Tournament Life Syndrome - Part 1 (IF) AND 2 (when, where, how etc)

Lazare

DeVore wrote:

I have to agree with Daithio in his earlier example. Why do I want to take a coinflip with the only guy who can hurt me on the table. Better that we both take on the other stacks and feed on them!

DeV.

For a lot of players passing the edge given in Daves example would be seriously -EV, but a lot would pass it. Not for Daves reasons though, their thought process would be something like, 'oh, I've got this far, I don't want to get knocked out now'.
This is the point people are making here, that elimination should never be the sole reason for a decision.


Dave is taking a lot of variables into consideration such as a weak table dynamic etc.. , therefore a fold here is +EV for him (I can't see a call being -EV though)

Paul22

EV is one of the single most important things in poker, and when in, and approaching money stages of a tournament one must factor in the EV in relation to actual cash won rather than long term chip earnings.

kincsem

I wish all this theory applied in real poker. Fitz scalps last night I was out first after break: Slow played JJ calling a raise from 85, 853 flopped; my QQQQ picked up 200 blinds; finally AK flopped a king but Kevin Farrelly rivered a flush.
It was like playing bingo. Its the SE boards game for me, or any tourney where you see more than 40 hands.

Hitman Actual

kincsem wrote:

I wish all this theory applied in real poker. Fitz scalps last night I was out first after break: Slow played JJ calling a raise from 85, 853 flopped; my QQQQ picked up 200 blinds; finally AK flopped a king but Kevin Farrelly rivered a flush.
It was like playing bingo. Its the SE boards game for me, or any tourney where you see more than 40 hands.

Ah come on Sean, it's still just maths. The first hand, the opponent hit a ~20/1 shot to outflop your overpair; in the second one, it's often hard to get paid with quads as it's less likely (probabilty-wise) that the board helped anyone else; for the third one, not sure how the money went in, but it's still just probabilty.

jimbling

Hectorjelly wrote:

Well its not completely crap, but its not something that should be foremost in your mind. Also it only makes sense if you are genuinely the best player, or maybe the second best at the table, and you have a large edge over the others. This is probably the case a lot less than people imagine.

A lot of what is written about tournaments on this forum is really wrong though, and the type of thinking that is bandied about will lead to bad results. Disregarding pot odds in a poker tournament is like a football player choosing to ignore the flight of a ball in a football game because its a tournament rather than a league game.

Decided to reply to this here. Sry to anyone disgusted by dragging up this thread again.


I think you might have either misread or mistook some peoples opinions here. I presume you are talking about me and my fellow tournament idiots in this thread.
I never, nor do I recall anyone else, talked about disregarding pot odds. I also don't think anyone ever said that this was foremost in there mind.
Just because something isn't as important in an EV calculation doesn't mean we shouldn't talk about it or take it into account.

What we are talking about is nothing at all like ignoring the flight of the ball in a game of soccer.
More like taking into account that the flight of the ball will change due to outside factors such as wind etc.

Hectorjelly

A few times people have said things about pots odds, like they wouldnt call an all in if they only had a 30% chance to win no matter what odds they were getting. This is insane. I wasnt talking about this thread in paticular!

jimbling

Hectorjelly wrote:

A few times people have said things about pots odds, like they wouldnt call an all in if they only had a 30% chance to win no matter what odds they were getting. This is insane. I wasnt talking about this thread in paticular!

lol, fair enough, that is insanity.

Apology's for jumping to conclusions, I just assumed you were talking about this thread as I am fairly certain thats what El Stuntman was alluding too with his TLS question.

jimbling

Hectorjelly wrote:

A few times people have said things about pots odds, like they wouldnt call an all in if they only had a 30% chance to win no matter what odds they were getting. This is insane. I wasnt talking about this thread in paticular!

funny that this came up yesterday. I was playing the 5k gtd last night and it was down to the last 30 or something. I had just lost a pot and had 30k. I was in the BB which was 6k
UTG (shortstack) went all in for his last 12k.
it was folded to me and I called with 67o.
He had K8s, and my hand held up

The point being, this player lost his head, calling me the biggest muppet under the sun. A few others joined in saying what a bad call it was. I calmly tried to explain (don't ask me why) that I was getting the odds. I was getting over 3-1.
This guy actually starting telling me I had a few things to learn about odds etc etc. And actually stated that the odds didnt matter because I was behind. You should never ever call if you think you're behind......and if I want to play catch up poker then I will always be a loser.
I couldn't stop laughing.

phantom_lord

kinda similar story, I was massive big stack in a stt, short stack goes in for less than the sb!! utg, I reraise all-in with 107o trying to isolate, as far as I could see, I was free rolling and I probably wasn't far behind anyway cause he was all in next hand.

Only thing was the button called me with ajo :rolleyes: , and I got tons of abuse in the chat "how could u think u were ahead blah blah"




no one said anything about the button calling two allins with ajo tho:D