had been showing for 7-8 hands already (then explained what this meant). He wanted to fight and ended up getting thrown out.

If I play the cards, I slowly blind out (unless I get lucky and pull a good (better)) hand one of the times he pulls a good hand. If I play the player I win (and I did).

:lol

I'm all for making stands. That was a stupid one. Congrats on winning.

[Drachen]

:lol

I'm all for making stands. That was a stupid one. Congrats on winning.

Like I said, when you can pretty much see the guy's cards, its not making a stand, its a smart play. Sad part is, he could have beat me because he was playing decent, then as soon as we got heads up, he started to pull this crap.

Put me in the same situation and I will make the same move 100 out of 100 times.

Could I have waited for a better hand to "make the stand"? Sure. Could I have been caught waiting until it was too late. Absolutely.

[Cry Havoc]

Sorry dude, but this is terrible terrible terrible. Passive players that limp in in live games almost always hang around - especially if they have any piece of the flop. Bottom pair, gutshot, backdoor draws - it doesn't matter - they're going to call.

Building a multiway pot with a marginal hand is one of the worst mistakes you can make in any no limit game.

Which is exactly why you make it EXPENSIVE for them to limp in. Your method allows people to have free cards when they are (likely) holding nothing, not even a pair. If they're ALWAYS going to call, they probably won't be sitting at the final table, because you just sit on a good hand and then punish them. Good players are going to turn loose of hands if it's too expensive for them to shoot for a runner runner, or they need one of about 8 cards in the deck on the river.

I don't understand why you think limpers are so adamant about calling -- that's why they're called limpers! They're trying to check for cheap cards. You push limpers over, not check them to keep them in the pot.


CH, you sound incredibly easy to trap. Why can't someone be holding Queen/Rag? Because no one bet? Why can't someone be holding a set? Why can't someone have KJ?

And you sound like you only play a hand when you're 100% positive it's the best at the table. How often does that happen? Once every 40 or 50 hands?

Again, it's a judgment call. He'd been folding for a solid 45 minutes. The other players at the table are going to respect his hand with a flush/straight draw out on the flop. When he raises, he's representing something tough to the other players -- which is why the limpers will often lay down here.


Why would you want to knock someone off a draw here? If you have a set you want a draw to come along every single time as long as you make it a mistake for them to call with your bet size.

Because if they HIT that draw, your set is trash. A straight OR a flush beats a set, you realize this, correct? You let a someone who's just check/calling and hanging around stay in the pot for cheap, suddenly you're sitting across from a hand that's completely got you beat, and you find it really hard to muck it because you were recently top hand on the table.


In any event, you're essentially playing this hand as a bluff because you don't want to go to a showdown. Bluffing against 4 others in a NL hand is pretty damn terrible in almost every situation.

He's bluffing? There's ONE over card on the table, and even if someone hits that with a queen in the pocket, there's a good chance you can make them think they're beat too, with what's on the table. This is why situational, positional play is so important, and the pre-flop betting is the absolute key to the game. From the sound of it, no one was making any strong moves to push other people out of the pot, which means at the worst he's got to beat a pair of ladies, and has several outs to do so, even if the other person calls out his two 10s.


As I said above, if you're playing to make them fold then you're playing a bluff and bluffing into four others is just about one of the biggest leaks I can think of.

2nd high pair with an ace in the pocket, a straight, and a flush draw on the table is a bluff to you? What do you do with the other 8 hours in a poker game you play in where you muck your hand because you aren't dealt pocket aces or kings?


In many situations you up your chances more by checking it down and almost always ensuring the player is knocked out then by chancing letting him basically quadruple his stack.

Again, it all depends. He called all-in already on the first raise, which means his back was to the wall and he was probably relatively desperate, playing something like J-8 suited or maybe a baby suited connector.


In fact I think its in most. You def don't have enough equity with middle pair TK to make the bet worthwhile when you consider that.

Even though he'd been folding for 45 minutes? Manny, I see what you're thinking but you're only playing the cards, not the people. When he raised pre-flop and then on the flop, he was representing either a pair of queens or something even better. Most players who are trying to just hang around are going to fall out when there's a pre-flop raise and then another raise by the same player on the flop, particularly if that player has been playing very tight.

[Cry Havoc]

:lol

I'm all for making stands. That was a stupid one. Congrats on winning.

Player. Not cards.

It doesn't count as a "stand" when you wait to flop a nut flush from Big Slick and turn down everything else.

[MannyIsGod]

You picked almost the worst hand in the world to pull that move and you did it after a flop which makes it even worse. Its good you had a read but why don't you do it before the flop?

Its not about being blinded out or playing the way you did, because IMO both are bad. There are better alternatives and that doesn't mean you have to be "blinded out".

No one listens when I talk poker on here though so :lol . I learned my lesson and stopped talking about it on here for a long time but I got sucked in today.

[Cry Havoc]

You picked almost the worst hand in the world to pull that move and you did it after a flop which makes it even worse. Its good you had a read but why don't you do it before the flop?

He did. He got massively raised pre-flop and called.


Its not about being blinded out or playing the way you did, because IMO both are bad. There are better alternatives and that doesn't mean you have to be "blinded out".

You don't always have the option to sit and wait on a great hand, especially in heads-up. Chances are, when you hit it, your opponent will have rags and just fold you the BB or SB. Then you make nothing on him.


No one listens when I talk poker on here though so :lol . I learned my lesson and stopped talking about it on here for a long time but I got sucked in today.

Poor Manny, no one listens to him. :lol

[Drachen]

You picked almost the worst hand in the world to pull that move and you did it after a flop which makes it even worse. Its good you had a read but why don't you do it before the flop?

Its not about being blinded out or playing the way you did, because IMO both are bad. There are better alternatives and that doesn't mean you have to be "blinded out".

No one listens when I talk poker on here though so :lol . I learned my lesson and stopped talking about it on here for a long time but I got sucked in today.


Ok, well then, thank you for your expertise. If I need to know statistics on the fly about what possibility I have of winning a hand based on the cards on the table, I really (not sarcastically) think that you would be the guy to go to. However since each hand isn't played in a vacuum and is related to every other hand that has been played I have to stick with my way of playing the player.

