Passive gameplay sucks in all situations whether it be an mtt or a cash game
Wrong. This is such an overgeneralization...the beauty of poker is there are almost always exceptions to any "rule". To say you should "always" or "never" do something is ridiculous. About the only thing I can think of is that you should never fold AA pf in a cash game, and you should never fold the nuts. Both of these are so abundantly obvious though...
Agreed. The following are the options, from best to worst:
1) Re-raise all-in: highest fold equity & probably highest EV, but HIGHEST VARIANCE!
2) Re-raise but not all-in: high EV, but high variance.
3) Calling with probably the best hand, but with the worst position & the BB left to call: probably +EV compared to folding, lower variance.
4) Folding: EV=0, lowest variance.
I would choose the play that I think maximizes EV, not minimizes variance (folding). "Small ball" poker does not apply in this and many other tournament situations. We are not Phil Ivey, we are probably not the best post-flop player in the tournament, we are not in a Skill Level 6 tournament with 90-minute blinds and a Patience Factor of 100, and we are not in the Green Zone.
We CANNOT afford to pass up +EV situations just to minimize variance or based on the unreasonable assumption that all the other players are so much worse than us that we will have many higher +EV opportunities before the increasing blinds limits our options. As Chris Ferguson said at the WSOP Main Event, even he could not afford to pass up small edges.
Depends on the situation. The key question you need to ask is "Is he playing Loose-Aggressive because he's good and he knows how to control the table or is he just plain reckless?"
You also need to ask yourself a question about your skill level vs the other players in the tournament.
Wetbrain's theory: The more skilled you are vs. the other members of your table, the less necessary it is to take risks to play winning poker.
Why risk a coinflip with a loose-aggressive player? Call and see if you hit an ace or a queen, 2 diamonds or any other situation where you can be considered a reasonable favorite to win. If you hit a big hand (say you flop 2 pair or a flush or trip Queens) make small value bets, make him inclined to raise you. Then you can value bet or check raise him on the river. I guarantee this play is more +EV then coinflipping with someone of lesser skill.
Why risk a coinflip with a loose-aggressive player? Call and see if you hit an ace or a queen, 2 diamonds or any other situation where you can be considered a reasonable favorite to win. If you hit a big hand (say you flop 2 pair or a flush or trip Queens) make small value bets, make him inclined to raise you. Then you can value bet or check raise him on the river. I guarantee this play is more +EV then coinflipping with someone of lesser skill.
You arent risking a coinflip... you very likely have the best hand... and by shoving you are just going to take the pot down without showdown most of the time. Why call and risk getting bluffed out on a 953 rainbow flop? If you call and hit a big hand you arent getting paid off very often since he most likely doesnt have much.
The thing I'm struggling with is the decision to flip or 60/40 a playable stack.
In this case, this player is making the huge mistakes preflop. (In the form of these k-10 'roid rage chip stampedes) Occassionally he'd fire at a flop..but for the most part if he was called he was betting for value from that point forward. I raised expecting, wanting, the shove and was prepared to call; but I really can't decide if I was over eager to race my a-q against his b.s.
You arent risking a coinflip... you very likely have the best hand...and by shoving you are just going to take the pot down without showdown most of the time. Why call and risk getting bluffed out on a 953 rainbow flop? If you call and hit a big hand you arent getting paid off very often since he most likely doesnt have much.
I'd say that with the Loose Aggressive player generally, does not want to be challenged. He's usually looking to steal a number of easy chips and build up a pot. But like any bully, when you stand up to them, they usually back down. A re-raise from a LAG player is actually a sign of strength, a sign they are holding som kind of playable hand. Maybe a hand like mid pairs.
Even if they don't have a playable hand, even if they are holding a dog hand like suited connectors, why risk going in with a mere 60% chance to win?
THink about it this way. 1.) You put the LAG Loser on raising with any 2 hands, even a dog hand. 2.) If you put him on a hand like this then you KNOW he's willing to risk a lot of chips with a marginal hand. 3.) if you know he's willing to risk a lot of chips with a marginal hand, you can take his chips on a relatively risk free basis in the future.
or He actually has a good hand, like a pocket pair and you are a small underdog preflop.
Either way, re-raising is not a +EV play.
In her scenario, she's holding about 11K in chips with blinds of 200/400, if she was short stacked or this was the later stages of the tourney, no problem, push. But with a playable stack like 11K rep. about 30 Big Blinds, she's in no situation to take unnecsessary chances.
