Shortstack play - was I wrong?

jacQues

Live tourney. 54 runners, 18 left (2 tables of 9). No big (raising) hands all night and the calling hands don't flop much either. Shortstacked due to the blinds. 6,500 starting stack, 4,200 left and blinds are 500 / 1,000. I'm BB and I look at the clock; blinds are up next hand. So 1,000 in the pot, 3,200 left and SB next. All fold except the SB who calls.

I look down on my hand and see 10 4 off. I check. Flop comes Q 4 5. SB checks and so do I. Turn is a another Q. SB checks and I push since I read the SB for missing the board completely and I think I'm ahead but don't want to give the SB to catch up for free. Is this standard play / bad play / good play?

jacQues

SB calls with 6 6; I am out.

ianmc38

Standard.

Lafortezza

Standardo.

5starpool

Apart from waiting so long then yes, it is standard.

luckylucky

ianmc38 wrote:

Standard.

i'll 2nd that

fuzzbox

Why is this standard?

there is 2000 in the pot preflop.

But why does SB limp in?
Why do we not be the flop?
Why do we not go all in preflop?

I dont get how this is standard.

I mean, theres nothing particularly wrong with it, but why is it standard?

Lafortezza

jacQues wrote:

54 runners, 18 left (2 tables of 9).
So 1,000 in the pot, 3,200 left and SB next. All fold except the SB who calls.

I look down on my hand and see 10 4 off. I check. Flop comes Q 4 5. SB checks and so do I. Turn is a another Q. SB checks and I push

Push the flop, but as played you can't fold since you have a hand and no chips. SB's calling range is pretty big.
Standardissimo given we got to the turn and are in this situation.

Iago

what's the SB got left stack wise?

I might have pushed preflop, depending on his stack size, would definitely have pushed on the flop.

Ste05

I'd have pushed on the flop, but yes Standard...

connie147

Id like to know sb's stack size, but im probably all-in here pre flop or if not,most definately after the flop.

luckylucky

fuzzbox wrote:

Why is this standard?

there is 2000 in the pot preflop.

But why does SB limp in?
Why do we not be the flop?
Why do we not go all in preflop?

I dont get how this is standard.

I mean, theres nothing particularly wrong with it, but why is it standard?

You are posing different questions to what the poster asked, he asked was it ok to make that move on the turn and I think everyone thus far agreed that it was, one that you are going to hold your breath of course but still!

What he should have done on flop or preflop are two very different stories and as for why did the SB limp in - there could be all sorts of reasons - many people will just limp in with any 2 cards in sb period.


If he had some good read that the sb had him beat ok maybe he should just keep on checking - but other than that he has a pair in a H-u situation with no indication of strength from SB.

if he just checks again he's basically asking to be bluffed out of pot or allow SB to catch up. I take it that SB was slow-playing but f-it that's poker!

As for your questions - yeah he probably should have moved on flop unless he feared the pf limp.As for him raising pre flop with T4o - not saying it should absolutely never be done but not exactly going to say yeah go 4 it man :cool:

so that's why it's standard!

You can see I'm real busy at work;)

Iago

still relevant questions, he asked was he wrong. I would hazard a guess that if he pushes on the flop that the SB may fold. Depends on the SBs stack size of course.

BigDragon

I'd want to know the SB stack size then decide to push preflop or see a flop then push. Turn is too late.

jacQues

I was shortstacked. SB had a lot compared to me but I don't remember/didn't count since I was lowest. Say - for arguments sake - 20,000.

I felt that pushing pre-flop would accomplish nothing since 3,200 to win 5,200 is a call, taking into account that a shortstack pushed and no one else in the hand. He could safely expect a push, hence his flat-call seemed to me like A-rag or K-x.

jacQues

luckylucky

Iago wrote:

still relevant questions, he asked was he wrong. I would hazard a guess that if he pushes on the flop that the SB may fold. Depends on the SBs stack size of course.

hmmm maybe if he had something like middle pocket pair he might let that go on flop but call on turn when he sees a second queen so I see your point
but I think if he had any hand like this he would have put the big blind all-in pre flop, well I think most people would do so it's unlikely without knowing more about SB.

