QQ first hand WSOP

willis

there was discussions here about folding aces on the vey first hand of the WSOP if someone went all in. Well heres a very interesting article on a similar subject. youre opponent has gone all-in and has accidentallt flipped ak, you have qq and its the first hand of a $10,000 buy-in event. Do you call. Heres his points
http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_magazine/archives/showarticle.php?a_id=15093&m_id=65576

karlh

no

NickyOD

The only solid argument you could have for folding when you know you have QQ against AK is if you have a big stack against another big stack or if close to the money in a satelite with a flat payout structure. You should call there every time and have no regrets about it.

karlh

well its the first hand so its complete stack -vs- complete stack.

with such a ridiculously gentle structure there will be more than enough opportunities to get them in as a clearer favourite than this.

i would fold every single time and not because its the first hand of a tourney i've just paid 10,000 into.....which would be the reason for a lot of people folding i'd imagine.

handsfree

eh what kind of monky goes all in first hand of a tournament with a k. especially when all he has to gain is $50 if QQ folds

NickyOD

karlh wrote:

with such a ridiculously gentle structure there will be more than enough opportunities to get them in as a clearer favourite than this

There was a time when I'd agree and in a tournament where I can be sure of finding players I can exploit I would certainly try to avoid getting all my chips in preflop even in a situation where I have a slight edge, but the vast majority of players in this years WSOP never got their stack above 15K and most of those would be considered to be good and competent players.

This situation isn't like folding KK to a rereraise. This is a hand where you have a known edge.

mewso

O.k. we all know about pot odds and EV. To call is mathematically correct but I deffinately think the possibility of elimination should have an effect on your decision. You have no way of saying oh well if I keep calling these I'll win in the long run. Win what? You are out.

dvoakes

if you want to win. you have to play - so suck it up and just stick your chips in. if that's the case are you just going to wait for 5 or 6 rounds and let the blinds kill you. play your qq.

Mmmm_Lemony

Great article.

I agree with D above. You can only play the cards your given. You have to have a gamble it's the only way to win. I've never won any tourney playing like a ducks arse. Fair enough, if you've got crap you can't call. But QQ is an agressive hand and should be played. How many times have you seen pocket aces beat? Poker is a game of chance and gamble. When you get a good chance, gamble.

DocO

If the article is properly read then it answers both scenarios. for example you win your ticket online in a free roll, or through numerous feeders and you are in vegas looking for "the experience" then you will fold.
yet if you have any plans on making in roads in the tournament then you have to take the risks when your are mathemtically ahead. the fear of playing with the 10,000 entry fee should be left completely out of your mind, as playin scared will inhibit how you play.
If you have JJ and the board comes QJx , double suited and somehow you realise that one player has double ended str8 draw and one the flush draw, and it would involve all your chips goin in, do you now fold? it means your tournament will be finished if you lose . . . (first level 10,000 buy in)
the point i am tryin to make is that there is very little chance of goin tru a massive field of competitors without taking these risks. its part of poker and very necessary to allow you to seriously attack and enjoy (and have an even bettr experience of the event) than if you didnt take these risks.

willis

It all depends on the size and quality of the playing field imo. If it is the wsop then i think you cant lay the queens down,however if it is a 100 runner event where you feel you are in the top 10 players then i would fold, unless i saw it as a chance to take out one of the best players in the field i.e. i would not take the risk against a fish but maybe against a pro where u feel like you gotta exploit every single minute edge

Corben Dallas

QQ first hnd in WSOP against a >>visable<< AK

CALL CALL!!!! yur ahead, he has to hit. You've got to be prepared to take these risks if u have designs on getting a money finish.

QQ would be the min, JJ's I'd fold.

btw i would love to know how/why they are visable?

---

plus if u have QQ against Devore, you have got to fold those mothers.....

cause he'll have Aces grumble grumble....

DocO

Corben Dallas wrote:

btw i would love to know how/why they are visable?

We know they are visible because if you read the article in the very first post it says that he saw his opponents hand as he was checking them.

Good point Willis, perhaps you would consider laying them down in this situation, esp if you felt that you could outplay the majority of the field (considering a relatively small field, and more importantly for building up your stack immediately, the table your sitting on). Feeling that you have this type of ability in a field over 100 players and outside the tournaments that we always play (we being irish poker players, and my reasoning for this is to know you can out play an opponent you must know their game to a certain degree, and this is helped by if you have constantly played against them), then you are either seriously gifted and assured of your poker abililties, or seriously mis-led, and will not be a profitable player in the long run.