I'd say that with the Loose Aggressive player generally, does not want to be challenged. He's usually looking to steal a number of easy chips and build up a pot. But like any bully, when you stand up to them, they usually back down. A re-raise from a LAG player is actually a sign of strength, a sign they are holding som kind of playable hand. Maybe a hand like mid pairs.
Even if they don't have a playable hand, even if they are holding a dog hand like suited connectors, why risk going in with a mere 60% chance to win?
THink about it this way. 1.) You put the LAG Loser on raising with any 2 hands, even a dog hand. 2.) If you put him on a hand like this then you KNOW he's willing to risk a lot of chips with a marginal hand. 3.) if you know he's willing to risk a lot of chips with a marginal hand, you can take his chips on a relatively risk free basis in the future.
or He actually has a good hand, like a pocket pair and you are a small underdog preflop.
Either way, re-raising is not a +EV play.
In her scenario, she's holding about 11K in chips with blinds of 200/400, if she was short stacked or this was the later stages of the tourney, no problem, push. But with a playable stack like 11K rep. about 30 Big Blinds, she's in no situation to take unnecsessary chances.
I'd say that with the Loose Aggressive player generally, does not want to be challenged. He's usually looking to steal a number of easy chips and build up a pot. But like any bully, when you stand up to them, they usually back down. A re-raise from a LAG player is actually a sign of strength, a sign they are holding som kind of playable hand. Maybe a hand like mid pairs.
Even if they don't have a playable hand, even if they are holding a dog hand like suited connectors, why risk going in with a mere 60% chance to win?
THink about it this way. 1.) You put the LAG Loser on raising with any 2 hands, even a dog hand. 2.) If you put him on a hand like this then you KNOW he's willing to risk a lot of chips with a marginal hand. 3.) if you know he's willing to risk a lot of chips with a marginal hand, you can take his chips on a relatively risk free basis in the future.
or He actually has a good hand, like a pocket pair and you are a small underdog preflop.
Either way, re-raising is not a +EV play.
In her scenario, she's holding about 11K in chips with blinds of 200/400, if she was short stacked or this was the later stages of the tourney, no problem, push. But with a playable stack like 11K rep. about 30 Big Blinds, she's in no situation to take unnecsessary chances.
lol... dont even know how to respond to this... but if you arent willing to get it all in for 25 big blinds or whatever it is with AQ against a late position raiser who opens a ton of hands maybe poker isnt for you
lol... dont even know how to respond to this... but if you arent willing to get it all in for 25 big blinds or whatever it is with AQ against a late position raiser who opens a ton of hands maybe poker isnt for you
And Lol to your lol.
I'm willing to take chances when playing poker. But this is a completely unnecessary chance for this situation.
The key to poker is not to take a lot of 60-40 chances pre-flop when both you and the other player are fully stacked. The key to poker is to capitalize on the unskilled.
Your opinion on the correct response to this situation is predicated on the idea that Kristea Sea is equally skilled to this LAG player (and for that matter, everyone on else on her table). MY opinion is forumlated upon KS being much more highly skilled than everyone else at the table.
And If you don't think you are definitely the most skilled player at the table, each and every time you sit down, then it is you my friend, who needs to pick a new hobby.
I'm willing to take chances when playing poker. But this is a completely unnecessary chance for this situation.
I would hardly call shoving here taking a chance when it is very likely you have the best hand and the most likely outcome is winning the pot preflop with no showdown
The key to poker is not to take a lot of 60-40 chances pre-flop when both you and the other player are fully stacked. The key to poker is to capitalize on the unskilled.
You say you are willing to take chances but yet you dont want to take a 60/40... seems logical.
Your opinion on the correct response to this situation is predicated on the idea that Kristea Sea is equally skilled to this LAG player (and for that matter, everyone on else on her table). MY opinion is forumlated upon KS being much more highly skilled than everyone else at the table.
With a 27bb stack i have a hard time imagining anyone having the skill advantage to pass up shoving in preflop in this spot.
And If you don't think you are definitely the most skilled player at the table, each and every time you sit down, then it is you my friend, who needs to pick a new hobby.
I would gladly play at a 6-max cash table against phil ivey, patrik antonius and 3 fish... you dont need to be the best player at the table to have an edge.
obv, With the odds of hitting the flop and being good against this lagtard, combined with the odds of the 'stop n go' usually working here...you haven't yet convinced me the stop n go is a bad play here. Obviously I understand getting it in when you are ahead...but what is so bad about the stop n go (against someone who won't recognize it)....thoughts,ty.
