If the short stack or any stack for that matter pushes all in and two or more players call, you do not bet into a dry pot... ever. There is absolutly no value in doing so - the only time it is acceptable is if you have the absolute nuts. There is no value in better your marginal hand when the other players hand may improve and be the hand that knocks the player out.
This is common sense, I dont understand why people don't understand this simple concept. For example, I played in a Sit-n-Go with 6 friends yesterday, the buy-in was $20 and we started with huge stacks.
I play very tight knowning that when I do get hands, I will be payed off. We get down to the final three, my stack is about 10% smaller than the chip leader - the small stack pushes all in on the button, I call for about 20% of my stack with As/7s - the big stack pushes all in... such a ridiculous play, I have no choice but to fold. The big stack turns over 10d/9d and the short stack shows Ks/10c. The short stack triples up.
The worst play in poker. I finished in 2nd place. I'm still upset.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
sorry bro, don't cry you'll bust me next time... lol
I actually think that I disagree with you based on the example here here.
What the other big stack did not bluff any empty side pot. What he did was get a whole bunch of dead money into a pot with little risk.
Howard Lederer talks about this on his DVD. The big stack can put you on a hand that doesn't want to raise him out so he can raise all-in to isolate the all-in player. He can be pretty sure you will fold, so he can get all of your call in the pot - to give him a great shot (heads up) to win in a situation with about 3:1 on his money. If the small stack had a hand like pocket 55s or AQ, the big stack knows he is getting a good price (he will be a 50/50 against the underpair and 2:1 dog against the overcards). I really like his play here because if he was going to play he set himself up to win against only one player -a much easier feat with his hand.
What I think your post is referring to is a situation where you and the big stack sees the flop. Then he pushes all-in after you both miss it. Bluffing an empty side pot is STUPID. :)
There is more value in eliminating a player and moving up in the money. You have to also consider that your isolating for the initial raiser and giving him odds that make his play profitable.
Espcially if your holding 10/9, you could easily be dominated(he was) or have under cards to a middle pair... this is a bad play, plain and simple.
This is not a bad play though. Its a great play.
He got a shot at your money with no risk.
Okay so the worst case scenarios: if he is dominated he is about 25% to win, 3:1. Or if he has undercards he is about 33% to win, 2:1. He is getting sufficient odds to call here only if he gets you out. If he wants to play his hand his best play is to get the hand heads up so at worst he is making a break even play. At best he is 50/50 to get 3x the chips he invested.
Download Howard Lederer's 2nd DVD, More Secrets for No Limit Texas Hold'em. He explains this exact situation. I just rewatched it to make sure I wasn't going crazy. :P
This would be a good play in a cash game, not in a tournament - I don't care what Howard Lederer says.
We are on the bubble for the payout and you are giving the short stack to go from short, to huge.
I understand what your saying, he did give himself odds - but he also gave the shortstack odds because now any hand the shortstack is +EV.
Tournament poker is not about putting a large portion of your chips on marginal edges.
"In tournament poker, pot odds isn't always the most important factor in deciding whether to play a hand. It goes out the window a lot of times because you can't go back to your pocket for more chips - and that should be a determining factor in each and every hand. You should take the math into consideration, yes, but if that's all you're thinking about - and you forget about the fact that if you don't win the pot, you either will be out of the tournament or will take a big hit to your stack - you are putting too much importance on it. Your thinking in critical tournament situations has to be different from how you think in a side game."
-T.J. Cloutier
I'm in agreement with Bruno and T.J. on this one. I tried convincing itz about how its a good move for a cash game but he also makes the same points as andrew and howard lederer I guess. It's best to just agree to disagree on this one as its two very different styles. Of course, my style is the best, but there is no way I can teach you guys it.
Post a Comment