[Stringer_Bell]

You won who the fuck cares about some etiquette.

This.

A bet is a bet, and if the other players don't want to partake they can fold. "Oh, but they might not invite you back"...big fuckin deal, you'll always be the n00b that came in and beat them on the first try. HOWEVER, it needs to be said that if they didn't raise issue with you about it and it was only your friend that brought it up - take his advice. But if the others bitched, fuck 'em and take their fuckin' money.

[Lebowski Brickowski]

No hand is a "bad draw" if you play it right.

You always play the other people, not the cards. If everyone is limping in and trying to hang around, you are probably good to go. A 10 with that flop on the board has a number of outs if you're down early. An ace, another 10, a straight chance, and a flush draw. Even a queen helps him here if no one else has paired the ladies.

If no one else on the board was claiming the queen, he's very likely in good position there and a strong raise scares off any potential runner runner assholes on the river. More importantly, the flop likely means that no one has him locked out

That's where I was coming from. The thing where I could have messed up is that IF there was QQ somewhere, or even a nut str8, the people that I would have made on those hands all chked after the flop (I guess according to the house rule.) I misread that as weakness, not kindness, and it could have bit me. Fortunately, my big raise folded the guy who WOULD have hit the (low) str8 (my friend) and the high str8 didn't hit.

The hand set me up for my run.

[Canibspur]

Yes you shouldve checked middle pair on the flop. Simply bc at that point you dont know what anyone else has, including the all in player. He couldve pushed with QT and then youdve been dominated.

The whole purpose of checking is to have everyones hole cards have a chance to knock the all in player out. In a tourny this is always the proper play bc the common goal is to knock out whos all in, putting you and everyone else left closer to the money.

Youre friend is wrong by saying you should always check it down when there is an all in. Everyone, theoretically, should check until they have a made hand, two pair or better. Anything less shouldnt be bet. You may be good with your ten on the flop but what if the all in hit the queen? Then what if your bet makes whoever hit the 7 fold and he wouldve hit 2 pair on the river? He wouldve knocked out the all in but instead your bet just got the all in 5x his chips to start the hand! Bad.

It can get much more complicated than this but this is the simplest I can explain it to you or anyone with the same question. Hope it makes sense to you and helps you improve your tournament play. Congrats on the win tho.


PS... some doucher is going to complain about something at every tourny. You have those players that think bc the watch it on tv they have learned it all, usually those are the biggest fish and easy money. Just figure out what they say youre "supposed" to do and use it against them to take their money.

[Cry Havoc]

That's where I was coming from. The thing where I could have messed up is that IF there was QQ somewhere, or even a nut str8, the people that I would have made on those hands all chked after the flop (I guess according to the house rule.) I misread that as weakness, not kindness, and it could have bit me. Fortunately, my big raise folded the guy who WOULD have hit the (low) str8 (my friend) and the high str8 didn't hit.

The hand set me up for my run.

Which is why I hate rules like that in general. Slow rolling makes sense because you're deliberately attempting to piss someone off, and it's poor sportsmanship.

So now you're confused because rather than playing the cards or the players, you have to worry about their motives via some unwritten tourney rule. It's stupid, and it can definitely be taken advantage of.

[Cry Havoc]

Yes you shouldve checked middle pair on the flop. Simply bc at that point you dont know what anyone else has, including the all in player. He couldve pushed with QT and then youdve been dominated.

Of course you know what other people have. That's the point of paying attention on the pre-flop betting. If you can't judge someone's hand (this late in the tourney) with relative certainty by the end of the 2nd round of betting, you're doing it wrong.


The whole purpose of checking is to have everyones hole cards have a chance to knock the all in player out. In a tourny this is always the proper play bc the common goal is to knock out whos all in, putting you and everyone else left closer to the money.

He won anyway. You're telling me with a flush or a full house that you should check just to make sure that the short stack gets knocked out? Please. If people are that unsure of their hand beating a guy who's tapped out just to make the first raise, they shouldn't be in the hand.


Youre friend is wrong by saying you should always check it down when there is an all in. Everyone, theoretically, should check until they have a made hand, two pair or better. Anything less shouldnt be bet. You may be good with your ten on the flop but what if the all in hit the queen? Then what if your bet makes whoever hit the 7 fold and he wouldve hit 2 pair on the river? He wouldve knocked out the all in but instead your bet just got the all in 5x his chips to start the hand! Bad.

You can play "what ifs" all day. The side pot isn't going to go to the short stack, he can't win anything after he's tapped anyway. If that's the rule, then no one with less than a pocket pair or a couple of face cards should even play, because they're increasing the amount of money the guy who's all-in can win.

[Canibspur]

Of course you know what other people have. That's the point of paying attention on the pre-flop betting. If you can't judge someone's hand (this late in the tourney) with relative certainty by the end of the 2nd round of betting, you're doing it wrong.



He won anyway. You're telling me with a flush or a full house that you should check just to make sure that the short stack gets knocked out? Please. If people are that unsure of their hand beating a guy who's tapped out just to make the first raise, they shouldn't be in the hand.



You can play "what ifs" all day. The side pot isn't going to go to the short stack, he can't win anything after he's tapped anyway. If that's the rule, then no one with less than a pocket pair or a couple of face cards should even play, because they're increasing the amount of money the guy who's all-in can win.


Please refer to the "doucher" reference in my last post.

I dont understand why youre getting so defensive? Did you not actually comprehend what i posted?
He asked a betting question and i gave my answer. Furthermore, i specifically said you should bet with a made hand. Middle pair is not a made hand with an all in. I dont know why you are acting like i said never bet with an all in in the hand. The best way to play that hand is to check down until you are strong. Pretty simple concept. Youre the type of player that thinks poker is mostly about the "moves" you do make rather than the patience in the moves you dont make. Continue losing your money. Im counting on you.

[Cry Havoc]

I dont understand why youre getting so defensive? Did you not actually comprehend what i posted?

How am I being defensive? I asked you a question about whether or not you should fold with a flush or full house because the unspoken rules state that you should stop betting if someone is tapped.