You say you are willing to take chances but yet you dont want to take a 60/40... seems logical.
Completely logical, it's about relative odds. I'm not going to take a 60/40 gamble when I feel there's a good chance that even if an ACe or Queen hits, the LAG player will make a mistake and pay me off. Or further still, if I get a better situation later in the tournament, I am still alive long enough to utuilize it.
With a 27bb stack i have a hard time imagining anyone having the skill advantage to pass up shoving in preflop in this spot.
What do stack sizes have to do with skill level? How many times have newer players been lucky, only to lose it all later in the tournament?
I would gladly play at a 6-max cash table against phil ivey, patrik antonius and 3 fish... you dont need to be the best player at the table to have an edge.
But you aren't playing with 2 players whom you can reasonable expect to have superior skill, you are playing on a table full of players whom you can expect to have less skill.
Let me give you a scenario to illustrate this concept.
Let's say you are in the Big Blind at the final table of the world series of poker. To your left and right, Doyle Brunson and Phil Ivey and the gang. Let's say the chip stacks are equal and you pick up :ac:as. Now suppose 5 of these world class players push all in against you? Do you call? Of course! Even though you are <50% to win, if your aces hold up, you probably win the WSOP.
Now let's take a different scenario, you are playing early in a local bar tournament. You notice these players are total donkey idiots. Player 1, likes to scratch his nose when he bluffs and he does this consistently and he coughs whenever he has a good hand. Player 2 always raises all in whenever he holds any Ace and folds to a bet otherwise. ETC. Now same scenario, 5 players have decided to move all in and you hold:ah:ad. Now what's your play? By the book, it's an +EV play, but by the way the game has played out, you know that you will MOST likely win this tournament. What is the correct play?
Put away the textbooks. They are usually written with the understanding that all players involved in the hand have similar skill levels. This is because the people writing these books have the same circle of friends. There are few books written with a small-ball NL player in mind.
I guess there is no way you will be convinced that shoving is far more +EV than calling here so I won't bother trying to argue. I also won't waste my time debating folding AA preflop because that is just plain dumb.
What do stack sizes have to do with skill level? How many times have newer players been lucky, only to lose it all later in the tournament?
Stack sizes have everything to do with it... when you are super deep stacked you can afford to pass up small edges if you are more skilled than your opponents so you can get it in with a bigger edge later. Deeper in tourneys with shallow stacks you simply can't afford to pass up a 60/40. What are you going to do... blind down and wait for a big pair so you can get it all in as an 80/20 and if you win that you are right back with the stack size you had when you passed up the 60/40.
My general impression is that the people who argue for folding hands because you have a skill advantage and can find a better spot are generally not that good at poker. Outside of early stages of tourneys when you are super deepstacked you simply cant pass up small edges.
obv, With the odds of hitting the flop and being good against this lagtard, combined with the odds of the 'stop n go' usually working here...you haven't yet convinced me the stop n go is a bad play here. Obviously I understand getting it in when you are ahead...but what is so bad about the stop n go (against someone who won't recognize it)....thoughts,ty.
My thoughts on the stop n go in this spot is that your stack is too big for it. Generally the stop n go is used when you dont really have much fold equity if you shove preflop so by calling and shoving the flop you are in a sense creating fold equity. In this spot if you call and lead out on the flop it seems pretty obvious and if i was the preflop raiser i would be shoving over the top a lot and unless you hit a pair you would be forced to fold.
If you are gonna get creative do a stop and go it would be better if you didnt have a strong preflop hand.. AQ is too strong a hand against this opponents range to not be reraising here.
With a hand like AK or AQ you generally want to take it down preflop or get it in preflop so that you can see all 5 cards.
I understand the point he is making and it is not unreasonable. This is not your std. "Can you fold aces pf" bullshit
Thanks for your input!
It's ok, people who can't formulate rational arguments usually can not think logically at all. These type of people are a welcome addition to any poker table.
The correct play is choose the action that maximizes EV. You can't ask for a better situation than to get all your money in with the best hand in poker. Having set records in a couple of bar tournament leagues including the most wins, it would have been idiotic of me to fold AA preflop just because I think the other players are less skilled.