Overall I think if he was going to move yeah I agree though it should have been done on flop, when he didn't do it on flop though, it actually looks even better after that turn card for the reason I mention above - a middle pocket pair seems unlikely - anyways as e.body said the move was standard!

Anyways presume small blind was slow playing so have a feeling Hero was going to get called no matter what he did.:(

Gholimoli

fuzzbox wrote:

Why is this standard?

there is 2000 in the pot preflop.

But why does SB limp in?
Why do we not be the flop?
Why do we not go all in preflop?

I dont get how this is standard.

I mean, theres nothing particularly wrong with it, but why is it standard?

agree with this .
how is this standard.
first of push the re flop.

if not push the flop when checked to.

the worse thing you can play this on the turn is to push.
your push is bad because it can only get called when your beat and you will get no better hand than yours to fold either.

Gholimoli

luckylucky wrote:

You are posing different questions to what the poster asked, he asked was it ok to make that move on the turn and I think everyone thus far agreed that it was, one that you are going to hold your breath of course but still!

What he should have done on flop or preflop are two very different stories and as for why did the SB limp in - there could be all sorts of reasons - many people will just limp in with any 2 cards in sb period.


If he had some good read that the sb had him beat ok maybe he should just keep on checking - but other than that he has a pair in a H-u situation with no indication of strength from SB.

if he just checks again he's basically asking to be bluffed out of pot or allow SB to catch up. I take it that SB was slow-playing but f-it that's poker!

As for your questions - yeah he probably should have moved on flop unless he feared the pf limp.As for him raising pre flop with T4o - not saying it should absolutely never be done but not exactly going to say yeah go 4 it man :cool:

so that's why it's standard!

You can see I'm real busy at work;)

its bad to make that move on the turn .
not that bad given the stack size but bad all the same.

luckylucky

Gholimoli wrote:

its bad to make that move on the turn .
not that bad given the stack size but bad all the same.

A dissenter finally

jacQues wrote:

Turn is a another Q. SB checks and I push since I read the SB for missing the board completely and I think I'm ahead but don't want to give the SB to catch up for free. Is this standard play / bad play / good play?

He has made his read - if he thinks he's ahead then it's time to take down the pot, with this few chips left it would be poor play not to imho - if his read was different fair enough - check it down.

As you can see I'm in loose agro mode today - not folding this thread

Gholimoli

luckylucky wrote:

A dissenter finally



He has made his read - if he thinks he's ahead then it's time to take down the pot, with this few chips left it would be poor play not to imho - if his read was different fair enough - check it down.

As you can see I'm in loose agro mode today - not folding this thread

that Q on the turn just improved SB's hand whether he had or not.
if he did have did ,well obviously he just made trips .if he didnt have it it has just made it less likely for BB to have it so while there is a chance of him folding a hand such as 66,55 or what ever on the flop(ie BB could represent that Q ) that chance has gotten much less because of the second Q turning.
thats why its bad.

luckylucky

Gholimoli wrote:

that Q on the turn just improved SB's hand whether he had or not.
if he did have did ,well obviously he just made trips .if he didnt have it it has just made it less likely for BB to have it so while there is a chance of him folding a hand such as 66,55 or what ever on the flop(ie BB could represent that Q ) that chance has gotten much less because of the second Q turning.
thats why its bad.

I think that Q is a double edged-sword - it makes it look less likely to both players that their opponent will have a Q, yes it means that if SB has a hand like 66 55 he will probably call whereas he might have folded this on the flop - so I agree with you on that - but as I mentioned already a small or medium pair looks unlikely as most players would have raised pre flop in SB's position - I know i would! so the likelihood of this is reduced in this case.

And the other factor is he has said he has a read that he's ahead! If you're not prepared to believe and follow through on your reads in this game well you're not going to be any sort of a player.

If he's pretty sure that he's ahead - what is he to do then check again, as I have said already he is practically asking to be bluffed out of pot on river or he gives a chance for sb to catch up. He needs those chips!