He asked a betting question and i gave my answer. Furthermore, i specifically said you should bet with a made hand.

Do you mean this as a general rule of practice? Of course you bet with a made hand. Do you play only when you've got a made hand though? This is an actual question.


I dont know why you are acting like i said never bet with an all in in the hand.

How am I acting like that? I'm disputing the notion that his friend is calling him out, when he actually made a pretty solid poker bet.


The best way to play that hand is to check down until you are strong. Pretty simple concept.

It's also just about the easiest player in the world to read. "Oh, Tony is betting this hand, he must have something good. I'll lay down my cards pre-flop so he doesn't get any money."

Does this concept include other people's hands as well? Because when you check holding a pair, and there are at least one or two other people at the table looking for a straight or a flush draw, is your hand somehow going to become stronger? Checking is for people who are ON a draw (or who want people to think they're on a draw), not for people whose hand is only going to get weaker if there are more people in the pot. That's why you don't ever just sit on a pocket pair unless you've flopped a set or a full boat, because even pocket aces aren't that strong against connecting/suited flops. You get a pair early (with a chance to take down the pot), you push people out of the hand EARLY, so they cannot beat you late. Pretty simple concept.

The "checking until I know I have everyone beat" is exactly what makes an average poker player average. There's nothing special about kicking everyone's ass with a set of aces on the flop, or a nut straight flush. It doesn't mean you have skill when you play hands that have a 90%+ chance of winning.


Youre the type of player that thinks poker is mostly about the "moves" you do make rather than the patience in the moves you dont make. Continue losing your money. Im counting on you.

As the OP had stated, he had been checking down and folding for 45 minutes. Had he said, "Well I was just calling/raising bets off left and right and for some reason I kept getting beat!" my attitude toward his play would have been much different. Of COURSE Hold'em is about patience and making confident bets when you know you've got your opponent staring down a set and you're sitting on a high flush. But it's also about nutting up and betting into a pot that you're not sure you've got licked, because you're reading your opponents and you think they're holding rags.

Some of the best plays I've ever made were because I simply decided not to play the hand with the cards I was dealt. So instead of the dealer throwing me a 6-4 off suit, I called in the big and decided that I was REALLY holding A-Q suited, and bet accordingly into a group of weak hands, and won some nice pots from them.

[Canibspur]

How am I being defensive? I asked you a question about whether or not you should fold with a flush or full house because the unspoken rules state that you should stop betting if someone is tapped.



Do you mean this as a general rule of practice? Of course you bet with a made hand. Do you play only when you've got a made hand though? This is an actual question.



How am I acting like that? I'm disputing the notion that his friend is calling him out, when he actually made a pretty solid poker bet.



It's also just about the easiest player in the world to read. "Oh, Tony is betting this hand, he must have something good. I'll lay down my cards pre-flop so he doesn't get any money."

Does this concept include other people's hands as well? Because when you check holding a pair, and there are at least one or two other people at the table looking for a straight or a flush draw, is your hand somehow going to become stronger? Checking is for people who are ON a draw (or who want people to think they're on a draw), not for people whose hand has a better chance of being weaker if there are more people in the pot.

The "checking until I know I have everyone beat" is exactly what makes an average poker player average. There's nothing special about kicking everyone's ass with a set of aces on the flop, or a nut straight flush. It doesn't mean you have skill when you're 99.9% sure you've got the other players beat.



As the OP had stated, he had been checking down and folding for 45 minutes. Had he said, "Well I was just calling/raising bets off left and right and for some reason I kept getting beat!" my attitude toward his play would have been much different. Of COURSE Hold'em is about patience and making confident bets when you know you've got your opponent staring down a set and you're sitting on a high flush. But it's also about nutting up and betting into a pot that you're not sure you've got licked, because you're reading your opponents and you think they're holding rags.

Some of the best plays I've ever made were because I simply decided not to play the hand with the cards I was dealt. So instead of the dealer throwing me a 6-4 off suit, I called in the big and decided that I was REALLY holding A-Q suited, and bet accordingly into a group of weak hands, and won some nice pots from them.


We are only talking about this specific pot he was involved in. Do you only play made hands in general? Cmon man, thats a whole different thread. You are wrong tho by saying this was a solid poker bet, only because of the circumstances tho. Had there been no all in, undoubtedly you play the hand differently. If its a cash game you play it toatally different as well. But in this hand at this tournament it was the wrong play. It was closer to bad than good. Its really not a big deal but it will improve his play.



ON a side note.... you play Poker with Tony too?

[Cry Havoc]

We are only talking about this specific pot he was involved in.

There's no such thing as "one pot" in a tournament game. His play was a function of how he was reading the other players over the past several hours, not a spot-check on his mathematical ability for calculating odds on the fly for winning that hand. He made a judgment call based on intuition, and he was right in doing so.

[Canibspur]

There's no such thing as "one pot" in a tournament game. His play was a function of how he was reading the other players over the past several hours, not a spot-check on his mathematical ability for calculating odds on the fly for winning that hand. He made a judgment call based on intuition, and he was right in doing so.


We will just have to agree to disagree.

[Lebowski Brickowski]

If I respected short stack to play his all in legitimately, I see that the easy road is to team up on the guy for cheap.

But that guy was the easiest read at the table. He was all over the place all night long and threw in all his chips more than once. When he hit, it was never b/c he made the right play. And that's how he ended up at the final table and that's how he ended up 1st out at the final table. People that play like that panic when their chips are down and will more often than usual try to buy the blinds, even though they're not rich enough to.

Basically, he had nothing and I knew it. He was the least of my worries and should have been the least of everyone's worries.

I saw a positional chance to stack some chips against some limpers, and I took it. I didn't care about the all-in.

[Cry Havoc]

We will just have to agree to disagree.

Yep. I will continue to play with intuition, and you will continue to win based on mathematical chances rather than skill.

[Cry Havoc]

If I respected short stack to play his all in legitimately, I see that the easy road is to team up on the guy for cheap.