In any one tournament, luck plays a huge factor and the best skilled player is unlikely to be the winner. However, if you know how to make EV-maximizing decisions such as calling preflop all-ins with AA, then you will win and make it to the final table a lot more than average in the long run.
Now let's take a different scenario, you are playing early in a local bar tournament. You notice these players are total donkey idiots. Player 1, likes to scratch his nose when he bluffs and he does this consistently and he coughs whenever he has a good hand. Player 2 always raises all in whenever he holds any Ace and folds to a bet otherwise. ETC. Now same scenario, 5 players have decided to move all in and you hold:ah:ad. Now what's your play? By the book, it's an +EV play, but by the way the game has played out, you know that you will MOST likely win this tournament. What is the correct play?
My thoughts on the stop n go in this spot is that your stack is too big for it. Generally the stop n go is used when you dont really have much fold equity if you shove preflop so by calling and shoving the flop you are in a sense creating fold equity. In this spot if you call and lead out on the flop it seems pretty obvious and if i was the preflop raiser i would be shoving over the top a lot and unless you hit a pair you would be forced to fold.
Why not just evaluate the flop? There are a number of flops that give Kristy the correct play of pushing. Obviously any flop with an Ace, a Queen or 2 clubs or a flop like King, King-10 and she's a solid favorite to 2 undercards. Any hand that misses but with a "big" card like a King and she can push and the LAG player has to fold. A flop with 2 small paired cards like 4-4-2 and she can push with near certainty that this is the correct play. A flop like 4-5-6 and the lag has either hit or has flopped an open ended straight draw and Kristy must play cautiously. The information of the flop will dictate the next coarse of action. Considerably better set of circumstances than having to rely upon a coinflip or 60/40.
The correct play is choose the action that maximizes EV. You can't ask for a better situation than to get all your money in with the best hand in poker. Having set records in a couple of bar tournament leagues including the most wins, it would have been idiotic of me to fold AA preflop just because I think the other players are less skilled.
In any one tournament, luck plays a huge factor and the best skilled player is unlikely to be the winner. However, if you know how to make EV-maximizing decisions such as calling preflop all-ins with AA, then you will win and make it to the final table a lot more than average in the long run.
The AA situation really, I just used it to illustrate a point. Obviously in a bar tournament you could never be so much more skilled that you would fold Aces. I should have said "for the purposes of example".
Ok I'll re-illustrate for the purposes of example. Let's say you are wearing X-ray glasses that can flat out see the other players cards but you can't see the cards coming from the dealer. Do you still call an all in bet from 5 players?
Even Hellmuth advocates that there are a few rare examples where you can fold aces pre-flop. For example, you are deeply short stacked and in the bubble in a major MTT. 3 players have gone all in before you and if you survive you go from 0 tournament dollars won to say $5000. The play is to fold.
Why not just evaluate the flop? There are a number of flops that give Kristy the correct play of pushing. Obviously any flop with an Ace, a Queen or 2 clubs or a flop like King, King-10 and she's a solid favorite to 2 undercards. Any hand that misses but with a "big" card like a King and she can push and the LAG player has to fold. A flop with 2 small paired cards like 4-4-2 and she can push with near certainty that this is the correct play. A flop like 4-5-6 and the lag has either hit or has flopped an open ended straight draw and Kristy must play cautiously. The information of the flop will dictate the next coarse of action. Considerably better set of circumstances than having to rely upon a coinflip or 60/40.
In some situations it's okay to give up small preflop edges in return for more information on the flop and beyond because you play better postflop. What you do is trade a little of your preflop equity in order to keep the pot size small and make up a bigger postflop edge.
This is not the one of those situations.
Here you have a huge advantage preflop.
Push it.
If you had say, A9
You could say that you're probably ahead of his range, but you don't have huge advantage so you can see the flop ...
Ok I'll re-illustrate for the purposes of example. Let's say you are wearing X-ray glasses that can flat out see the other players cards but you can't see the cards coming from the dealer. Do you still call an all in bet from 5 players?
This is a spot where you would have the skill advantage to pass up small preflop edges. But since nobody (other than potripper) has the edge of actually seeing their opponents cards this is not a realistic example since nobody will ever have this much of an edge in reality.
