If You Have The Pot Odds Should You Always Go For It?

[pokerroomace 0]

If you have the right odds to call a hand, at the beginning of a tourney, should you go for it or not? and why not?Eg:10 person SnG: first hand:blinds are 10/20. Everyone has a stack of 1500 chips. You're in the BB and everyone folds till the SB who raises allin.Your hand is 55 and the other guys hand is AQo (lets say for arguments sake that he showed you his cards, so you're 100% sure what he has).Do you call or fold? You're getting the right odds. But you're putting the SnG on a 50-50 hand.I would definitely fold in this situation and I think that's the right play. But what's the reason for folding?In a cash game you would definitely make a call here, right? (If you make this call 1000 times you'll have a made a profit at the end of it)Elie

[mtdesmoines 3]

RE-buy: yesother situations: no (55 ?!?!?!)I hate rebuys.

[Dannon 0]

completely agree, folde the 55 if its not a rebuy, good players don't like coinflips, if you are better then your opponent, why risk your tournament on a coin flip? And I hate rebuys too...

[kidprodigy08 0]

depends on how good you are, if you are better than 50% of the players than fold, if you suck then call

[navybuttons 15]

there was a whole thread last week where i advocated folding AK in the BB if SB goes all in with QJ on the first hand of the main event.however, i think this situation is completely different. the slightest reason for the call is the positive equity from it being our blind (although this is relatively moot)in the main event having 20000 chips to start the second hand does very little for our overall chances to win the tournament.however doubling up in the first hand of a SNG does a whole lot for our chances of winning.if you are a good player you can use those chips to basically coast your way into the money (without having to showdown another hand) and if you are a bad player all you have to do is probably play really tight to make it into the money.it would also show the table that you are willing to take an absolute gamble. (makes them less likely to raise your blind and less likely to call your raises IMO)

[Sluggo 0]

If you have to ask, you should call 100% of the time. Don't wait for a worse spot to get your money in.

[76clubs 0]

If I had that same situation in a cash game I would fold it. jsI'm not that good though....

[copernicus 0]

there was a whole thread last week where i advocated folding AK in the BB if SB goes all in with QJ on the first hand of the main event.however, i think this situation is completely different. the slightest reason for the call is the positive equity from it being our blind (although this is relatively moot)in the main event having 20000 chips to start the second hand does very little for our overall chances to win the tournament.however doubling up in the first hand of a SNG does a whole lot for our chances of winning.if you are a good player you can use those chips to basically coast your way into the money (without having to showdown another hand) and if you are a bad player all you have to do is probably play really tight to make it into the money.it would also show the table that you are willing to take an absolute gamble. (makes them less likely to raise your blind and less likely to call your raises IMO)

that depends on what you mean by doubling up "does very little for your overall chances". In either case doubling up doubles your chances of winning. However in the SnG that means going from 10% to 20%, and in the ME from .025% to .005%.Also due to the steepness of the SnG payout structure doubling your chances of winning is far short of doubling your $EV, because you are foregoing some of your chances of 2d place and some of your chances at 3rd place. In the shallower payout structure of a large MTT, doubling your chances of winning comes closer to doubling your EV.(Note that this effect...the reduction in probability of lower payouts when you increase your probability of higher payouts and the resulting less than proportional increase in EV...is what is responsible for the "chips lose value" paradox. I call it a paradox because your chances of winning improve proportionally with your stack (or more than proportionally if you are a good big stack player) but your EV doesnt increase in proportion to those chips. So on one hand additional chips apparently are at least equal in value, and on the other hand they apparently lose value.In a single prize satellite it becomes obvious that both P(winning) and $EV increase in the same proportion. Its only a mutlitple prize structure that leads to the paradox.

[Actuary 3]

Copernicus,I'm not a fan of the tEV equations but I have no basisMy theory is thast actual results do not mirror the expectations close enough to prove them to be good indicators.I think their is so much moving of the chips that no set of formulae can affix TEQ properly.How dumb am I ?

[copernicus 0]

Copernicus,I'm not a fan of the tEV equations but I have no basisMy theory is thast actual results do not mirror the expectations close enough to prove them to be good indicators.I think their is so much moving of the chips that no set of formulae can affix TEQ properly.How dumb am I ?

As long as the skill level disparity isnt huge I think ICM (or the model used for sit-n-go analyzer) are actually pretty good. And skill level is equalized to a great extent by low stack/blind ratios toward the end of the tournament and luck in all stages of a tournament...so I like them. They are sound mathematically, and particularly in late stages when the stacks are fairly wide spread (where most of the bubble play questions come in) they clarify the best moves well. Are they really accurate to .2% of the prize pool...no...but a lot closer than "common sense" analysis of the best move.

[Squirrelmonger 0]

However in the SnG that means going from 10% to 20%, and in the ME from .025% to .005%

I hate when I go all-in on a hand, proceed to win the hand and lose 4/5ths of my stack as a result >< Although this year in the main event its somewhere around going from 0.000114% of the chips to 0.000228% of the chips. Leaving only 99.999772% of the chips to be won!

[Actuary 3]

. Are they really accurate to .2% of the prize pool...no...but a lot closer than "common sense" analysis of the best move.

is there empiracle evidence?

[copernicus 0]

is there empiracle evidence?

Of which...ICM/tournament chip models in general, or end game/sit n go analysis ala sit-n-go analyzer?On the former, not that I know of. I would love to have access to chip counts every n minutes from a a few thousand online tourneys, but i dont think any site is going to fork them over.On the latter...the best empirical evidence is using it as the learning aid its intended to be, and seeing how often your gut instinct is wrong and the improvement in SnG ROI as a result.