I suppose you could argue for something like a half size pot bet and if he is re-raised he can get away from hand but jeez he would really be up against it then stackwise - so I don't really like that in this case

If he doesn't have this read, particularly if he feels he's being slowplayed, then fair enough, he can keep checking.

The read for me is the key!

Though i do agree he should have made the move on flop and never have left it get to turn.

Anyway have a feeling we're not going to agree on this one Gholi

Hitman Actual

Gholimoli wrote:

the worse thing you can play this on the turn is to push.
your push is bad because it can only get called when your beat and you will get no better hand than yours to fold either.

I disagree, the worse thing he can (now) do is check and allow a hand he's currently beating to catch up on the river.

Lafortezza

lenny_leonard wrote:

I disagree, the worse thing he can (now) do is check and allow a hand he's currently beating to catch up on the river.

I agree with this. Hero can't fold, he has a pair, and will be in the SB with almost zero chips and very little chance of getting back into the tournament. It's unlikey that SB will check it down, so push the turn and if SB has live cards like J9 at least make him pay something to hit.

If we check behind on the turn do those who think betting the turn is bad fold the river to a non-T non-4 river? With blinds about to go to (probably) 800-1500 we will have 2400 chips left in the next hand after posting the SB.

Gholimoli

lenny_leonard wrote:

I disagree, the worse thing he can (now) do is check and allow a hand he's currently beating to catch up on the river.

im not sure about the maths but assuming he has two over cards to the 4 ,with one card to come i think there is 14% chance of him paring one of them.
now if you bet here you will go broke 100% of the time when you get called.
you will win the pot all those times that you dont get called.(we say x% of the time you will not get called).

Pot=1000
Stack =3200



EV of checking:
For simplicity we assume that hero is ahead at this stage so we are just concerned with giving villain a free card to beat us on the river.
I think with one card to come assuming villain has two cards higher than 4,the odds against villain paring one of those cards are or something like 12%(not too sure about this but I think its right).

EV of checking behind:
Assuming we are already winning in the hand then we will only loose it 12% on the river so

EV=1000x82% + 12x(-1000)=700

EV of pushing the turn.
We loose 3200 the times he calls,and win 1000 the times he folds.
So if we assume he folds x% of the time then:

EV=1000x(x%) +(-3200)(100-x%)

Lets give x some random numbers to see how it will turn out:
Lets start by 50.so we assume that he will call 50% and fold the other 50%

In this case the EV of pushing is:

EV=1000x(50%)+(-3200)x50%=-1100

Now lets try another number shall we…
Lets assume villain folds 60% and calls the other 40% .in that case we have

EV=1000x(60)+(-3200)x40%= -680 getting better
Lets try again

We assume hero folds 80% and calls 20%

EV=1000x(80%) + (-3200)x20% =160

Now if my math is correct about him having a 12% chance of improving on the river then you can see that even if villain folds 80% of the time we still have a higher EV by checking the hand down.
Now this obviously dosent take everything in to consideration like the likely hood of SB bluffing us of the winning hand on the river etc but im just trying to say that giving a free card here is not bad Lenny.

luckylucky

Gholimoli wrote:

im not sure about the maths but assuming he has two over cards to the 4 ,with one card to come i think there is 14% chance of him paring one of them.
now if you bet here you will go broke 100% of the time when you get called.
you will win the pot all those times that you dont get called.(we say x% of the time you will not get called).

Pot=1000
Stack =3200



EV of checking:
For simplicity we assume that hero is ahead at this stage so we are just concerned with giving villain a free card to beat us on the river.
I think with one card to come assuming villain has two cards higher than 4,the odds against villain paring one of those cards are or something like 12%(not too sure about this but I think its right).