If the opponent in this hand was a much tighter player i could see an arguement for just calling preflop but i still dont think its the best play. The bottom line is this guy is raising a lot of hands in late position and not getting out of line post flop, you have a monster hand that is better off seeing 5 cards than 3 cards, you have 27bbs and are out of position. You absolutely need to be reraising in this spot... stop talking about relying upon a coinflip or a 60/40... you will end the pot with a reraise the vast majority of the time and in the spots where you dont you will often be racing. AQ is not a hand that you want to just take a flop with out of position... you have too big a preflop edge to be just calling and you wont get paid off on many flops that you do hit. Calling preflop is just so weak. Just curious...how would you play AK, TT, 55 in this exact spot?
The only debate in this hand should be if you should just shove or make a standard reraise with intentions of calling a shove.
This is a spot where you would have the skill advantage to pass up small preflop edges. But since nobody (other than potripper) has the edge of actually seeing their opponents cards this is not a realistic example since nobody will ever have this much of an edge in reality.
Ahh ..but I only mentioned this to demonstrate there are times when sacrificing a preflop advantage can be the right play but it relies upon the relative skill difference between your opponents. Folding aces because you can see your oppoennt's cards is an exaggeration but calling with A_Q because there's a high probability of your opponent misplaying the hand is a more realisitic example of the same concept.
If the opponent in this hand was a much tighter player i could see an arguement for just calling preflop but i still dont think its the best play. The bottom line is this guy is raising a lot of hands in late position and not getting out of line post flop, you have a monster hand that is better off seeing 5 cards than 3 cards, you have 27bbs and are out of position. You absolutely need to be reraising in this spot... stop talking about relying upon a coinflip or a 60/40... you will end the pot with a reraise the vast majority of the time and in the spots where you dont you will often be racing. AQ is not a hand that you want to just take a flop with out of position... you have too big a preflop edge to be just calling and you wont get paid off on many flops that you do hit. Calling preflop is just so weak. Just curious...how would you play AK, TT, 55 in this exact spot?
You are greatly overstating the amount of fold equity you get here by pushing. I don't think you play much of these low level tournaments. Perhaps your venue is a more skillful $50 or $100 buy in torunament. I've seen some of the most ridiculous calls, raises and folds from players at a 20.00 buy in tourney or lower. There are so many LAG players that just will not fold their hands. Therefore, pushing is likely to be a simple 60/40 situation/ Completely unacceptable to lose a tournament in this manner unless you are short stacked and you have no other choice, Put it this way, even if Kristy wins this showdown, she doubles in chips but still has a long way to go before even placing in the money. On the other hand, she can lose everything. But more importantly than just being eliminated form the tournament, she forego's the opportunity to pick up far easier chips along the way.
And by the way refraining form going all in with A-Q is not weak. Relying upon your logic and your poker instincts for post flop play requires, way way more guts than pushing with A-Q like typical "textbook" poker and then complaining about bad luck after losing to 7-5 offsuit.
You are greatly overstating the amount of fold equity you get here by pushing. I don't think you play much of these low level tournaments. Perhaps your venue is a more skillful $50 or $100 buy in torunament. I've seen some of the most ridiculous calls, raises and folds from players at a 20.00 buy in tourney or lower. There are so many LAG players that just will not fold their hands. Therefore, pushing is likely to be a simple 60/40 situation/ Completely unacceptable to lose a tournament in this manner unless you are short stacked and you have no other choice, Put it this way, even if Kristy wins this showdown, she doubles in chips but still has a long way to go before even placing in the money. On the other hand, she can lose everything. But more importantly than just being eliminated form the tournament, she forego's the opportunity to pick up far easier chips along the way.
And by the way refraining form going all in with A-Q is not weak. Relying upon your logic and your poker instincts for post flop play requires, way way more guts than pushing with A-Q like typical "textbook" poker and then complaining about bad luck after losing to 7-5 offsuit.
You are correct in that i don't play low buyin tourneys (or any tourneys outside of sunday for that matter). I dont think im overestimating the amount of fold equity in shoving but even if i was that is not a bad thing... we have AQ not 98... if they are making looser calls it means they are calling with hands that AQ beats (weaker aces, KQ, KJ etc.) This is a good thing... i will gladly get my money in good and leave it up to the cards.
You are overestimating how easy it will be to pick up chips and find a better spot later in the tourney. I am a cash game player and would definitely have a significant post flop edge against players in these tourneys but im still getting it in preflop in this spot every single time. As i said before... the people who argue for passing up small edges (in this hand i think it is more than a small edge) so they can use their skill advantage later are generally not very good at poker.