V good article though, really makes you re-assess what you are hoping to gain from a tournment before you enter it (To win/be willing to gamble vs guaranteed longer "experience")

mewso

So you would all also call with 22? I see this "If you want to win you must blah blah blah" stuff all the time and I'm not convinced. Talk to the current WSOP champion. Maybe ask him why he laid down so many hands at the final table? Man he really hurt his chances. Oh wait...

willis

musician wrote:

So you would all also call with 22? I see this "If you want to win you must blah blah blah" stuff all the time and I'm not convinced. Talk to the current WSOP champion. Maybe ask him why he laid down so many hands at the final table? Man he really hurt his chances. Oh wait...

Your in a field of 5,000 people, you have qq and you see he has ak. you fold?

mewso

I'm not sure. I probably would fold. My point is though that it's not as simple as a macho "you have to make the gamble" etc. etc. The arguement I hear oh so often.
Now you have 22 and he shows AK. You call?

cardshark202

Corben Dallas wrote:

QQ first hnd in WSOP against a >>visable<< AK

CALL CALL!!!! yur ahead, he has to hit. You've got to be prepared to take these risks if u have designs on getting a money finish.

QQ would be the min, JJ's I'd fold.

:eek: :eek: That makes no sense. If you'll call with QQ against AK, then why not JJ or even 22. Any pocket pair is ahead of AK so if you call with QQ then there is no excuse for folding 22.

Mmmm_Lemony

musician wrote:

Now you have 22 and he shows AK. You call?

There's a big difference between 22 and qq. I would fold 22 straight away. Without knowing what he had. But QQ, thats a different kettle of fish.

willis

musician wrote:

I'm not sure. I probably would fold. My point is though that it's not as simple as a macho "you have to make the gamble" etc. etc. The arguement I hear oh so often.
Now you have 22 and he shows AK. You call?

I agree with you fully, i hate putting th majority/all of my stack(when ive a healthy one) in on a coinflip situation. My initial answer to the question would be to fold the Queens, however after reading the article and the fact that there are so many runners i feel you have to call.

With regards 22,i would fold, simply because AK has slightly more of a chance aaginst 22 than qq, because the board could pair twice

Samba

This is a very subjective debate which reflects each individuals own style of play.

Tight passive players will strongly consider folding while aggressive with a play to win attitude are calling every time in this position.


Of course, with 22 you must consider the possibility of a double paired board which can hinder your ducks!

EDIT

fs willis!!!!

henbane

cardshark202 wrote:

Any pocket pair is ahead of AK so if you call with QQ then there is no excuse for folding 22.

equity (%)  	win (%)	tie (%) 
Hand  1:	50.0842 %  	49.77% 	00.31%      { AdKd }
Hand  2:	49.9158 %  	49.60% 	00.31%      { 2c2h, 2c2s, 2h2s }

[/pedantry]

Tourneque

This is roughly how the PP's rate against AK suited.

AKs 46-54 TT-QQ
AKs 48-52 55-99
AKs 49-51 44
AKs 50-50 22-33

It's a question of what edge you should be willing to push. I think most of the top tournament players would call instantly with TT+
If it were nearer to the bubble or a money jump then obviously this would have to be looked at differently.

Personally, i'd have some difficulty calling after buying in for $10K but I'd have no problem if I was playing within my bankroll.

Is there anyone who wouldn't call this if it were an STT ?

mewso

Samba wrote:

This is a very subjective debate which reflects each individuals own style of play.

Tight passive players will strongly consider folding while aggressive with a play to win attitude are calling every time in this position..

Good to know I'm a tight-passive player with a play to lose attitude. Almost half the time these "play to win" TAGs will of course be on the rails but hey they played with the spirit of a winner. Whenever I make a decision my stack size is a huge factor in tournaments. Will it cost all of my stack? Will it it badly damage my stack? Anyway we all differ but I don't consider myself a passive losing-obsessed player either way.

bohsman

http://twodimes.net/h/?z=1361238
pokenum -h 2c 2s - 6h 7h
Holdem Hi: 1712304 enumerated boards
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
2s 2c 774031 45.20 891821 52.08 46452 2.71 0.466
7h 6h 891821 52.08 774031 45.20 46452 2.71 0.534

I would call with QQ knowing my opponent had AK in any situation other than the flat pay out...

