Did anyone see Raymer's all in?

[Indiana]

Did anyone see that over the top all in yesterday? There was a raise UTG then a massive re-raise and then Raymer went all-in with AK suited. Wasn't that a risky play? You gotta know that a guy has at least a pocket pair with that kind of early UTG action. Anyway, he got called by KK and was at that point ~3.5:1 underdog....Of course he got lucky and hit an A to take it down....There were about 200 or so left at that point...But this hand is what propelled him to the money.

Any Thoughts?

[davidross]

I didn't see that one, but I heard he also won an under pair all-in when he flopped his set. I've never made a final table where I didn't win at least one hand as a significant dog. I assume it's the same for almost everyone.

[Indiana]

Yeah, but isn't that a poker 101 fold? I would lay that hand down very quickly.

?

[davidross]

I'd need to know teh chip counts and amounts, but generally when you are holding AK you put your opponent on QQ rather than KK or AA, because of your cards. Calling an all-in with AK can be questionable, but when you're the guy going all-in you will get hands like JJ anf TT to fold, QQ is questionable, but you have a good chance against QQ. And even KK is only a 2.5 to 1 favorite I think.

[Indiana]

Yeah, sorry it is 2.5:1....but still, two big raises in front and you would call with AK??? Raymer had around 9000 chips...probably about average of 200 players at that time.

Thanks for the replies

[sammy_g]

I think he was only a 2:1 dog with AKs.

After the hand he said, "Oops."

[Indiana]

Yeah, i accidently said 3.5:1 but it was more like 2.5:1 per my calculations. I just thought that it was a kindergarden-simple thing to lay it down????/

i dunno...he's the one with all the money

[Tosh]

Can people stop posting hands without all of the information.

[Indiana]

Sorry Tosh, just don't remember all the info...not a regular poster...he had around 9K chips (about the average) with ~200 players left. raises in front of him were in the order of 1800 and 4800...He was in MP and the two raisers were in early position.

My apologies again,

Indiana

[Tosh]

The problem is poker is very situational, sometimes it might be a fold sometimes an all in.

[cornell2005]

there is alot more to tournament poker than the strength of the hand. if it wernt, than anyone could play well

[Indiana]

I guess my ? was a "what would you do" question.

[Roman]

The person who re-raised the UTG raiser was very very aggressive and im guessin Raymer thought he could have a lot of hands here.

[Greg (FossilMan)]

I don't recall the exact numbers either. However, I do recall that my rereraise was big enough to make even the reraiser fold if he thought he was beaten. That is, I believe I went all-in for at least triple his reraise amount. Thus, it was NOT a spot where I should've known I would get called by any pair.

Now, on top of that, the first raiser had been playing very loosely for the first raise, and I believed the reraiser knew that. Thus, he did NOT have to have a premium hand to reraise there. As such, there was at least some chance I was facing any of a wide variety of hands there, and as such AKs was a clear play. And, if I'm going to play, I'm not going to call for 30% or so of my stack, even with position. Thus, all-in.

Also, given the above thoughts about their hand strengths, even if I knew the reraiser were going to be potstuck, I still would've gone all-in, and expected to be ahead of his total range of hands.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[Indiana]

Greg,

I guess i was not watching closely enough to get the types of reads that you were getting. I just thought that it was a big risk that you didn't need to take. I know that you are one of the best players in the world, so you are probably thinking at a higher level than I am. My feeling is that these types of reads lose their value against 2 raisers (especially when you are in MP). I dunno, maybe these are the types of risks that you need to take to finish well.

Am I missing something?

Indiana

[SossMan]

Even if he had as little as 15% folding equity, it is almost certainly the right play. His read was that the first raiser was loose with his raises, and the 2nd raiser knew that, so his hand certainly didn't need to be as strong as AKs to make this play. Greg was probably hoping that he was PC'd with his AQ-ATs.

[Indiana]

Understood, but don't you see an added risk to going all-in on a read against multiple players?

Just wondering

[Eder]

Greg...I watched your table with interest....can you tell us what your thoughts were when you raised on the button with 88...SB reraised big...I think he had you covered at that point, but you pushed and saw you were against the bullets. Did you consider folding?

Also later a guy 2 to your left reraised your steal attempts I think 3 times in a row and you folded each time...did you tighten up after the previous mentioned play or were you on straight steals?

[fnurt]

By the same logic, paying $2500 to enter a tournament where you probably have an 80% chance of winning nothing is a big risk you don't need to take...

[Indiana]

I guess you have a point...So you advocate taking big risks when there is a decent chance that you don't have the edge? When I am in the middle of the pack, I like to wait until I have the math in my favor to push...But that might be why I often finish out of the money...

[MLG]

[ QUOTE ]
So you advocate taking big risks when there is a decent chance that you don't have the edge?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. As Greg explained he determined (combination guesswork and math) that he had an edge over the range of hands he could be facing. In his opinion the chance of having no edge was outweighed by the chance of having an edge, combined with the chance of being even money and having the overlay for a coinflip. There is no magical way of determining what cards he has, but you can guesstimate a range of hands.

In order to be successful you must do this, as opposed to waiting for a time when you are absolutely sure to be a favorite, as those times are few and far between.

[SossMan]

Understood, but don't you see an added risk to going all-in on a read against multiple players?

As opposed to what?
You'll see a lot of people on this board advocating avoiding risky situations without looking at the reward side of the equation. Don't fall into that trap unless you want to finish between 20%-30% of the field most of the time.
There is a reason many good players enter final tables with a mountain of chips. And it's not because they played "survivor".

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess you have a point...So you advocate taking big risks when there is a decent chance that you don't have the edge? When I am in the middle of the pack, I like to wait until I have the math in my favor to push...But that might be why I often finish out of the money...

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the math was definitely in Greg's favor, and he did a good job of explaining why. There was still risk... poker is a gambling game, there is always risk.

[Greg (FossilMan)]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess you have a point...So you advocate taking big risks when there is a decent chance that you don't have the edge?

[/ QUOTE ]
Decent? No. When the likelihood is that you have the edge with your chosen play. While there was a risk that I was WAY behind, there was also a chance that I get a small-medium pair to fold, and a chance that I get called by AQ or other unpaired hand. Both of those positive edges, plus other +EV to the play, exceed the negative expectation aspects of the play (i.e., mostly the chance of running into AA or KK).

[ QUOTE ]
When I am in the middle of the pack, I like to wait until I have the math in my favor to push...But that might be why I often finish out of the money...

[/ QUOTE ]
I had the math in my favor. It simply was not blatantly in my favor. Or, to put it another way, there was still a chance that I was not ahead in the hand. However, just because I MIGHT be behind, doesn't mean the math wasn't in my favor.

Imagine a scenario where I give you 66, deal myself a random hand, and then bet you on a hand of showdown holdem poker. That is, there is no betting throughout the hand, just a simple bet of $100 per hand where you get 66, I get 2 random cards, and we then deal out the 5-card board and see who wins. Would you take the bet? Your edge is not certain, in that I might get two cards that makes me the favorite, but the math is still in your favor, right?

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[Dominic]

when the heck was this on TV?? The WSOP on ESPN didn't have Raymer playing, it was Omaha and the $5000 buy in limit hold 'em....what did I miss??

[cferejohn]

[ QUOTE ]
when the heck was this on TV?? The WSOP on ESPN didn't have Raymer playing, it was Omaha and the $5000 buy in limit hold 'em....what did I miss??

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it has been on yet, has it?

[Ian J]

Actually, I think this hand is from the main event of the WCOOP.

[eMarkM]

This is a hand from the WCOOP main event. The WSOP Main event on ESPN starts next week.