Comments
Wrong. This is such an overgeneralization...the beauty of poker is there are almost always exceptions to any "rule". To say you should "always" or "never" do something is ridiculous. About the only thing I can think of is that you should never fold AA pf in a cash game, and you should never fold the nuts. Both of these are so abundantly obvious though...
1) Re-raise all-in: highest fold equity & probably highest EV, but HIGHEST VARIANCE!
2) Re-raise but not all-in: high EV, but high variance.
3) Calling with probably the best hand, but with the worst position & the BB left to call: probably +EV compared to folding, lower variance.
4) Folding: EV=0, lowest variance.
I would choose the play that I think maximizes EV, not minimizes variance (folding). "Small ball" poker does not apply in this and many other tournament situations. We are not Phil Ivey, we are probably not the best post-flop player in the tournament, we are not in a Skill Level 6 tournament with 90-minute blinds and a Patience Factor of 100, and we are not in the Green Zone.
We CANNOT afford to pass up +EV situations just to minimize variance or based on the unreasonable assumption that all the other players are so much worse than us that we will have many higher +EV opportunities before the increasing blinds limits our options. As Chris Ferguson said at the WSOP Main Event, even he could not afford to pass up small edges.
You also need to ask yourself a question about your skill level vs the other players in the tournament.
Wetbrain's theory: The more skilled you are vs. the other members of your table, the less necessary it is to take risks to play winning poker.
Why risk a coinflip with a loose-aggressive player? Call and see if you hit an ace or a queen, 2 diamonds or any other situation where you can be considered a reasonable favorite to win. If you hit a big hand (say you flop 2 pair or a flush or trip Queens) make small value bets, make him inclined to raise you. Then you can value bet or check raise him on the river. I guarantee this play is more +EV then coinflipping with someone of lesser skill.
You arent risking a coinflip... you very likely have the best hand... and by shoving you are just going to take the pot down without showdown most of the time. Why call and risk getting bluffed out on a 953 rainbow flop? If you call and hit a big hand you arent getting paid off very often since he most likely doesnt have much.
In this case, this player is making the huge mistakes preflop. (In the form of these k-10 'roid rage chip stampedes) Occassionally he'd fire at a flop..but for the most part if he was called he was betting for value from that point forward. I raised expecting, wanting, the shove and was prepared to call; but I really can't decide if I was over eager to race my a-q against his b.s.
I'd say that with the Loose Aggressive player generally, does not want to be challenged. He's usually looking to steal a number of easy chips and build up a pot. But like any bully, when you stand up to them, they usually back down. A re-raise from a LAG player is actually a sign of strength, a sign they are holding som kind of playable hand. Maybe a hand like mid pairs.
Even if they don't have a playable hand, even if they are holding a dog hand like suited connectors, why risk going in with a mere 60% chance to win?
THink about it this way. 1.) You put the LAG Loser on raising with any 2 hands, even a dog hand. 2.) If you put him on a hand like this then you KNOW he's willing to risk a lot of chips with a marginal hand. 3.) if you know he's willing to risk a lot of chips with a marginal hand, you can take his chips on a relatively risk free basis in the future.
or
Either way, re-raising is not a +EV play.
In her scenario, she's holding about 11K in chips with blinds of 200/400, if she was short stacked or this was the later stages of the tourney, no problem, push. But with a playable stack like 11K rep. about 30 Big Blinds, she's in no situation to take unnecsessary chances.
And this is your brain on drugs
Mark
lol... dont even know how to respond to this... but if you arent willing to get it all in for 25 big blinds or whatever it is with AQ against a late position raiser who opens a ton of hands maybe poker isnt for you
I shove he goes away, I re-raise I get all our chips in and cross my fingers.
I lean towards the re-raise, but I can't say with certainty that it is the right play. (hence the post)
You're special
And Lol to your lol.
I'm willing to take chances when playing poker. But this is a completely unnecessary chance for this situation.
The key to poker is not to take a lot of 60-40 chances pre-flop when both you and the other player are fully stacked. The key to poker is to capitalize on the unskilled.
Your opinion on the correct response to this situation is predicated on the idea that Kristea Sea is equally skilled to this LAG player (and for that matter, everyone on else on her table). MY opinion is forumlated upon KS being much more highly skilled than everyone else at the table.
And If you don't think you are definitely the most skilled player at the table, each and every time you sit down, then it is you my friend, who needs to pick a new hobby.