EV of checking behind:
Assuming we are already winning in the hand then we will only loose it 12% on the river so

EV=1000x82% + 12x(-1000)=700

EV of pushing the turn.
We loose 3200 the times he calls,and win 1000 the times he folds.
So if we assume he folds x% of the time then:

EV=1000x(x%) +(-3200)(100-x%)

Lets give x some random numbers to see how it will turn out:
Lets start by 50.so we assume that he will call 50% and fold the other 50%

In this case the EV of pushing is:

EV=1000x(50%)+(-3200)x50%=-1100

Now lets try another number shall we…
Lets assume villain folds 60% and calls the other 40% .in that case we have

EV=1000x(60)+(-3200)x40%= -680 getting better
Lets try again

We assume hero folds 80% and calls 20%

EV=1000x(80%) + (-3200)x20% =160

Now if my math is correct about him having a 12% chance of improving on the river then you can see that even if villain folds 80% of the time we still have a higher EV by checking the hand down.
Now this obviously dosent take everything in to consideration like the likely hood of SB bluffing us of the winning hand on the river etc but im just trying to say that giving a free card here is not bad Lenny.

Ahem ahem - LMAO think I can finally see why gholi was so opposed to the bet.
Gholi try your calculations again this time though with 2000 instead of 1000!
Unless I've got something very wrong there is 2000 in the pot i.e. the blinds were 500/1000 and sb completed the blind!


And even besides all this maths - maths are an essential part of poker but so is the read!

Hitman Actual

I haven't time to really look through the maths, but 14% sounds about right for two overcards (~6/1 with 6 outs). But the pot is 2K, and some of your zero-sums seem off (82% and 12%???).

Anyway, I'm just going by basic TOP freecard play: the pot is big now (compared to your stack size), so betting and offering villain 6/1 odds is much better than giving him infinite odds to outdraw you. And I think the fact that you have bottom pair makes a difference. If you had hit your T, it's safer to give the free card (straight draws not-withstanding), as fewer overcards can come to beat you, and an undercard might make villain put money in the pot.

Gholimoli

luckylucky wrote:

Ahem ahem - LMAO think I can finally see why gholi was so opposed to the bet.
Gholi try your calculations again this time though with 2000 instead of 1000!
Unless I've got something very wrong there is 2000 in the pot i.e. the blinds were 500/1000 and sb completed the blind!


And even besides all this maths - maths are an essential part of poker but so is the read!

oops my mistake but even with the 2000 pot things dont change as EV of calling down is still better than shoving(unless my assumption about villain having 12% of improving is also wrong)


EV of calling the hand down


EV=88%x2000 + (-2000)12%=1520


now EV for each of the examples i gave will change to:

if villain calls 50% and fold 50% then :

EV=-600

if villain folds 60% and call 40% then

EV=-80

if villain folds 80% and calls 20% then

EV=960

even if villain folds 80% here the EV of checking the hand down is better.
Again the maths could certainly have things wrong with it but unless i have hugely underestimated the chances of villain improving on the river then it shouldn’t change things that much.

ollyk1

Gholimoli wrote:

im not sure about the maths but assuming he has two over cards to the 4 ,with one card to come i think there is 14% chance of him paring one of them.
now if you bet here you will go broke 100% of the time when you get called.
you will win the pot all those times that you dont get called.(we say x% of the time you will not get called).

Pot=1000
Stack =3200



EV of checking:
For simplicity we assume that hero is ahead at this stage so we are just concerned with giving villain a free card to beat us on the river.
I think with one card to come assuming villain has two cards higher than 4,the odds against villain paring one of those cards are or something like 12%(not too sure about this but I think its right).

EV of checking behind:
Assuming we are already winning in the hand then we will only loose it 12% on the river so

EV=1000x82% + 12x(-1000)=700

EV of pushing the turn.
We loose 3200 the times he calls,and win 1000 the times he folds.
So if we assume he folds x% of the time then:

EV=1000x(x%) +(-3200)(100-x%)

Lets give x some random numbers to see how it will turn out:
Lets start by 50.so we assume that he will call 50% and fold the other 50%

In this case the EV of pushing is:

EV=1000x(50%)+(-3200)x50%=-1100

Now lets try another number shall we…
Lets assume villain folds 60% and calls the other 40% .in that case we have

EV=1000x(60)+(-3200)x40%= -680 getting better
Lets try again

We assume hero folds 80% and calls 20%

EV=1000x(80%) + (-3200)x20% =160

Now if my math is correct about him having a 12% chance of improving on the river then you can see that even if villain folds 80% of the time we still have a higher EV by checking the hand down.
Now this obviously dosent take everything in to consideration like the likely hood of SB bluffing us of the winning hand on the river etc but im just trying to say that giving a free card here is not bad Lenny.