But that guy was the easiest read at the table. He was all over the place all night long and threw in all his chips more than once. When he hit, it was never b/c he made the right play. And that's how he ended up at the final table and that's how he ended up 1st out at the final table. People that play like that panic when their chips are down and will more often than usual try to buy the blinds, even though they're not rich enough to.

Basically, he had nothing and I knew it. He was the least of my worries and should have been the least of everyone's worries.

I saw a positional chance to stack some chips against some limpers, and I took it. I didn't care about the all-in.

Exactly. Lebowski has learned to read his opponents. Sadly, some people think that isn't important in tournaments. :lol More money for us!

[MannyIsGod]

Which is why I hate rules like that in general. Slow rolling makes sense because you're deliberately attempting to piss someone off, and it's poor sportsmanship.

So now you're confused because rather than playing the cards or the players, you have to worry about their motives via some unwritten tourney rule. It's stupid, and it can definitely be taken advantage of.

Hmm, I'm not sure you know what slow rolling is.

[MannyIsGod]

This.

A bet is a bet, and if the other players don't want to partake they can fold. "Oh, but they might not invite you back"...big fuckin deal, you'll always be the n00b that came in and beat them on the first try. HOWEVER, it needs to be said that if they didn't raise issue with you about it and it was only your friend that brought it up - take his advice. But if the others bitched, fuck 'em and take their fuckin' money.

If I'm at a game where I think the players are bad I'm doing my best not to piss them off because I want to be invited back.

[MannyIsGod]

BTW I have a response on my laptop typed up for CH that I typed up while I was commuting via train this morning. The wifi went out before I could post it so when I post in a bit it might seem out of context.

[Cry Havoc]

Hmm, I'm not sure you know what slow rolling is.

Man, your eights are really nasty... I wasn't expecting you to have such a good hand.... especially when I've got a FULL HOUSE, SUCKER.


If I'm at a game where I think the players are bad I'm doing my best not to piss them off because I want to be invited back.

Do you want to win? Winning a tournament pisses people off a lot.

[MannyIsGod]

Which is exactly why you make it EXPENSIVE for them to limp in. Your method allows people to have free cards when they are (likely) holding nothing, not even a pair. If they're ALWAYS going to call, they probably won't be sitting at the final table, because you just sit on a good hand and then punish them. Good players are going to turn loose of hands if it's too expensive for them to shoot for a runner runner, or they need one of about 8 cards in the deck on the river.


Middle pair in a four way pot is never a good hand. Thats the most important point you're missing.



I don't understand why you think limpers are so adamant about calling -- that's why they're called limpers! They're trying to check for cheap cards. You push limpers over, not check them to keep them in the pot.
Sure, with a good hand. Once again four handed middle pair is not a good hand.




And you sound like you only play a hand when you're 100% positive it's the best at the table. How often does that happen? Once every 40 or 50 hands?
No I don't. In this situation I'm not going to be betting into four passive calling stations because its one of the worst possible plays you can make with a marginal hand.



Again, it's a judgment call. He'd been folding for a solid 45 minutes. The other players at the table are going to respect his hand with a flush/straight draw out on the flop. When he raises, he's representing something tough to the other players -- which is why the limpers will often lay down here.
He raised preflop and got four callers. Sure sounds like they're respecting his hands.



Because if they HIT that draw, your set is trash. A straight OR a flush beats a set, you realize this, correct? You let a someone who's just check/calling and hanging around stay in the pot for cheap, suddenly you're sitting across from a hand that's completely got you beat, and you find it really hard to muck it because you were recently top hand on the table.
[quote]

Who said let him hang around for cheap? You should go back and reread my post.

[quote]
He's bluffing? There's ONE over card on the table, and even if someone hits that with a queen in the pocket, there's a good chance you can make them think they're beat too, with what's on the table. This is why situational, positional play is so important, and the pre-flop betting is the absolute key to the game. From the sound of it, no one was making any strong moves to push other people out of the pot, which means at the worst he's got to beat a pair of ladies, and has several outs to do so, even if the other person calls out his two 10s.
When you bet in an attempt to make someone fold you're effectively bluffing. Why? Because you're not looking to get someone to a showdown and draw value from your bet you're looking to make them fold. This play and mindset are exactly the same whether you hold 23o or A10s with middle pair.

At worst you're behind to a set in which you're drawing nearly dead. A pair of queens is far from the worst possible hand you could be drawing against here. You're behind a straight flush draw - a pair of queens - two pair and sets. You basically beat nothing but a worse middle pair or bottom pair.

One of the biggest mistakes people make is not gauging the range of hands they beat. You're making that mistake here.




2nd high pair with an ace in the pocket, a straight, and a flush draw on the table is a bluff to you? What do you do with the other 8 hours in a poker game you play in where you muck your hand because you aren't dealt pocket aces or kings?
CH, I played poker for five years for a living and the last few years I played about 35% of my hands preflop very aggressively. What you're not understanding is that the number of others in the hand dramatically effects the aggression level you should play at.




Again, it all depends. He called all-in already on the first raise, which means his back was to the wall and he was probably relatively desperate, playing something like J-8 suited or maybe a baby suited connector.
LOL? Your hand range on the AI. Given the information above there's no reason to suspect J-8 or a hand that bad. More often than not he'll have a PP or Ax in this situation.

I wondering if OP can tell us. I'd be shocked if he didn't have at least Kx or Ax here.





Even though he'd been folding for 45 minutes? Manny, I see what you're thinking but you're only playing the cards, not the people. When he raised pre-flop and then on the flop, he was representing either a pair of queens or something even better. Most players who are trying to just hang around are going to fall out when there's a pre-flop raise and then another raise by the same player on the flop, particularly if that player has been playing very tight.I'm actually very much playing the people. All four of them. And the fact that after all his folding they still all called his raise preflop. A lot of respect he's getting right? All the reason to believe he's going to get it post flop, right?

[MannyIsGod]

Man, your eights are really nasty... I wasn't expecting you to have such a good hand.... especially when I've got a FULL HOUSE, SUCKER.



Do you want to win? Winning a tournament pisses people off a lot.