I would hardly call shoving here taking a chance when it is very likely you have the best hand and the most likely outcome is winning the pot preflop with no showdown
You say you are willing to take chances but yet you dont want to take a 60/40... seems logical.
With a 27bb stack i have a hard time imagining anyone having the skill advantage to pass up shoving in preflop in this spot.
I would gladly play at a 6-max cash table against phil ivey, patrik antonius and 3 fish... you dont need to be the best player at the table to have an edge.
Completely logical, it's about relative odds. I'm not going to take a 60/40 gamble when I feel there's a good chance that even if an ACe or Queen hits, the LAG player will make a mistake and pay me off. Or further still, if I get a better situation later in the tournament, I am still alive long enough to utuilize it.
What do stack sizes have to do with skill level? How many times have newer players been lucky, only to lose it all later in the tournament?
But you aren't playing with 2 players whom you can reasonable expect to have superior skill, you are playing on a table full of players whom you can expect to have less skill.
Let me give you a scenario to illustrate this concept.
Let's say you are in the Big Blind at the final table of the world series of poker. To your left and right, Doyle Brunson and Phil Ivey and the gang. Let's say the chip stacks are equal and you pick up :ac:as. Now suppose 5 of these world class players push all in against you? Do you call? Of course! Even though you are <50% to win, if your aces hold up, you probably win the WSOP.
Now let's take a different scenario, you are playing early in a local bar tournament. You notice these players are total donkey idiots. Player 1, likes to scratch his nose when he bluffs and he does this consistently and he coughs whenever he has a good hand. Player 2 always raises all in whenever he holds any Ace and folds to a bet otherwise. ETC. Now same scenario, 5 players have decided to move all in and you hold:ah:ad. Now what's your play? By the book, it's an +EV play, but by the way the game has played out, you know that you will MOST likely win this tournament. What is the correct play?
Put away the textbooks. They are usually written with the understanding that all players involved in the hand have similar skill levels. This is because the people writing these books have the same circle of friends. There are few books written with a small-ball NL player in mind.
Wetbrain, you and IHP have SOO much in common....
You both argue for folding AA preflop..... damn, I mean.... damn.
Are you disciplined too?
Hrm... wait a second...
<runs from the room, returns with dictionary>
Let's see... direct... dirty.... ahh, here we are... disciplined.
Hmm... funny, it doesn't say it's a synonym of "fucktarded".
Mark
You just showed the whole world that you can be both a pussy and an ass.
WELL DONE!
Stack sizes have everything to do with it... when you are super deep stacked you can afford to pass up small edges if you are more skilled than your opponents so you can get it in with a bigger edge later. Deeper in tourneys with shallow stacks you simply can't afford to pass up a 60/40. What are you going to do... blind down and wait for a big pair so you can get it all in as an 80/20 and if you win that you are right back with the stack size you had when you passed up the 60/40.
My general impression is that the people who argue for folding hands because you have a skill advantage and can find a better spot are generally not that good at poker. Outside of early stages of tourneys when you are super deepstacked you simply cant pass up small edges.
My thoughts on the stop n go in this spot is that your stack is too big for it. Generally the stop n go is used when you dont really have much fold equity if you shove preflop so by calling and shoving the flop you are in a sense creating fold equity. In this spot if you call and lead out on the flop it seems pretty obvious and if i was the preflop raiser i would be shoving over the top a lot and unless you hit a pair you would be forced to fold.
If you are gonna get creative do a stop and go it would be better if you didnt have a strong preflop hand.. AQ is too strong a hand against this opponents range to not be reraising here.
With a hand like AK or AQ you generally want to take it down preflop or get it in preflop so that you can see all 5 cards.
I understand the point he is making and it is not unreasonable. This is not your std. "Can you fold aces pf" bullshit
Thanks for your input!
I'm taking the +EV situation here.
It's ok, people who can't formulate rational arguments usually can not think logically at all. These type of people are a welcome addition to any poker table.
In any one tournament, luck plays a huge factor and the best skilled player is unlikely to be the winner. However, if you know how to make EV-maximizing decisions such as calling preflop all-ins with AA, then you will win and make it to the final table a lot more than average in the long run.