Your maths are terrible for a number of reasons Gholi including the fact that you assume when called we lose 100% of the time with

a) at least some chance of the guy calling us with overcards and
b) we have to dog him on the river probably 1 in 8 times.

If you said that we won 40% of the time when we push on the turn and are called I'd say you'd be closer to reality.

As has already been stated you have the pot size wrong so the implied odds we give up by checking the turn to as a result fold or call (I'm not sure what you advocate here) on the river to a whole host of non helpful cards has to be higher then you think.

That's why I'd be all in on the flop. I do like how the SB played the hand though. But you've hit the flop your are very shortstacked. All-in on the flop with no read on the SB.

Gholimoli

lenny_leonard wrote:

I haven't time to really look through the maths, but 14% sounds about right for two overcards (~6/1 with 6 outs). But the pot is 2K, and some of your zero-sums seem off (82% and 12%???).

Anyway, I'm just going by basic TOP freecard play: the pot is big now (compared to your stack size), so betting and offering villain 6/1 odds is much better than giving him infinite odds to outdraw you. And I think the fact that you have bottom pair makes a difference. If you had hit your T, it's safer to give the free card (straight draws not-withstanding), as fewer overcards can come to beat you, and an undercard might make villain put money in the pot.

the fact that you have bottom pair makes huge difference Lenny as it allows you to win the pot as show down alot of the times with or with out improving.
dont look at it as your giving him infinite odds to improve,look at as risk/reward and you will see why its not a good idea to bet.
if you didnt have bottom pair then you would effectivly be bluffing and thats changes things totally.

Gholimoli

ollyk1 wrote:

Your maths are terrible for a number of reasons Gholi including the fact that you assume when called we lose 100% of the time with

a) at least some chance of the guy calling us with overcards and
b) we have to dog him on the river probably 1 in 8 times.

If you said that we won 40% of the time when we push on the turn and are called I'd say you'd be closer to reality.

As has already been stated you have the pot size wrong so the implied odds we give up by checking the turn to as a result fold or call (I'm not sure what you advocate here) on the river to a whole host of non helpful cards has to be higher then you think.

That's why I'd be all in on the flop. I do like how the SB played the hand though. But you've hit the flop your are very shortstacked. All-in on the flop with no read on the SB.

there is no way you win 40% of the time if you push and get called.
what do you think his calling range is?

if he has a Q your drawing dead.
if he has a higher PP than yours then your drawing to 2-5 outs.
its safe to say there is 0% chance we will call a push with out a higher pair than 4s on the turn.

you think with one more card to come thoes will give you a 40% chance of winning if you get called?

Hitman Actual

I cant believe I'm involved in this thread cos having 3BBs is alien to me, and I dont think it matters much what you do anyway. I'd have a) pushed around the 8-10BB mark, b) pushed preflop here, or c) pushed the flop here.

Ok, assume we check the turn, what do we do when (if) villain bets the river? Do you still intend calling, especially when you more than likely haven't improved?

I can understand where you're coming from about risk-reward, EV, etc, but I like pushing because we win the pot straight away hopefully, might fold out a 5, or bigger pairs (probably not likely), and we dont give infinite odds to be outdrawn.

sikes

jacQues wrote:

Shortstacked due to the blinds. 6,500 starting stack, 4,200 left and blinds are 500 / 1,000. I'm BB and I look at the clock; blinds are up next hand.

you are shortstacked because you have just over a 1/5 of the average stack with a m of ~2, unless you just took a beat, you have not adjusted to the blinds.

Preflop, if he is observant i dont think he is completing the blinds without a hand he will call a push with.

If the table has had a lot of callers preflop, as the hand has been played, i may wait for the blinds to pass and get your remaining 2200 in the pot when there has been 3/4 callers preflop with anything.

luckylucky

Gholimoli wrote:

there is no way you win 40% of the time if you push and get called.
what do you think his calling range is?

if he has a Q your drawing dead.
if he has a higher PP than yours then your drawing to 2-5 outs.
its safe to say there is 0% chance we will call a push with out a higher pair than 4s on the turn.

you think with one more card to come thoes will give you a 40% chance of winning if you get called?

