Yet another...

... call or fold post.

$200 NL SNG at Party.  None of the players are known to me.  1st level (10/15).  All of our stacks are approx. 1000.

I'm in the cutoff with AhAc.  One EP limper, I make it 60 to go, BB and EP limper both call. 

3 of us to the flop: Th Qd Jc.  BB checks, EP checks, I bet 150.  BB check-raises all-in, EP folds.

My decision.  Call or fold?

Any comments appreciated.

Comments

  • I hate that spot.

    I've been in similar spots but deep in tourneys when I laid down my AA to 10 J Q and 10 J k boards. I just checked cardplayers stats and AA is not a big a dog as I thought against 2-pair with that board. In your spot I would probably call because at the early level on SNGs there are usually 1-2 donks that just cant wait to go broke. You're probably up against KQ.
  • I'm leaning to the fold. a $200 SNG, so I assume they are decent. They know I could be raising AA KK AK QQ JJ AQ etc so that either I have an over or I got a piece of the flop. The flop is also well co-ordinated for a QJ call. But the player could be semibluffing with a hand like KQ/KJ. Since the players are un-beknown, I lean to the fold as 800 chips is still plenty until you get on later.
  • Meh. Would a raise of 45 pre-flop scare out 10J, JQ or QK? Probably not. I hope it would scare out 9K but that is hard to say. Would someone holding AQ, AK, 1010, JJ, QQ or KK reraise pre-flop? Probably. So... I'd guess you are up against 2 pr, QK, AQ or a 'shitty' player (my valuation which is usually wrong...). You have 2 aces so the odds of AK or AQ drop dramatically.

    I think you are getting 1.3 to 1 odds on your money. At this point, I'd say I haven't had my $200 worth of fun yet and likely fold. But I'd hope like hell to learn what cards he was playing.

    With KK, I'd be more inclined to call here. Any thoughts on that?
  • Be careful with the pot odds calculation.

    There is currently $1280 in the pot, and it costs $790 to call. That's just over 1.6 to 1 on the money, or in percentage, the EV break even point would be having a 38% chance of winning the hand against your opponent's range of holdings. In general in tournaments, you don't necessarily desire plays which are close to the EV break even point.

    However, unless Party SNG blind structures have changed a lot since I last played a SNG there (pbly a few months ago), I would favour a call here. You're going to need to gamble at many future points in this tournament with worse hands than this.

    BONSAIIIIIIIIIIII!

    Honestly, this is strikes me as a tough, and very close decision. Even with the turbo-ish Party SNG structure, laying down the hand is not unreasonable.

    ScottyZ
  • I think it would be much too likely for the villain to be holding hand that you beat to fold here. As Scotty said you need to double up to win these things and the blind structure generally forces the need to make some sorta gamble. There is no made hand that has you drawing dead and again you could easily be up against KQ.

    So even though folding is far from terrible, I would call and either double up with an excellent chance to win or go bust and signing up for my next Sit'N'Go.

    Aces what were your thoughts here?
  • My thoughts were that my opponent had the goods.  At least 2 pair.  He couldn't slowplay his hand because of the threatening nature of the flop, so he had to check-raise push.  The fact that he was doing this with 2 players left behind him only strengthened my conviction that I was beat.

    Here's how the rest of the hand went:

    EP folded.  I took my time, and typed: "Guess I'll have to fold my AA".  Then, I folded.

    BB said: "Wow I can't believe you laid that down".

    I said: "I think you had at least 2 pair.  Care to share?"

    He didn't answer.

    The sit and go went on for a while, until finally it was me and the BB from that hand playing heads-up.  At that point, I asked him if he had my AA beat from that hand in the first level.  He told me that he did.  Was he telling the truth?  Probably, but who knows, and I went on to win the thing.

    I actually thought it wasn't that big of a laydown.  A TJQ flop is TERRIBLE for AA, IMO.  As some of the responses have mentioned, there are too many hands that could have hit that flop pretty hard, and AA isn't one of them.  I would have called with KK, though.