Samba

Good to know I'm a tight-passive player with a play to lose attitude. Almost half the time these "play to win" TAGs will of course be on the rails but hey they played with the spirit of a winner. Whenever I make a decision my stack size is a huge factor in tournaments. Will it cost all of my stack? Will it it badly damage my stack? Anyway we all differ but I don't consider myself a passive losing-obsessed player either way.

Woah, take a step back there and stop grabbing words from the back of my throat before I have even formed any sentence Muso.

Where did I mention that tight-passive players are losing players? Nowhere.

I am sure that aggressive players will call here every time and more passive players will simply bring in the possibility of folding in to the equation.

I never stated that either one is a winning or losing style of play.

I suggest you re-read my post and then reply

Fatboydim

I fold unless it's a $10 SnG online. Why? Because seeing the AK actually makes little or no difference. The question is do you want to put your whole tournament on the line for a coinflip... Even if he had 22 he could suck out on you. As long as no one else knew I had the queens, and I had not commited a large amount of chips already I would fold. Simply because I would fancy myself to be in a better position to get that player's chips later in the game.

And also because I think there are other mathematical equations at work here.

However on a final table I would do it all the time.

After all if poker was simply about mathematics Hellmuth would win every time :-)

RoundTower

I probably call even if it's me with the AK and the other guy shows QQ. Think about it, you could be chip leader in the main event of the WSOP. If you call and lose you have an extra 6 days holidays in Vegas in the sickest cash games in the world. There are 58 million chips to be accumulated, so you have to start somewhere.

NickyOD

2/3 of the field are going out on their first day. Passing up this edge now increases your chances of being one of those players and its likely you will be asked a question for all your chips on one or more occasions on Day 1 when you don't know you are a favourite.

Question: If you have AK and you know he has 78 suited, do you still fold?

RoundTower

Fatboydim wrote:

I fold unless it's a $10 SnG online. Why? Because seeing the AK actually makes little or no difference. The question is do you want to put your whole tournament on the line for a coinflip... Even if he had 22 he could suck out on you. As long as no one else knew I had the queens, and I had not commited a large amount of chips already I would fold. Simply because I would fancy myself to be in a better position to get that player's chips later in the game.

And also because I think there are other mathematical equations at work here.

However on a final table I would do it all the time.

After all if poker was simply about mathematics Hellmuth would win every time :-)

Oh and just to be contrary I might fold in an online SNG, there is too much reward for sneaking into 3rd there.

Rnger

Someone went out very early this year with QQ, and could have folded and only lost 100 out of 10,000(ish)

Fold every time!! I'd be more concerned with the experience

so what if they ran into aces..

Daithio

FOLD FOLD FOLD FOLD FOLD! Why would you want to get involved in a coin flip at this stage of such a slow structured tournament? There will be plenty of other smaller pots to be picked up, and plenty of other situations where you can get your chips in with much better odds. The only time you should ever get your chips in when you know it will be a coinflip is if you are either playing against much superior players (this is definitely not the case in the WSOP) or when you are under pressure from extremely fast blinds and antes (also not the case in this situation).

mewso

Samba wrote:

I never stated that either one is a winning or losing style of play.

I suggest you re-read my post and then reply

lol relax. I think alot of folks here take things too seriously. I honestly was not reacting angrily to your post. I was amused at the "aggressive with a play to win attitude" bit which could be construed that the opposite would have a play to lose attitude. I'll try and sprinkle smileys liberally in future.

Marq

There's a guy at your table who sticks $10,000 in the pot to win $50 on the first hand of the tournament, you're probably going to find a better spot.

bohsman

Daithio wrote:

FOLD FOLD FOLD FOLD FOLD! Why would you want to get involved in a coin flip at this stage of such a slow structured tournament? There will be plenty of other smaller pots to be picked up, and plenty of other situations where you can get your chips in with much better oddsQUOTE]

Like waiting to get it in with AKo on a flop of Ah8d5d against AdJd and 67o

Daithio

different situation altogether. I was on a strong table and would have been left with 4k left with the average at 16k had I folded.