Ok last crack off this thread as it's just about run it's course I think.

I agree that if you get called it is less than 40% chance you will win the hand, however I don't think it is an insignificant number either though, there is plenty of people who will call with ace rag or king rag in this spot it's very loose play but we've all seen it.

One other thing I keep mentioning that the guy has a supposed read - if he's 80% sure that he's ahead what should he do Gholi?

My background is in mathematics but to be honest I just can't be arsed to work it out - but if you feel like it and factor to in this read percentage of 80% and perhaps give 25% to the times that hero gets called he still wins - and also remember even if this hand in solation was a naegative play by betting which I don't think it is - if he is the type of player who doesn't bet with these type of hands people will notice and he will be less likely to get paid off when he does have a hand.

I have a funny feeling hero never thought this post would generate so much debate

luckylucky

sikes wrote:

you are shortstacked because you have just over a 1/5 of the average stack with a m of ~2, unless you just took a beat, you have not adjusted to the blinds.

Preflop, if he is observant i dont think he is completing the blinds without a hand he will call a push with.

If the table has had a lot of callers preflop, as the hand has been played, i may wait for the blinds to pass and get your remaining 2200 in the pot when there has been 3/4 callers preflop with anything.

LOL You think everybody has read harrington on hold em! - I presume this is where this misguided spiel comes from. (sorry if that sounded harsh, I have had a few beers so saying it as it is:) - least i'm not playing poker)

And in regards to his m - he needs to be taking his chances when it looks like there's a door open - the door was open on the flop - particularly if his read was right - i gather it wasn't but won't blame hero too much for that - we all get the read wrong from time to time - at least he went with his read which I admire him for.

And also there are many reasons for somebody just to complete the blinds not least the fact that when you are in the small blind you have odds of 3 to 1 to call - enough reason to complete the blinds if you have any sort of hand especially if villain does not think hero is aggressive. I mean are you just going to fold something like 76o when you are in the small blind in this case !?
If you do that's very tight poker unless hero is a very agro guy who's likely to raise when small blind just completes blind.

And yeah sure he might have just completed the blind with a top hand like kings or aces too in a slow play move but it's more likely that he has just a normal hand, unless he has a read on the guy he can't possibly put him on a hand like this, if it happens it's part of the game, no point on dwelling on it.

Anyway there u go... can't believe I'm still on this thread... I'm getting fond of this site though:D

jacQues

luckylucky wrote:

if he is the type of player who doesn't bet with these type of hands people will notice and he will be less likely to get paid off when he does have a hand.

I was acting the rock alright. The fact that villan played his hand so very slow made me believe he didn't have a pocket pair. So in that way - good (but very risky) play by him. I would have folded if he'd bet on the flop since he was 'rocky' himself too. Having put him on A-rag or K-x I now believed that he hadn't a queen after checking twice and two queens showing. My bet was an out and loud "I have 2 pair" and that was the way I wanted it to be. I felt 50/50 he would fold/call given the situation since he had two overcards and my low stack all-in and close to pot odds.

It didn't matter that I went out, as long as I can try to learn from it and maybe improve my play. The general concensus seems to be to push on the flop. I still believe that pushing pre-flop is suicide since the 'rocky' SB was aware of my "all or nothing" stack size and wouldn't call with marginal hands because if I saw an A or K it would have been a push pre-flop. I simply had to assume that with 10 4 off I was way behind pre-flop.

luckylucky wrote:

I have a funny feeling hero never thought this post would generate so much debate

Right again.

jacQues

sikes

luckylucky wrote:

LOL You think everybody has read harrington on hold em! - I presume this is where this misguided spiel comes from. (sorry if that sounded harsh, I have had a few beers so saying it as it is:) - least i'm not playing poker)

yes i have read HoH and many other books. Fail to see where I am missguided. Whether using m or BB or whatever the fact of the matter is he is screwed without a massive amount of luck. Simply put you cant get into this position. So lets see where i am misguided.

luckylucky wrote:

And in regards to his m - he needs to be taking his chances when it looks like there's a door open - the door was open on the flop - particularly if his read was right - i gather it wasn't but won't blame hero too much for that - we all get the read wrong from time to time - at least he went with his read which I admire him for.