    In general, I thought that my BB opponent had no reason to not put me on at least a decent hand.  So the only reason I could think of for him to c/r all-in on the flop was because he was pretty certain he had the best hand, and wanted to protect it.  I still had enough chips to play with if I folded, so that's what I did. 
  • So you guys would call away your stacks when you can only beat a bluff?

    At best you have to survive the OESD, at worst you are up against two pair or a set.. Not exactly a situation I'm looking to get it all in the middle.
    So even though folding is far from terrible, I would call and either double up with an excellent chance to win or go bust and signing up for my next Sit'N'Go

    It's one thing to pull the trigger on a coin flip situation. It's another to just give you chips away just so you can start another one.
  • too scary of a flop for the AA. I agree that the check raise is representing atleast two pair, and with that board 2 pair can be easily out drawn. He thinks he is ahead and wants to take the pot down.
  • am playing in a SNG that has Turbo-nature where I'm not so averse to close EV play

    As stated...in general when playing Sit'N'Goes of this nature you will at some point need to take a gamble (and sometimes a much worse gambool than in the OP). This is far from an easy call or fold and niether is wrong. I just prefer to take the chance early rather than wait 'til later (and still go home with no money).

    Without a stack to play these things can become plain gambooling. Once you are down to 5 handed or less the blinds increase at lightening speed*.

    *This of course is assuming they (Party) are still using the 10 hands/level they have used in the past.
  • fold fold and fold some more

    you played it perfectly
  • $10-$30 SNG I call.

    $200 sit 'n go. I put him on J10, or possibly a set and pounding it to make your sraight draw or AQ pay in full and I lay down to wait for the next hand.
  • sloth wrote:
    $10-$30 SNG I call.

    $200 sit 'n go. I put him on J10, or possibly a set and pounding it to make your sraight draw or AQ pay in full and I lay down to wait for the next hand.
    I'm curious. Should the entry fee change your strategy?
  • IN A $10 sng, someone easily makes that move with any Q or K
  • pkrfce9 wrote:
    sloth wrote:
    $10-$30 SNG I call.

    $200 sit 'n go. I put him on J10, or possibly a set and pounding it to make your sraight draw or AQ pay in full and I lay down to wait for the next hand.
    I'm curious. Should the entry fee change your strategy?

    Absolutely, in general. The buy-in amount is a key piece of data in a tournament hand analysis discussion.

    In this particular hand, the chances of a $10-$30 buy-in opponent having a hand like 44, Q2, K4 or 93 in this spot, though still slim, are far greater than finding a $200 buy-in opponent with those same (or similar) hands.

    ScottyZ
  • ScottyZ wrote:
    Absolutely, in general. The buy-in amount is a key piece of data in a tournament hand analysis discussion.
    I can *partially* accept this. In general, I would expect more sensible play the higher the buy-in. Of course, someone could use these expectations to their advantage, as well!

    But then what about the fact this is on Party?

    Plus, even though this is a $200 SNG, who says the guy isn't a maniac? Don't you get maniacs at WSOP main event, too?

    Great discussion, BTW.
  • Plus, even though this is a $200 SNG, who says the guy isn't a maniac?

    You're talking possibilities, whereas we want to to talk probabilities.

    Maniacs are obviously possible at all buy-in levels, but more probable at lower buy-in levels.

    ScottyZ
  • pkrfce9 wrote:
    ScottyZ wrote:
    Absolutely, in general. The buy-in amount is a key piece of data in a tournament hand analysis discussion.
    I can *partially* accept this. In general, I would expect more sensible play the higher the buy-in. Of course, someone could use these expectations to their advantage, as well!

    But then what about the fact this is on Party?

    Plus, even though this is a $200 SNG, who says the guy isn't a maniac? Don't you get maniacs at WSOP main event, too?

    Great discussion, BTW.

    I whollly agree with you there, but the change play in referrence to the buyin is not only because you assume there are going to be a higher calibre player @ higher buyins, but also let's not forgot the value of your investment to you.