DeVore

Probably fold simply becaus of the length of the blinds etc.
I can probably find more spots to put my chips in at better odds.

DeV.

Waylander

Its a tough one, and I don't think I could answer it now. It would depend on my mood at the time of the play, as I do not think I feel as strongly as some others do one way or the other. To sum it up, I am sitting on the fence:)

handsfree

i'd fold because i'm there for the experience and dont want to go hame and tell people that i went out on the first hand. what are the odds of winning it if ur not a superb player anyway so only go for 50:50s when u get ur chips in first

RoundTower

handsfree wrote:

i'd fold because i'm there for the experience and dont want to go hame and tell people that i went out on the first hand. what are the odds of winning it if ur not a superb player anyway so only go for 50:50s when u get ur chips in first

I'd love to come back and have everyone ask how I did, and be able to tell them no, I won nothing. "Did you get far?" "No, out on the first hand." Big grin. If you went out on the bubble, and this is all you deserve if you spurn every opportunity to get your chips into the pot, you'ld moan about it for months.

And what you ask about the odds of winning it if you're not a superb player makes absolutely no sense. If you're not a good player your best chance is to keep sticking your chips in and getting lucky. You certainly won't win it by outplaying everybody.

AmarilloFats

"The arguments for folding are:

(1) I'm a good player .... use your skill to find a better spot to get your chips in.

(2) You don’t want to risk your entire tournament on one hand, especially in a coin-flip situation.

(3) I don’t play these big buy-in tournaments very often, so I want to get some experience playing them.

I strongly believe all of these arguments are specious.
Here’s a quick thought experiment: Let’s say you’re playing in a tournament with 1,024 people. How do you win this tournament? By getting all the chips, of course! This means that if you calculate your chances of doubling up 10 times, you will calculate your chances of winning the event. Now let’s say that you have a 53.8 percent chance of doubling up whenever you get all in for your stack. This means that your chance of winning the tournament is .538 to the 10th power, or about 0.203 percent. The average player’s chance of winning the tournament is 1÷1,024, or about 0.098 percent. So, if you consistently get your chips in with a 53.8 percent chance of winning, you will be more than twice as likely as an average player to win the event. It gets better.
"
Let’s say you choose to fold the queens, thinking you have a better than 53.8 percent chance to double up in this event. If you decline the “coin flip,” you’re stuck with your initial starting stack, as you’re expecting to have a better than 53.8 percent chance of doubling up at some point later in the tournament. If you accept, and win, the coin toss, you double up immediately.

You need to estimate, then, the expected value (EV) of your brand-new $20,000 stack size at a later point in the tournament — the hypothetical point at which you’d eventually double up after declining the “coin flip.” Let’s reasonably (conservatively, actually) say that when you double up right away, your stack will be worth $22,000 at that hypothetical future point at which you would’ve found your better spot.

It’s time to do the math. If taking the “coin flip” gives you a 53.8 percent chance to have a stack of $22,000 later in the tournament, how likely do you have to be to double up later in order to fold your pocket queens? Well, you can answer that by solving this equation: x(20,000) = (.538)(22,000).

Do the algebra and you get x = .5918, or 59.18 percent. So, do you think you’re good enough to have a 59.18 percent chance of doubling up later on? If you said yes, you’re wrong. Go back to our thought experiment. If you could consistently have a 59.18 percent chance of doubling up, you’d win a 1,024-player tournament more than five times as often as an average player. Trust me, you’re not that good. I don’t think it’s possible to be that good. I’m certainly not that good.

Here’s one more way to look at it: Let’s say you’re a very good player. You win a no-limit hold’em tournament twice as often as an average player — which is a spectacular rate. You win the 1,024-player tournament one time in 512. Now we can work backward and figure out our chance of doubling up. We do this by solving the equation 1÷512 = (chance of doubling up) to the 10th power.

And we get the chance of doubling up, .536, or 53.6 percent (note that this is smaller than the chance of your two queens beating the A-K suited).

Using the same equation as above, it turns out that we would take any edge greater than 48.63 percent. Yes, that’s right. I just made the argument that very good players should actually take slightly negative EV situations early in a tournament, because if they win the hand, they get to use their skill with their new stack. And that’s more important than waiting around for a slightly better situation — much more important. Have you seen a lot of successful players using the “get chips or go broke” strategy early? This is part of the reason why.