This is a basic idea in poker regardless of ones M and i havent said it isn't.

luckylucky wrote:

And also there are many reasons for somebody just to complete the blinds not least the fact that when you are in the small blind you have odds of 3 to 1 to call - enough reason to complete the blinds if you have any sort of hand especially if villain does not think hero is aggressive. I mean are you just going to fold something like 76o when you are in the small blind in this case !?
If you do that's very tight poker unless hero is a very agro guy who's likely to raise when small blind just completes blind.

Im raising or folding 67o, if i have > average stack im prob putting him all in. My point is the villain isnt folding to a push. If you completed the BB in this hand with 67o would you fold to a push?

luckylucky wrote:

And yeah sure he might have just completed the blind with a top hand like kings or aces too in a slow play move but it's more likely that he has just a normal hand, unless he has a read on the guy he can't possibly put him on a hand like this, if it happens it's part of the game, no point on dwelling on it.

Anyway there u go... can't believe I'm still on this thread... I'm getting fond of this site though:D

So yes you seem to be drunk, where am i misguided?

luckylucky

well this is what it's all about jacques, personally t4o pre flop i wouldn't have pushed either - it's too crappy a hand - and though I'm mostly an internet player so i can't judge the regular scene from personal experience as good as the other guys on this forum - I don't like to push with quite that bad a hand - the small blind has the odds to call if he has any sort of half decent hand and with a stack of 20000 it's almost guaranteed - maybe if it was t8o and i was feeling frisky and even then! - but t4o i'm thinking phew i get a chance 2 c da flop.

Anyway put all of us out of our misery - what did he have, I'm guessing aces or kings or maybe he hit da jackpot with a set of queens but i think the latter!

sikes

he had 66

on a side not, wtf happened to my post count? anyone?

luckylucky

ditto - it's saying i got 1005 - f-it i know i cant keep my mouth shut da last few days but wtf it was saying 5o s.thng while ago - presume some technical glitch

luckylucky

sikes wrote:

yes i have read HoH and many other books. Fail to see where I am missguided. Whether using m or BB or whatever the fact of the matter is he is screwed without a massive amount of luck. Simply put you cant get into this position. So lets see where i am misguided.



This is a basic idea in poker regardless of ones M and i havent said it isn't.



Im raising or folding 67o, if i have > average stack im prob putting him all in. My point is the villain isnt folding to a push. If you completed the BB in this hand with 67o would you fold to a push?



So yes you seem to be drunk, where am i misguided?

No I'm not drunk - though this post might drive me to da booze - i was just trying to lighten da blow of my harshish words - what is ur point here - yeah we know villian is not folding to a push pre-flop or is at least unlikely though but all that is irrelavant.

we are dealing with a post-flop situation and it would be scaredy cat paranoid to assume Small blind has aces or kings unless hero has a specific read

Furthermore if the flop or turn has missed him which it appears according to hero that it has then the pot is there for the taking - so what the hell is wrong with him in attempting to take it. if the villain indeed did have 66 then he's a moron who should have pushed pre-flop who things just happened to have worked out for.

And i still think ur point is all mixed up and does not make any real sense - i give u an opening about me having a few beers and u take a cheap shot but still doesnt change da fact that ur argument is garbled and I for one don't c da sense of it and yes i have read umpteen poker books also!

sikes wrote:

Im raising or folding 67o, if i have > average stack im prob putting him all in.

Are we talking about u here? - da point is not everybody is going to make a fold or raise here like u would have done - it is quite normal for a lot of players(the majority of which have not read 1 poker book nevermind harrington on hold'em) to just call with any type of marginal hand, of course if our hero knows who u r from now on if u complete da blind from the SB he should rightly be very wary and of course knowing u will raise with marginal hands he can call with them too but u cant assume da villain in this piece plays poker like u! (unless u r da villain!)