    If you're at a $5 sit 'n go, first hand UTG moves allin preflop and there are TWO callers between. You have 99

    With $5 invested do you not think your play would be leaning towards "yeah, let's gamble. big pot!" ? Now what if this were the first hand of a tournament you'd paid $1000 to sit down at? Wouldn't you think the callers before you are more likely to also be higher calibre because of what they've invested?

    Think of it the same as you would playing for no money at all, or in Wilson software or something. You flop a gutshot and you know you've got 4 outs, but hey "I wanna see if it gets there" and why not? It's free. A lot of people treat sit n gos like this in the 5-30 range.

    People are guaranteed to make the most insane calls/bets the lower the investment. I certainly won't rule it out entirely at even the highest limit games, but it's less likely.
  • I hate calling, and I hate folding. The right play has to be to lay it down, he's telling you you're beat and unless you have some reason to doubt him (ie a read from previous sngs that he's a crazy) you should probably listen.
  • sloth wrote:
    I whollly agree with you there, but the change play in referrence to the buyin is not only because you assume there are going to be a higher calibre player @ higher buyins, but also let's not forgot the value of your investment to you.

    If you're at a $5 sit 'n go, first hand UTG moves allin preflop and there are TWO callers between. You have 99

    With $5 invested do you not think your play would be leaning towards "yeah, let's gamble. big pot!" ? Now what if this were the first hand of a tournament you'd paid $1000 to sit down at? Wouldn't you think the callers before you are more likely to also be higher calibre because of what they've invested?

    Think of it the same as you would playing for no money at all, or in Wilson software or something. You flop a gutshot and you know you've got 4 outs, but hey "I wanna see if it gets there" and why not? It's free. A lot of people treat sit n gos like this in the 5-30 range.

    People are guaranteed to make the most insane calls/bets the lower the investment. I certainly won't rule it out entirely at even the highest limit games, but it's less likely.
    I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the general idea. However, money is relative. For an 18-year old with a $100 stake, a $5 SNG miight have the same import as a $200 SNG for someone who just won 72k...

    Also, in a $200 game, don't you expect the players to pull a few more moves? Not that this is necessarily the case here, I'm just thinking out loud.
  • I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the general idea. However, money is relative. For an 18-year old with a $100 stake, a $5 SNG miight have the same import as a $200 SNG for someone who just won 72k...

    The actual $$$ amount of a buy-in should be relative to your bankroll. Now that being said many of us take shots at buy-in levels that are not within our normal bankroll limits but it should not affect the decisions you make throughout a tourney.

    What make me lean towards calling rather than folding is that the OP is a Sit'N'Go that has a rapidly increasing blind structure. If it was at PokerStars (reg. not Turbos) and/or UB (I think they still have smooth slow Sit'N'Goes?) then I think I would be folding and waiting for a better spot to double up. The problem at Party (although not the case in the OP since Aces folded and won) is that it is quite possible you won't find a better spot than this to double through.

    Now again any time you know you won't be under blind pressure soon, like early in multi, this is an easy fold.
  • The two high(er) pair and str8 possibilities are too great to call. I fold without blinking if I am planning to win the thing. IF I am just trying to get an edge on everyone else early - yeah call and hope for the best.

    In a different tourney at a different point of reference in the game, my thoughts and most of others may be different. But I think in that situation a fold is the most reasonable action.

    I think one big problem with the hand is that you had the rockets, the bullets - Ace Ace. It is hard to let go of that hand sometimes, even with the board and players screaming "you are SO beat". The board you hit gave you some outs against whatever the opponent had, which makes it seem worse/tougher. If you ranked the cards all down by one, would the discussion still be the same?

    But as usual, All_Aces did the right thing and folded (in my opinion) his hand.
  • My choices are

    fold and grumbe about it for the next 30 minutes

    or

    Call and see exactly what i'm expecting (two pair or a set) and say "i just knew it ... and oh yah and aces never win"



    fold
  • I had a similat situation with a MTT. It has been the only time that I have folded AA on the flop...online that I can recall. You know he has to have a piece of it (you can be right but still wrong) the best hand you could hope for is KQ or 910 and at this point your about 67% to win.

    Good Fold
Sign In or Register to comment.