Winning a tournament in my experience doesn't piss people off. Breaking house rules, however, does. YMMV.

[MannyIsGod]

Yep. I will continue to play with intuition, and you will continue to win based on mathematical chances rather than skill.

:lol

There's more than one way to skin a poker cat. There are different play styles with varying levels of situational aggression that will earn similar win rates.

That being said, I've never seen a winning poker player who ignores the math aspect of the game. Never. The most aggressive players who mix things up are often the ones who have the best in depth knowledge on possible ranges and when to make the best out of marginal situations.

Reads are important, but reads are only there to help you narrow the range of possible hands.

[MannyIsGod]

Very simply put, CH. I've never once come across a winning player who advocates playing middle pair against a bunch of passive calling stations in a four handed situation in the manner you have.

[Cry Havoc]

Middle pair in a four way pot is never a good hand. Thats the most important point you're missing.

Objectively speaking, it's a good hand if it beats the other hands.


Sure, with a good hand. Once again four handed middle pair is not a good hand.

It is when everyone else is limping in with a couple of draws on the board.


No I don't. In this situation I'm not going to be betting into four passive calling stations because its one of the worst possible plays you can make with a marginal hand.

They're passively calling because they're waiting to make their own hand. Letting them hang around so they can punish you when they hit their draw is a horrible play.


He raised preflop and got four callers. Sure sounds like they're respecting his hands.

So someone on a good flush or straight draw or with suited connectors is going to lay down their hand just because one guy is raising pre-flop?


Who said let him hang around for cheap? You should go back and reread my post.

How would you have played the hand?


When you bet in an attempt to make someone fold you're effectively bluffing. Why? Because you're not looking to get someone to a showdown and draw value from your bet you're looking to make them fold. This play and mindset are exactly the same whether you hold 23o or A10s with middle pair.

No, it's not a bluff. It's you making a statement that your hand is better than their is presently, and you're going to make it very expensive for them to see the next card. A set of aces raising to a 4 card flush on the turn isn't bluffing.


At worst you're behind to a set in which you're drawing nearly dead. A pair of queens is far from the worst possible hand you could be drawing against here. You're behind a straight flush draw - a pair of queens - two pair and sets. You basically beat nothing but a worse middle pair or bottom pair.

Why would someone with a set be checking against a board that's got both a flush and a straight draw on it? Does that make any sense at all that a player with the best hand on the table would be checking to wait to see if his hand gets beat on the turn/river, rather than attempting to push out people who are trying to see cards for free?


One of the biggest mistakes people make is not gauging the range of hands they beat. You're making that mistake here.

You're not gauging the logic by which they would be betting with said hands. Someone with trips isn't going to look at a board with straight/flush possibilities and say, "Gee, maybe I should check to all these limpers". He's going to push. No one on the table was raising except for the OP.


CH, I played poker for five years for a living and the last few years I played about 35% of my hands preflop very aggressively. What you're not understanding is that the number of others in the hand dramatically effects the aggression level you should play at.


LOL? Your hand range on the AI. Given the information above there's no reason to suspect J-8 or a hand that bad. More often than not he'll have a PP or Ax in this situation.

As the OP has already stated, the SB was weak all night and was playing crazy, so it's likely he was impatient and just calling anything because he went on tilt from being in the short stack and was desperate to make something happen, and was hoping to get lucky.


I wondering if OP can tell us. I'd be shocked if he didn't have at least Kx or Ax here.

I'm actually very much playing the people. All four of them. And the fact that after all his folding they still all called his raise preflop. A lot of respect he's getting right? All the reason to believe he's going to get it post flop, right?

They called a single raise. Why would you stop raising at that point? You're basically saying, "Well, you won, I'm going to stop trying to force you out of the pot and give you a bunch of free cards now to see if you can land that straight or flush and beat me."



Very simply put, CH. I've never once come across a winning player who advocates playing middle pair against a bunch of passive calling stations in a four handed situation in the manner you have.

And I've never seen a winning player who says that you shouldn't vary your playstyle based on the way other people are playing. There are no hard and fast rules for Hold-Em. Do you think Doyle Brunson would ever say, "You know what? 7-4 off suit is a pretty solid hand that you should play in many situations."? No. But have I seen him play -- and win -- with that hand because he checked the table and decided it was worth taking a calculated risk to win a pot? Absolutely.

[MannyIsGod]

You're obviously not going to believe me, so I should just move on but betting middle pair into a four handed pot is a losing bet the vast majority of the time in a No Limit game of any type. I've never seen a winning player advocate a move like this.

[MannyIsGod]

And I've never seen a winning player who says that you shouldn't vary your playstyle based on the way other people are playing. There are no hard and fast rules for Hold-Em. Do you think Doyle Brunson would ever say, "You know what? 7-4 off suit is a pretty solid hand that you should play in many situations."? No. But have I seen him play -- and win -- with that hand because he checked the table and decided it was worth taking a calculated risk to win a pot? Absolutely.

I've never said you should never vary your playstyle. As for no hard and fast rules, you're welcome to believe whatever you'd like. Comparing the a hand played at a hand of professionals with a hand played with a bunch of loose passive players is pretty funny though.

[Cry Havoc]

You're obviously not going to believe me, so I should just move on but betting middle pair into a four handed pot is a losing bet the vast majority of the time in a No Limit game of any type. I've never seen a winning player advocate a move like this.

Have you ever seen a winning player knowingly bluff a superior hand? I have. Raising to a set when you're holding rags is a losing bet the VAST majority of the time too, but you see pros make the other guy muck his trip 7s because there's a busted straight on the board all the time.

[MannyIsGod]

Have you ever seen a winning player knowingly bluff a superior hand? I have. Raising to a set when you're holding rags is a losing bet the VAST majority of the time too, but you see pros make the other guy muck his trip 7s because there's a busted straight on the board all the time.

:lol

[MannyIsGod]

What percentage of a winning players gains come from bluffs, CH? Care to give a guess?

[Cry Havoc]

You're obviously not going to believe me, so I should just move on but betting middle pair into a four handed pot is a losing bet the vast majority of the time in a No Limit game of any type. I've never seen a winning player advocate a move like this.

