Poker Discussion
|
|
Please help support pocketfives by using our links when choosing to download a new site!
CarbonPoker · Full Tilt · Cake Poker · PokerStars · Ultimate Bet · Players Only · Bodog
|
Out in 8th, no big deal. I expected to go deeper as I had plenty of chips at the FT, but that's how the cookie crumbles sometimes.
Here was the scenario in question, from the Final Table of the Stars $150
Some call this move intelligent, personally I think it was a brainfart....
Short stack is all in utg for 5300. Blinds were 2k 4k, it was 1300 for me to call from the BB with an ace in my hand. Now if gobboboy has a legitimate hand in the SB, then sure, a reraise to isolate the all in player makes sense. But to basically give protection to an all in player at the final table made no sense whatsoever imho. He had T high and helped the guy with 5300 chips stay alive. Of course that player doubles and triples up and then finds AA when myself and another player had already moved all in with AK, so now he is the huge chip leader instead of being out in 9th.
gobboboy has been doing great of late, and i wish him continued success, but I think this was a very low positive ev imho.
Dealt to brsavage [4h Ad]
Sinchron: raises 1308 to 5308 and is all-in
3Nemesis: folds
TexDuke: folds
phx99: folds
fumanchu: folds
iamzflo: folds
TopToad: folds
gobboboy: raises 42554 to 47862 and is all-in
brsavage: folds
*** FLOP *** [As 3h 7s]
*** TURN *** [As 3h 7s] [Jd]
*** RIVER *** [As 3h 7s Jd] [8c]
brsavage said, "thats a genius move with a player facing elimination"
*** SHOW DOWN ***
gobboboy: shows [Th 8s] (a pair of Eights)
Sinchron: shows [Td Tc] (a pair of Tens)
Sinchron collected 16416 from pot
brsavage said, "pure genius"
|
|
|
|
Ok, so ive been doing a lot of thinking about similar situations with regards to the differences between what is (+Chip EV) and what is overall +$EV in MTTs. In cash games, decisions are made almost always strictly in terms of Chip EV (barring metagame reasons..., setting weak opponents up for later hands, etc.), as Chip Ev is the same as $$EV. But in tournaments, the value of each chip changes significantly throughout the tournament. 15,000 chips at 100/200 is vastly different than 15,000 at 2,000/4,000...right??? My question is, as i choose to look at things in the same way as brsavage on this issue is...: How does one correctly evaluate the $$EV of a play like this in a MTT. In a cash game, or any other game where chips are money, there is little difficulty in calculating an approximate EV of a play using certain variables such as hand ranges, pot odds, etc.
It just seems to me that in a MTT situation like the one described in this post, there is a much larger range of variables. (Tripling up this certain player (is he a strong player or someone who is likely to quickly give back the chips he lost), how much are my chances of winning this tournament increased if i pick up these extra 15,000 chips or whatever and how does that correlate into actual $$ results??? is the risk of me losing on this hand cancelled out by the positive real $$ev of me having an extra 15,000 chips? While i agree with Brsavage on this issue, i am more interested in learning his opinion and other peoples opinions on a better way to "calculate real $$ev in relation to chip ev...and specifically on its practical implications in real tournament situations...
Sorry if this seems like a pointless rant, i just find this topic intriguing, and that there is a lot left to explore.
|
|
|
Having said I agree with both sides I honestly think the best play here was to make it 12000 to go. That way if BR has a monster and goes all in you can fold and if not you accomplished your goal of risking 3300 to win 13000 in a most likely 40% or so spot which is obviously +EV .
A.J.
|
|
|
Great, great, post.
I've commented before that many of the new school online superstars fall into the trap of playing math more than playing poker.
In NLH MTTs there are many, many other factors that SHOULD go into every decision besides the ev of an individual hand.
The expected value of pushing with 10-8 there can be profitable, in regards to the hand itself, however, the times you win, mostly the short stack's chips, you add to your chip stack, which at the end of the day guarantees nothing more than a better mathematical chance of winning 1st place, with alot of poker to be played. When you lose to the sb, you've left another player in the way to 1st place, and made him healthy in the process. The times you run into a hand in the BB, which goes on to beat you, well you just got sent to the rail with 11 BBS and no hand, and have a 0% chance of winning the tournament.
The game theory reference is paramount. Is it possible that while a hand is +ev, it can give you less of a chance of winning, when you factor in talent, the dnynamic you create at the table the times you lose to the short stack (like in this case, making a strong player with no chips, a factor, who has position on you), or the opportunity you eliminated for yourself when you get busted by the BB holding a monster?