I keep trying to think maybe I'm overlooking some central point of ur argument but if I am I don't c it!

Ghouli's argument I understood - I disagreed but I understood it.

anyway...
Jeez this is fast becoming da daftest post i've got involved in since i signed up on this site two weeks ago - poker and pints it's all ur fault!

Anyway have a feeling not going to get any more sense out of this thread!
Next!:rolleyes:

sikes

Your words are not harsh dont worry about it.

In my original post I quoted the OP when he said he was shortstacked due to the blinds. I then went on to mention why you shouldn't get into a situation like this, this of course has been mentioned in the thread already.

I then went on to say that if we push preflop, the SB is calling therefore we have no FE.

I went on to say that, if we could check the hand down, we could let the blinds pass, and if the table is loose get our remaining 2200 when there are a few callers preflop an option that i think had merit, depending on the table.

You then said that

You think everybody has read harrington on hold em! - I presume this is where this misguided spiel comes from

First of all I think HoH is a great book and do many others, can you please tell me where he is misguided and where it relates to my post.

The rest of your ramblings has nothing to do with my orginial post.

Again I will ask you where I am misguided.

Next

What is this meant to mean?

Gholimoli

folks hero's stack here is to extreamly low so IMO no matter what he does he cant be that wrong.the shorter your stack the less significant your mistakes becomes.
however Lenny made a post about the fact that the worse thing villain can do here is check the hand and not bet it and allow villain to catch up.
i was just trying to show that with only one more card to come (assuming we are at the moment ahead of villain) villain's chances of improving are not that much at all so giving him a free card does not hurt us much.
the calculation didnt take everything in to considration at all but they did show a rough figure .because we have a pair here and we can take the pot significant % of the time on the turn then betting the turn does not accoumpish all that much.
by pushing the turn ,he will fold all the hands that your ahead of,he will not fold any hand that is ahead of you,and in terms of protecting your hand you dont have much to worry about but the downside is you lose you stack and the game so betting the turn here is -EV.
if you didnt have a pair in your hand and your hand was T high then it would have been different as betting the turn would prob get J,Q,K,A high to fold and thoes hands would beat you if the hand goes to show down.

luckylucky

Ok Let's put this one to bed once and for all I agree with Gholi that perhaps he does not give so much by checking along but I don't think it was a poor play either.

On sikes ok I see what ur getting at - why would SB just complete the blind - if the small blind was a good player or was the type of player that was so tight who would just flat call with a medium pair I would be very worried particularly on the turn so then a check would definitely be the right decision

But my point was that Hero did not read Villain this way (rightly or wrongly only those at that table will know) and in reality there are plenty of players out there who will just flat call in smalll blind with a mediocre hand that Hero is ahead of right now.

Slightly off topic here...I think HOH 1 and 2 are great books also btw but just because you are playing in accordance with his suggestions don't assume others are, to be frank i'm a better cash game player than at tourneys but I still used do reasonably ok at them - but my tourney results went down when I started following HOH too religiously - it needs to be applied properly to real world poker where people are too inclined to look you up... anyway i digress!

On the turn I think if you can rule out the type of player I mention then a push by Hero is fine, one other option if Villain is the type to take a small stab at pot with bluff on river - this would add extra EV to just checking on turn.

Anyway I can see your points of view and i think I've gone on enough about mine:rolleyes:

One thing I have been thinking about through all this is the mathematics of the read - I think it's worth a post at some stage - if you are 80% confident of you're read and factor this with other probabilities I reckon for me anyway it would improve my results.

Hitman Actual

Last question to Gholi: Are you going to call any bet on the river? If you are, then pushing now is best. If not, then I can see where checking and hoping to get to a showdown is good.

TBH, I think this is a freak tourney situation and occurs very rarely anyway.

Bp!

Lads this ones going on a bit here no? Jaques is down to disaster stage in terms of blinds, The 2nd Q on the turn is a great card and of course he should have pushed here, he needs a double up badly. With his tourney life at 3 BB's if its blind on blind he needs to push (or yes even call) the flop if he connects at all