And perhaps 90% of the time I would agree with you. This is an exception to that idea because of the situation presented by the OP. The SB was weak, and all the players on the table seemed like they were waiting to pair up or hit a straight or a flush.

[Cry Havoc]

What percentage of a winning players gains come from bluffs, CH? Care to give a guess?

It's not about the % of money you make from a bluff. It's about the order and the reputation you establish at the table for yourself.

Losing a bluff (which wasn't even really a bluff in this situation considering no one was betting into the pot) every so often is a lot better than never losing a bluff because you never take a shot at a winnable pot.

It also stands to reason that the OP was making a value bet. Since the pot was so large from several players being in it, even taking a stab at it and losing was worth the risk because the payoff was big.

[MannyIsGod]

And perhaps 90% of the time I would agree with you. This is an exception to that idea because of the situation presented by the OP. The SB was weak, and all the players on the table seemed like they were waiting to pair up or hit a straight or a flush.

Oh man. I've talked with hundreds of pros in my time and I don't think any of them ever exhibited the hand reading skills necessary for that kind of a judgment in a four handed situation.

[Cry Havoc]

Oh man. I've talked with hundreds of pros in my time and I don't think any of them ever exhibited the hand reading skills necessary for that kind of a judgment in a four handed situation.

You've sat a table for hours with other players, and you can't make four reads based on the way they are betting and the cards that are out on the board?

You still haven't answered my other question: Why would someone with top pair or a set be checking/calling to other players who are on a straight or a flush draw? He WON the hand with a set, so that means at MOST there was a high pair on the board (maybe two pair), in which case he read the hand exactly as he predicted.

[MannyIsGod]

It's not about the % of money you make from a bluff. It's about the order and the reputation you establish at the table for yourself.

Losing a bluff (which wasn't even really a bluff in this situation considering no one was betting into the pot) every so often is a lot better than never losing a bluff because you never take a shot at a winnable pot.

It also stands to reason that the OP was making a value bet. Since the pot was so large from several players being in it, even taking a stab at it and losing was worth the risk because the payoff was big.

Against good players I agree. Against the type of player that calls a raise with bad hand from a player who's been silent for almost an hour.

Never.

[MannyIsGod]

You've sat a table for hours with other players, and you can't make four reads based on the way they are betting and the cards that are out on the board?

You still haven't answered my other question: Why would someone with top pair or a set be checking/calling to other players who are on a straight or a flush draw?

If after a few hours (live averaging maybe 20 hands an hour so 60 hands) you have the hand reading skills you are portraying that should be standard you should move to Vegas and become a pro.


To check raise? To disguise their hand? Why would someone with top pair bet out each and every time? Considering the type of players they could have Qx (x being a rag) and they just want to call down for a show down.

I see that all time.

[Cry Havoc]

To check raise? To disguise their hand? Why would someone with top pair bet out each and every time? Considering the type of players they could have Qx (x being a rag) and they just want to call down for a show down.

I see that all time.

This would make sense if there wasn't a flush and a straight draw on the board. Why would you check raise or disguise a hand that's only going to potentially get weaker as the turn and the river come out? Why would you check/call to a hand that can have you drawing dead when the next card comes off?

You check/raise or slow call in a situation where you are trying to lure the other players in because if the hand goes to the river, it's not going to affect your chances of taking the pot much, because you've got the best hand on lock-down and you want as many people in the pot as possible. If you've only got a high pair or even trips and you're staring at a flop like that, you want people OUT of the pot, because they have a good chance of beating you if you let them stay in.

[MannyIsGod]

This would make sense if there wasn't a flush and a straight draw on the board. Why would you check raise or disguise a hand that's only going to potentially get weaker as the turn and the river come out? Why would you check/call to a hand that can have you drawing dead when the next card comes off?

You check/raise or slow call in a situation where you are trying to lure the other players in because if the hand goes to the river, it's not going to affect your chances of taking the pot much, because you've got the best hand on lock-down and you want as many people in the pot as possible. If you've only got a high pair or even trips and you're staring at a flop like that, you want people OUT of the pot, because they have a good chance of beating you if you let them stay in.

Its funny because on one hand you say these guys are bad then you expect them to have well thought out reasons for their actions. Bad players are bad players for many reasons and trying to act as if they only do these moves in the right situations is such a bad mistake.

I think your characterization of when to use a check/raise is bad to begin with, but its also besides the point (or when to call and disguise your hand for that matter).

You are correct to an extent in saying that you want people out of the pot because your hand is marginal but that doesn't mean its worth a bet. You have 2 cards to go and your hand does have some significant showdown value but if you bet and you are called by the person immediately after you the chances that the others call IF they have draws is much greater now because they can do so correctly.

So what do you do on the turn? Fire again? Check? If you check how does that make your hand look? Also the pot is much bigger now so if you fire again how much of your stack are you committing on a marginal hand if you haven't improved on the turn? What if its a scare card on the turn that completes a draw? What if a king peals off? You're looking at a big pot four handed with such a weak hand and you STILL have another round of betting to go.

PS - The questions posed are rhetorical.

[Cry Havoc]

Its funny because on one hand you say these guys are bad then you expect them to have well thought out reasons for their actions. Bad players are bad players for many reasons and trying to act as if they only do these moves in the right situations is such a bad mistake.

I didn't say they were bad. I said they were limping into the pot with hands that haven't been made yet.


I think your characterization of when to use a check/raise is bad to begin with, but its also besides the point (or when to call and disguise your hand for that matter).

Respectfully, it would be hard to encapsulate my philosophy on check/raising in a serious discussion in person, let alone in a few words online. Admittedly I could be a little more careful and articulate about how I would play in a more typical example.


You are correct to an extent in saying that you want people out of the pot because your hand is marginal but that doesn't mean its worth a bet. You have 2 cards to go and your hand does have some significant showdown value but if you bet and you are called by the person immediately after you the chances that the others call IF they have draws is much greater now because they can do so correctly.

But that's the read he made. He knew it was worth betting into because of how the other players were calling. Of course it's not something he absolutely needed to bet on, and I've agreed that it's not something he should do all the time, but in this case, this one instance, it made sense.