Basically, can a hand be +ev and -ev at the same time?
|
|
|
Separate from the +/- EV considerations of the play itself....what about weighing the "risk" of tripling up the short stack versus letting more chips fall into the hands of BRSAVAGE?
Tough player immediately to my left, already has me covered, good pot odds to "race" with the short stack.....and....at least BR doesn't get the chips.
Any thoughts?
|
|
|
This discussion is going way beyond what it's worth, IMO. I made
a +cEV play when I have great equity against his range. I
maximized my equity by moving out the bb. I'm not going to let
someone else have a free shot at this pot. There are too many
dead chips.
Besides, br, you could've called me. If you think I'm doing
something wrong then take advantage of it. If you think I'm doing
something right, then don't call me an idiot.
|
|
|
Chris,
Nice job with the thought-provoking post. I don't have any time at all now to go into detail, but what everyone should think about when making a decision like this is:
1) What are my chances in this battle(hand)?
2) How will what I do in this battle affect the war(the rest of the tournament)?
Some things that are right tactically are incorrect strategically and vice versa. Take your time and think about these decisions. I know I need to think more at the tables, and have been making sure I take more time to act lately.
Thank you Sheets,
Bax
|
|
|
This is a great post. We need more like this instead of some of the rants.
I think ape spells out the best play;
This is one of the more controversial plays. I've gotten so much shit for this particular play its not even funny... I'll do it with 23 sooted sometimes and it really pisses people off (especially the big blind). Nothing wrong with it really, I wouldnt do it at a final table though.
Question: "What is the bigger +ev about 40% chance to get 18% more chips or maybe 60%-70% chance of getting rid of a player at the final table(assuming short stack has slightly better than avg. hand and SB, BB play avg.hands)."
In this situation I would flat call from the SB then check down unless I had a good hand to protect.
boris
|
|
|
Whoa nellie... I never called you an idiot... last night, when a lil miffed I believe I stated "genius move"
As for today, I thought it was a great issue to post about on the forum, as I knew it would create a little interest, after all, closing out tournaments is one thing we all strive to get better at.
My position hasn't changed at all, for all the reasons I stated in my earlier follow up post.
I congratulate you on your recent success, and with you further triumphs!
GLGLGLGL,
Chris.
|
|
|
Chris, this question may have already been asked and anwered, but out of curiosity if GOBO just flat calls from SB, do you then push to isolate with (I think it was A 4)? Just curious of what u would do if GGOBO flat calls the UTG all-in.....
johns05
|
|
|
lol, sorry. I was actually really surprised to see this. I
figured after you calmed down a little bit (I understand why you're
upset, but there were a lot of chips out there and winning that pot
would give me a lot of legroom) that you'd realize it wasn't THAT bad a
play.
It's borderline probably, but easily +cEV and that's what I was going for.
I tend to exaggerate, so don't take anything the wrong way.
|
|
|
I agree with brsavage. If this was the middle of the tournament, then raising would be a good move to try and gain chips. However, at the final table when the elimination of a player is worth so much, it's best to eliminate a player. I don't see how people are calling gogo's all-in a +EV play, because it appears that it's clearly a -EV play. As everybody knows, there is a significant pay jump at every position at the final table. In my opinion, this guaranteed pay increase is worth more than 2 or 3 more big blinds in your stack. But more importantly, you'll only get those extra chips about one-third of the time (since UTG is almost surely ahead of you). This is just a rough estimate taking into account when you are usually slightly behind, and occationally when you are in really bad shape (when he has TT or higher). However, this is not taking in account the times where the BB wakes up with a monster (or where he decided you are weak and calls with less than a monster and wins, in which case you are likely to be on the rail).
So while he play MIGHT have been +EV in terms of chips, it was still -EV in terms of actual dollars. Not only do you face the chance of you actually busting out of the tournament, you give the crippled stack a change to get back into the tournament, which is a HUGE -EV factor.
I advocate playing to win, because it's the best way to play, but this is not what they mean by playing to win. You still need to make intelligent +EV decisions. And just remember, an increase in your chip stack does not automatically mean the decision is +EV!
|
|
|
|
That would also be a bad play
|
|
|
I haven't read any of the replies, but in order to be a better judge of how good/bad his play was I need to see the stacks.
From an initial look though it looks like a play I would make almost 100% of the time. He's getting hella odds against a hand that was obviously a very wide range, and you've got to pick up a monster to call him.
I think you'll find a high % of good players make this play very often.
OKAY, now after reading the thread it's basically what I thought it would be.
In your long-winded reply Chris, you say that he is riskign 47k to win 11k and that's just not the case. If he is called for his 47k, then he's risking 47k to win 47k+47k+11k, which still isn't good but it's completely different than what you said. The EV of this push is very clearly positive and not that hard to see. 11k chips is a fairly large % of his stack at this point, and everyone knows that the BB isn't going to call here without a big hand.