Why not just evaluate the flop? There are a number of flops that give Kristy the correct play of pushing. Obviously any flop with an Ace, a Queen or 2 clubs or a flop like King, King-10 and she's a solid favorite to 2 undercards. Any hand that misses but with a "big" card like a King and she can push and the LAG player has to fold. A flop with 2 small paired cards like 4-4-2 and she can push with near certainty that this is the correct play. A flop like 4-5-6 and the lag has either hit or has flopped an open ended straight draw and Kristy must play cautiously. The information of the flop will dictate the next coarse of action. Considerably better set of circumstances than having to rely upon a coinflip or 60/40.
The AA situation really, I just used it to illustrate a point. Obviously in a bar tournament you could never be so much more skilled that you would fold Aces. I should have said "for the purposes of example".
Ok I'll re-illustrate for the purposes of example. Let's say you are wearing X-ray glasses that can flat out see the other players cards but you can't see the cards coming from the dealer. Do you still call an all in bet from 5 players?
Even Hellmuth advocates that there are a few rare examples where you can fold aces pre-flop. For example, you are deeply short stacked and in the bubble in a major MTT. 3 players have gone all in before you and if you survive you go from 0 tournament dollars won to say $5000. The play is to fold.
In some situations it's okay to give up small preflop edges in return for more information on the flop and beyond because you play better postflop. What you do is trade a little of your preflop equity in order to keep the pot size small and make up a bigger postflop edge.
This is not the one of those situations.
Here you have a huge advantage preflop.
Push it.
If you had say, A9
You could say that you're probably ahead of his range, but you don't have huge advantage so you can see the flop ...
This is a spot where you would have the skill advantage to pass up small preflop edges. But since nobody (other than potripper) has the edge of actually seeing their opponents cards this is not a realistic example since nobody will ever have this much of an edge in reality.
If the opponent in this hand was a much tighter player i could see an arguement for just calling preflop but i still dont think its the best play. The bottom line is this guy is raising a lot of hands in late position and not getting out of line post flop, you have a monster hand that is better off seeing 5 cards than 3 cards, you have 27bbs and are out of position. You absolutely need to be reraising in this spot... stop talking about relying upon a coinflip or a 60/40... you will end the pot with a reraise the vast majority of the time and in the spots where you dont you will often be racing. AQ is not a hand that you want to just take a flop with out of position... you have too big a preflop edge to be just calling and you wont get paid off on many flops that you do hit. Calling preflop is just so weak. Just curious...how would you play AK, TT, 55 in this exact spot?
The only debate in this hand should be if you should just shove or make a standard reraise with intentions of calling a shove.
Ahh ..but I only mentioned this to demonstrate there are times when sacrificing a preflop advantage can be the right play but it relies upon the relative skill difference between your opponents. Folding aces because you can see your oppoennt's cards is an exaggeration but calling with A_Q because there's a high probability of your opponent misplaying the hand is a more realisitic example of the same concept.
You are greatly overstating the amount of fold equity you get here by pushing. I don't think you play much of these low level tournaments. Perhaps your venue is a more skillful $50 or $100 buy in torunament. I've seen some of the most ridiculous calls, raises and folds from players at a 20.00 buy in tourney or lower. There are so many LAG players that just will not fold their hands. Therefore, pushing is likely to be a simple 60/40 situation/ Completely unacceptable to lose a tournament in this manner unless you are short stacked and you have no other choice, Put it this way, even if Kristy wins this showdown, she doubles in chips but still has a long way to go before even placing in the money. On the other hand, she can lose everything. But more importantly than just being eliminated form the tournament, she forego's the opportunity to pick up far easier chips along the way.
And by the way refraining form going all in with A-Q is not weak. Relying upon your logic and your poker instincts for post flop play requires, way way more guts than pushing with A-Q like typical "textbook" poker and then complaining about bad luck after losing to 7-5 offsuit.
You are correct in that i don't play low buyin tourneys (or any tourneys outside of sunday for that matter). I dont think im overestimating the amount of fold equity in shoving but even if i was that is not a bad thing... we have AQ not 98... if they are making looser calls it means they are calling with hands that AQ beats (weaker aces, KQ, KJ etc.) This is a good thing... i will gladly get my money in good and leave it up to the cards.
You are overestimating how easy it will be to pick up chips and find a better spot later in the tourney. I am a cash game player and would definitely have a significant post flop edge against players in these tourneys but im still getting it in preflop in this spot every single time. As i said before... the people who argue for passing up small edges (in this hand i think it is more than a small edge) so they can use their skill advantage later are generally not very good at poker.