[Actuary 3]

On the former, not that I know of. I would love to have access to chip counts every n minutes from a a few thousand online tourneys, but i dont think any site is going to fork them over.

you hit on my point of skeptism.the chip counts change so often how possibly can the TEQ be predictive?my questions are ignorant I know..cant really put into words.

[Gooser 0]

i like a call with the 55 vs ak 1st hand. You either double up and can then really make some plays and build your stack up and dominate your table - or youre out and didnt waste any more than a few minutes p.s. i think this play also depends on the stakes of the mtt, id be willign to do the for a 30 tourney or less, but probably not make the gamble in a super weekday for instance (unless i qualified for <30

[kevinoc85 0]

i like a call with the 55 vs ak 1st hand. You either double up and can then really make some plays and build your stack up and dominate your table - or youre out and didnt waste any more than a few minutes p.s. i think this play also depends on the stakes of the mtt, id be willign to do the for a 30 tourney or less, but probably not make the gamble in a super weekday for instance (unless i qualified for <30

i agree. if it's a tournament you can afford to lose, then by all means, call because you can get yourself a big stack, and if you know how to use a big stack, then you'll be in a good position to make the final table. but if it were... say the main event of the wsop, then of course i wouldn't call.

[canadapoker5 0]

Personally, I would probably fold 5-5 would have to have at least 2 to 1 or better odds especially early in a tournament or SnG.Just my thoughts, no criticism intendend toward anyone.

[copernicus 0]

you hit on my point of skeptism.the chip counts change so often how possibly can the TEQ be predictive?my questions are ignorant I know..cant really put into words.

certainly minor changes in chip counts happen often enough that there is a lot of noise inherent in small differences. However, grouping the data along with a bit of Whittaker-Henderson Type B graduation (sorry for the inside actuary joke) should give some fairly solid evidence in favor/against ICM.

[pragtyro 0]

The math on this is next to impossible, but at this point wouldn't pocket 5's be BEHIND AQ? 8 folds on the first hand of an STT makes me think that those 16 cards in the muck didn't include alot of aces or queens.

[ChrisRichey 1]

Personally, I would probably fold 5-5 would have to have at least 2 to 1 or better odds especially early in a tournament or SnG.Just my thoughts, no criticism intendend toward anyone.

I agree. Wheter it is mathematically correct or not, I would rather pick a better place to shove all of my chips in.

[XXEddie 0]

The math on this is next to impossible, but at this point wouldn't pocket 5's be BEHIND AQ? 8 folds on the first hand of an STT makes me think that those 16 cards in the muck didn't include alot of aces or queens.

and you think for some reason alll the mucked cards wouldnt be As or Qs. On the first hand of a SnG, I wouldnt even play A9 unless I was in MP and most Qs other than AK, KQs and QQ would also fold.The very amatuer-ish(sp...is that a word) for you to think that the unknown mucked cards could come into play. Ill tell you right now to stop it

I agree. Wheter it is mathematically correct or not, I would rather pick a better place to shove all of my chips in.

seriously. Not to mention the fact that the SB would never show you their cards, and that alone makes this question dumb. But unless the SB was some big name pro, Id fold.

[copernicus 0]

The very amatuer-ish(sp...is that a word) for you to think that the unknown mucked cards could come into play. Ill tell you right now to stop it

this is not quite true. It is easier to do live, but reducing potential outs for unseen mucked cards is not necessarily "amateurish" (yes its a word without the hyphen). Mason Malmouth started a thread on this at 2+2 a while ago. There can be inferences drawn about mucked cards from prior action, particularly about the presence of Aces. The accuracy and value of them might be fairly weak, especially compared to imputing unseen cards when you are counting cards at black jack, but can affect close decisions (eg where you are on a flush plus overpair draw with an A, you may be able to adjust your chances of getting the A based on imputing lack or presence of Aces in folded hands based on their position and how A hands would be expected to react.another example is if there is a bet that you recognize as being likely to be protecting against a flush draw, and someone between you and the bettor takes an unusual amount of time to respond (or live you can even see them moving their lips or some other "calculation" behavior). An inference that they have one or two of your flush outs is not at all out of line.

[mrbluto 0]

If you have the right odds to call a hand, at the beginning of a tourney, should you go for it or not? and why not?Eg:10 person SnG: first hand:blinds are 10/20. Everyone has a stack of 1500 chips. You're in the BB and everyone folds till the SB who raises allin.Your hand is 55 and the other guys hand is AQo (lets say for arguments sake that he showed you his cards, so you're 100% sure what he has).Do you call or fold? You're getting the right odds. But you're putting the SnG on a 50-50 hand.I would definitely fold in this situation and I think that's the right play. But what's the reason for folding?In a cash game you would definitely make a call here, right? (If you make this call 1000 times you'll have a made a profit at the end of it)Elie

I ran into problems twice in s&g's with sb and bb going all in on the first hand and me with A-K, the first time I called he had 77, and I lost, the second time I called and the player had A-Q and I won.I think you have to play the big hands early against an all in and hope they are protecting a average hand.

[WowThats 0]

My personal opinion: Before calling just because you have pot odds you have to look at all the possible scenarios.THE MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR:Do you have a realistic chance of winning... lots of people on this site advocate calling just because you have pot odds, which is goofy or as they say a donkey move.Tournaments:How close are you to the money? If I am in the top five in chips count "on the bubble" I will throw away AA I will let the small stacks fight it out. No reason to get sucked out on by a desperate player. BTW: there is more to "why I would throw away AA".Everyone will have a opinion about how it should be played out just remember to think it through before it is your turn. I've seen many players even the so called pros calling with no chance of winning because they have pot odds.

[copernicus 0]

You might be more comfortable in the General forum making statements like this:"If I am in the top five in chips count I will throw away AA I will let the small stacks fight it out."thats the worst big stack tournament advice Ive ever seen.