Some say calling with the queens would amount to a good player letting his skill go to waste. Here’s the thing about poker — the skill is about finding edges. And edges are precious. Think about it; on most hands, we fold before the flop. It’s very hard to find a way to get our chips in profitably. And here, we have a known edge. We know that in the long run, we’ll earn $810 by calling with the Q-Q. That’s not a small edge. Folding here would be akin to flushing an hour’s work down the toilet. Calling here doesn’t negate our skill over the field. Calling here is our skill over the field.

You don’t want to risk your whole tournament on one hand? Then you shouldn’t be in the tournament. The only question you should be asking yourself is, “Will I make more money in the long run by calling here?” And even if it’s “the experience” you’re after, wouldn’t the experience of a final-table run be much more valuable than the experience of playing for a day or so and then busting out near the bubble?

If you don’t believe all of this math mumbo jumbo, I suggest a little record-keeping experiment. For every tournament you play, write down whether you double your stack or bust out before doing so. I did this for a little while, and I doubled up 67 times in 127 tournaments. That’s about 52.8 percent of the time. I think that’s pretty good! If, after a thousand tournaments, you find that you’re doubling up more than 59 percent of the time or so, congratulations — you might be good enough to fold queens in the above situation. In the meantime, stick to getting your chips in with an edge. That’s how poker tournaments are won in real life.

Matt Matros is the author of The Making of a Poker Player, which is available at www.CardPlayer.com. He is grateful to Dr. Bill Chen for first presenting the above argument as The Theory of Doubling Up."

karlh

right, i've changed my mind slightly.

if i can play the WSOP every year for 143 years, i'll call.

henbane

karlh wrote:

if i can play the WSOP every year for 143 years, i'll call.

Calling gives you an opportunity to do that.

NickyOD

I think this is a pretty solid argument for why you should definitely call.

AmarilloFats wrote:

If you don’t believe all of this math mumbo jumbo, I suggest a little record-keeping experiment. For every tournament you play, write down whether you double your stack or bust out before doing so. I did this for a little while, and I doubled up 67 times in 127 tournaments. That’s about 52.8 percent of the time. I think that’s pretty good! If, after a thousand tournaments, you find that you’re doubling up more than 59 percent of the time or so, congratulations — you might be good enough to fold queens in the above situation. In the meantime, stick to getting your chips in with an edge. That’s how poker tournaments are won in real life.

karlh

henbane wrote:

Calling gives you an opportunity to do that.

so does folding.

ok, let's stop

RoundTower

Good essay amarillo, but I think the maths is wrong. Why do you use 48.63% instead of 53.6% for your minimum chance of doubling up? It looks like the excellent player expects to double up 10 times, each time getting his chips in as a 53.6% favourite, so any edge less than this would be wrong to take with 1024 players left.

But the argument that people ignore is the point that having lots of chips is actually very valuable to you. Let's say you're one of these internet posters who is there for the experience and can't bear the idea of putting all his chips in until he's seen the river and made sure he has the nuts. Well, if you grit your teeth and take a coinflip on just this one hand, you don't have to worry about that any more. Next time a similar situation comes up, you'll only have to risk half your chips! (You would risk half your chips on a 53-47 shot, wouldn't you?) If you win that one, you'll have 3 times the average stack and be at even less risk of losing your whole tank in one hand.

So if you've got to be really repulsed at sticking your whole stack in, for God's sake make sure it's a big stack to start with.

Daithio

I can't believe this discussion. It's basic tournament strategy not to get all your chips in unless there is 1) a huge chance the other player will fold, 2) you are a huge favourite (this doesn't qualify), or 3) you are under extreme pressure. None of these apply in this situation. Folding these queens has nothing to do with the ocassion either, I'd fold them on the first hand of the Fitz Monday game or the first hand of any decent structured freezeout tournament. I don't think the ocassion of something should change how you play. The only way you can lose in a tournament is by putting all your chips in the middle, so why voluntarily do it knowing you are facing a coinflip? Do you not trust in your ability to be able to accumulate chips a little better? Especially, if as Mark says, somebody has just stuck their whole tank in to win 100, you'll definitely find a better spot.

AmarilloFats

Not my essay... From Cardplayer. Note the "".