Also, another aspect to consider here is that he doesn't care at all if the other guy gets more chips, he just wants to give himself the best chance to get the most chips. Another thing is that most good players know that they want players to their left to have smaller stacks and players on their right to have larger stacks and this play helps preserve that. By either giving himself the chips or the shortstack and preventing you from getting them, he is making the table be set up better for himself.
As for the argument that he would be better off eliminating a player, there isn't any guarantee that with both players in it will eliminate the player. Also, stemming from the table setup point I said before, if I could choose between a 9 handed table where I have 50k and both players to my left have 20k, or an 8 handed table where I have like 30k and the player directly to my left has 90k, then I'll take the 9 handed table almost every time. It really is that big of a difference.
OKAY, and now after seeing the full hand history and seeing savage had 150k and gobbo had 47k I think I still like the play. Even though it won't affect BR's chip stack much if he wins or loses the pot, the chips will help out gobbo's position considerably.
Sorry for the long-winded response, this is just a play I feel strongly about.
|
|
|
I understand what you are saying, but sincerely, the pay increase DOESN'T EVEN COME INTO THE EQUATION, except that it gets me closer to the actual spots that the pay increase DOES mean something. The difference between 9th, 8th, 7th, etc is negligible. Tournament poker only really matters by trying to finish in one of the top 3 spots and getting paid for your efforts.
I truly believe eliminating a player in this spot matters in the grand scheme of things in regard to being able to get to the point where you can play hyper aggressive short handed play, something I believe myself and gobboboy have the capacity to do. To me, getting closer to short handed play is a much better ev than the chips able to be won in the hand itself.
At Tunica last year I had a monster stack with 19 left and could have broken a player at the table on a particular hand but CHOSE to keep him alive for a reason. I remembered Scotty Fischmans advice to keep a player in and keep hammering the table and chipping up short handed as opposed to knocking him out and being down to two full tables of 9 players each. The tournament only paid the top 18, and remaining short handed at my table with a lot of chips when the other players were worried about "making the money" put me in a very powerful position. So you see, IMHO, there are tactics to be taken at different stages and different scenarios of a tournament.
GL,
Chris.
|
|
|
Here's the full hand history.
PokerStars Game #4703929376: Tournament #23113753, $150+$12 Hold'em No
Limit - Level XVIII (2000/4000) - 2006/04/22 - 01:54:45 (ET)
Table '23113753 52' 9-max Seat #2 is the button
Seat 1: iamzflo (35706 in chips)
Seat 2: TopToad (110761 in chips)
Seat 3: gobboboy (48062 in chips)
Seat 4: brsavage (156256 in chips)
Seat 5: Sinchron (5508 in chips)
Seat 6: 3Nemesis (38947 in chips)
Seat 7: TexDuke (137632 in chips)
Seat 8: phx99 (38154 in chips)
Seat 9: fumanchu (45474 in chips)
iamzflo: posts the ante 200
TopToad: posts the ante 200
gobboboy: posts the ante 200
brsavage: posts the ante 200
Sinchron: posts the ante 200
3Nemesis: posts the ante 200
TexDuke: posts the ante 200
phx99: posts the ante 200
fumanchu: posts the ante 200
gobboboy: posts small blind 2000
brsavage: posts big blind 4000
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to gobboboy [Th 8s]
Sinchron: raises 1308 to 5308 and is all-in
3Nemesis: folds
TexDuke: folds
phx99: folds
fumanchu: folds
iamzflo: folds
TopToad: folds
gobboboy: raises 42554 to 47862 and is all-in
brsavage: folds
*** FLOP *** [As 3h 7s]
*** TURN *** [As 3h 7s] [Jd]
*** RIVER *** [As 3h 7s Jd] [8c]
brsavage said, "thats a genius move with a player facing elimination"
*** SHOW DOWN ***
gobboboy: shows [Th 8s] (a pair of Eights)
Sinchron: shows [Td Tc] (a pair of Tens)
Sinchron collected 16416 from pot
brsavage said, "pure genius"
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 16416 | Rake 0
Board [As 3h 7s Jd 8c]
Seat 1: iamzflo folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 2: TopToad (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 3: gobboboy (small blind) showed [Th 8s] and lost with a pair of Eights
Seat 4: brsavage (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 5: Sinchron showed [Td Tc] and won (16416) with a pair of Tens
Seat 6: 3Nemesis folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: TexDuke folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: phx99 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 9: fumanchu folded before Flop (didn't bet)
|
|
|
|
|
PocketFives.com Rankings
|
|
|
|
|
Carbon Poker Sorting Tables
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|