So what do you do on the turn? Fire again? Check? If you check how does that make your hand look? Also the pot is much bigger now so if you fire again how much of your stack are you committing on a marginal hand if you haven't improved on the turn? What if its a scare card on the turn that completes a draw? What if a king peals off? You're looking at a big pot four handed with such a weak hand and you STILL have another round of betting to go.

All the more reason to get them out of the pot as soon as possible. If they aren't going to fold even if they're beat, then you don't need to worry about them because you're going to eventually catch the nuts and wreck their stack anyway.

[ginobili's bald spot]

Sorry dude, but this is terrible terrible terrible. Passive players that limp in in live games almost always hang around - especially if they have any piece of the flop. Bottom pair, gutshot, backdoor draws - it doesn't matter - they're going to call.

Building a multiway pot with a marginal hand is one of the worst mistakes you can make in any no limit game.



CH, you sound incredibly easy to trap. Why can't someone be holding Queen/Rag? Because no one bet? Why can't someone be holding a set? Why can't someone have KJ?

Why would you want to knock someone off a draw here? If you have a set you want a draw to come along every single time as long as you make it a mistake for them to call with your bet size.

In any event, you're essentially playing this hand as a bluff because you don't want to go to a showdown. Bluffing against 4 others in a NL hand is pretty damn terrible in almost every situation.



As I said above, if you're playing to make them fold then you're playing a bluff and bluffing into four others is just about one of the biggest leaks I can think of.



In many situations you up your chances more by checking it down and almost always ensuring the player is knocked out then by chancing letting him basically quadruple his stack.

In fact I think its in most. You def don't have enough equity with middle pair TK to make the bet worthwhile when you consider that.



Don't tap the aquarium imo

[MannyIsGod]

Don't tap the aquarium imo


:toast

[midnightpulp]

It's also worth mentioning that it's hard to give the OP sound advice when we don't know what the pot size was relative to the blinds.

However, the standard play here is to check it down and hope to eliminate the short stack so everyone moves up in money. You actually want someone, even if it's not yourself, to make a strong hand to guarantee the short stack gets eliminated. If you make a big bet and force a hand like Q9 out only to lose to the short stack's JJ or Q3, you quadrupled up a player who had no business doing so and kept him in the tourney. A big bet in this situation should usually only be made with TPTK or stronger. Furthermore, MPTK isn't worth building and defending a side pot for.

And Cry Havoc's advice in this thread is terrible.

[midnightpulp]

This is why you don't want to knock out the field with a big bet. Assuming the shortstack pushed with the top 50% of possible hands, and your opponents called with the top 30%, here's your equity:


6,738,855,939 games 142.823 secs 47,183,268 games/sec

Board: Qs Tc 7d
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 34.464% 33.05% 01.42% 2227113655 95398686.00 { AsTs }
Hand 1: 20.439% 19.44% 01.00% 1309738590 67610115.33 { 22+, A2s+, K2s+, Q7s+, J8s+, T8s+, 98s, 87s, 76s, 65s, 54s, A9o+, K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+, T9o }
Hand 2: 22.530% 21.33% 01.20% 1437650885 80643916.33 { 22+, A2s+, K5s+, Q7s+, J8s+, T8s+, 98s, 87s, 76s, 65s, A7o+, K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+, T9o }
Hand 3: 22.567% 21.38% 01.18% 1441048301 79694727.00 { 22+, A2s+, K5s+, Q7s+, J8s+, T8s+, 98s, 87s, 76s, 65s, 54s, A7o+, K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+ }

Now if you knock the field out and get heads up with the shortstack, here's how the numbers change:

539,550 games 0.008 secs 67,443,750 games/sec

Board: Qs Tc 7d
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 69.212% 68.42% 00.79% 369186 4247.00 { AsTs }
Hand 1: 30.788% 30.00% 00.79% 161870 4247.00 { 22+, A2s+, K2s+, Q2s+, J3s+, T5s+, 95s+, 86s+, 75s+, 65s, A2o+, K4o+, Q6o+, J7o+, T7o+, 98o }


You're a 2 to 1 favorite to take the pot down, however your opponent is getting 3 to 1 on his money. Therefore, it's a HUGE mistake to get heads up with him. He stands to profit on the play in the long run. But by keeping everyone in, he's now more than a 3 to 1 dog, so it's -EV for him.

[MannyIsGod]

I can't even explain how effective bluff works here. Good luck explaining tournament EV.

[midnightpulp]

I can't even explain how effective bluff works here. Good luck explaining tournament EV.

How about explaining fold equity, the gap concept, and the fundamental theorem of poker? :lol

You post at 2+2?

[MannyIsGod]

Sup bro.

When I played more I did. I played for a living for about five years and I posted on there but I read and PMed more than I posted.

I always felt I had more to gain by reading there and listening than by offering my insights.

[Cry Havoc]

However, the standard play here is to check it down and hope to eliminate the short stack so everyone moves up in money. You actually want someone, even if it's not yourself, to make a strong hand to guarantee the short stack gets eliminated. If you make a big bet and force a hand like Q9 out only to lose to the short stack's JJ or Q3, you quadrupled up a player who had no business doing so and kept him in the tourney.

Did you read what the OP said? He knew the guy who was all-in had nothing, because he had been playing horribly all night.

[MannyIsGod]

Oh and the fundamental theorem of poker doesn't really apply here because after a few hours you always know what your opponent holds.

[midnightpulp]

Did you read what the OP said? He knew the guy who was all-in had nothing, because he had been playing horribly all night.

How can he be sure he holds "nothing?"

You can only put him on a range, and in this case, his opponent can be holding anything.

[midnightpulp]

Oh and the fundamental theorem of poker doesn't really apply here because after a few hours you always know what your opponent holds.

:lol

[ginobili's bald spot]

How can he be sure he holds "nothing?"


Bad players don't get cards obviously.



Furthermore, lol donkaments.

[MannyIsGod]

LOL Spurstalkaments

ZSINeUHLNw0

[AnthonyM]

I didn't read much after the first page here.

But it was a bad move. Simple as that.

[AnthonyM]

In that situation, you want to move up a place to move up in the cash. You're best bet with that is to have 4 hands in the pot after the river to up your odds of beating the player that is at risk for his tournament life. 5 vs 1 > 1 vs 1

You just got lucky that you ended up beating him.

You don't bet there unless you have a hand you don't want outdrawn there. Definitely not with mid-pair top kicker with a backdoor flush draw (which is a shitty draw and isn't even really considered a draw). It's called betting into a dead pot, you aren't betting to win the money on the flop there because you still have to go down to the river and showdown.

Your buddy was right and I would have been pissed too...again, you just got lucky that you still ended up beating him with a weak hand on the flop instead of knocking another player out that might have beaten him.

Also this is basic poker tournament knowledge, not necessarily a rule or secret between players. Funny too how people say "Play to win!" and advocate betting there. It's not the right play.

[AnthonyM]

Not to mention betting on the flop is either going to win you nothing on the flop (because you will get the money you bet back, and still have to go down to the river) or you're putting your money out there and basically saying "Take this money" (because you didn't have a good hand) and the only people that will call you or raise you there at a tournament like that are people that will EASILY have mid pair top kicker beat.

[AnthonyM]

Did you read what the OP said? He knew the guy who was all-in had nothing, because he had been playing horribly all night.

Lol, nothing with two cards to come...

[TDMVPDPOY]

ur friend and any complainers should go suck a dick

when gambling, there is no friend, family or foe, its every man for himself...

if the game is to hard? step back and go home

[AnthonyM]

ur friend and any complainers should go suck a dick

when gambling, there is no friend, family or foe, its every man for himself...

if the game is to hard? step back and go home

Still makes no sense. You're contradicting yourself by saying that any complainers should suck a dick (implying that fuck what they have to say) but then say its every man for himself.

If the OP had the "every man for himself" mentality then he would be looking to move up in the cash to get closer to winning the tournament (or at the very least making more money). Betting in the situation at question is not the right play because it lessens the OP's chances of making more money and/or knocking a player out.

That's what some people need to understand.

[Lebowski Brickowski]

I'm actually very much playing the people. All four of them. And the fact that after all his folding they still all called his raise preflop. A lot of respect he's getting right? All the reason to believe he's going to get it post flop, right?

By your rationale, everyone called the all-in, not my pre-flop raise, b/c everyone wanted to knock out the short stack. But not everyone called, 4 people called, 5 folded.

Short Stack had low-suited connectors and panicked w/ the blinds at 600-1200 w. only 2700 left in his stack. It was easy to put him on that play.

All in all- I think I made a bad play that worked out. My post-flop 10k raise knocked everyone else out but the guy with the high-str8 draw. He missed, but he had better odds than I did on the turn and the river.

Anyway -- thanks for the advice AnthonyM, CH, and MIG. I'm inexperienced in tournaments and the analysis can only help. I knew at the time that my play was a gamble, but I went for it anyway, based on the reads I made of the other players. My reads were thrown off by the fact that nobody re-raised the all-in but, fortunately, I threw everyone else off by representing a monster on my post-flop bet.

EDIT: also ty to cannabis and midnightpulp (even though you're a laker fan)

I've been out of town all weekend and away from the discussion but I haven't been able to get that play off my mind.

[Cry Havoc]

By your rationale, everyone called the all-in, not my pre-flop raise, b/c everyone wanted to knock out the short stack. But not everyone called, 4 people called, 5 folded.

Short Stack had low-suited connectors and panicked w/ the blinds at 600-1200 w. only 2700 left in his stack. It was easy to put him on that play.

All in all- I think I made a bad play that worked out. My post-flop 10k raise knocked everyone else out but the guy with the high-str8 draw. He missed, but he had better odds than I did on the turn and the river.

Anyway -- thanks for the advice AnthonyM, CH, and MIG. I'm inexperienced in tournaments and the analysis can only help. I knew at the time that my play was a gamble, but I went for it anyway, based on the reads I made of the other players. My reads were thrown off by the fact that nobody re-raised the all-in but, fortunately, I threw everyone else off by representing a monster on my post-flop bet.

EDIT: also ty to cannabis and midnightpulp (even though you're a laker fan)

I've been out of town all weekend and away from the discussion but I haven't been able to get that play off my mind.

This is a good post. It's also good that you're taking the right attitude -- not being all cocky just because you won the hand/tournament.

I don't think you made a horrible play. Not a great one (as others might think I was arguing for), but not horrible either. It's good that you weren't afraid to throw down and represent a bigger hand than you had. Just don't do it too often or good players will mark you. :lol

[AnthonyM]

By your rationale, everyone called the all-in, not my pre-flop raise, b/c everyone wanted to knock out the short stack. But not everyone called, 4 people called, 5 folded.

Short Stack had low-suited connectors and panicked w/ the blinds at 600-1200 w. only 2700 left in his stack. It was easy to put him on that play.

All in all- I think I made a bad play that worked out. My post-flop 10k raise knocked everyone else out but the guy with the high-str8 draw. He missed, but he had better odds than I did on the turn and the river.

Anyway -- thanks for the advice AnthonyM, CH, and MIG. I'm inexperienced in tournaments and the analysis can only help. I knew at the time that my play was a gamble, but I went for it anyway, based on the reads I made of the other players. My reads were thrown off by the fact that nobody re-raised the all-in but, fortunately, I threw everyone else off by representing a monster on my post-flop bet.

EDIT: also ty to cannabis and midnightpulp (even though you're a laker fan)

I've been out of town all weekend and away from the discussion but I haven't been able to get that play off my mind.

No problem. I wasn't trying to be mean, but it's good that you're taking the criticism well. Just remember that you only bet there if you have a hand that you don't want to get beat, not to try to win the hand. At least, those are the basics. You can get into EV and all that but that takes a little while you learn. Also, because he was terrible (and so short stacked) he's likely coming into the hand with a huge range of hands there, and could have anything...another reason why you want more hands in the hand to hopefully beat him in case he draws out on you.