folds the nuts on the flop??

[MissOt]

$5 s/g 2 table on stars 17 players left

15/30 blinds i have 2,010 in chips

im on BB with QJs

4 players limp and i check

flop comes As Kh Th i bet 120 1 folds MP calls(2500) LP min raises to 240[maniac(3k)] and sb calls 240(700)

i push from BB hoping to win the hand right there didnt really want any calls. anyway MP called, LP called, and SB called...

MP had TsTc LP had A4h SB had Q9o

turn was a king and we were all drawing dead but on the flop i was a 38% favorite a4h was a 31% favorite and TT was 30%

obviously i knew i had the best hand, but i didnt want to see five cards with three people lol. i play these s/gs all the time and the level of play is very low and i have no problem constantly cashing. so what do you think of a fold here. anyway please dont say it is results oriented because im only a small favorite anyway. what im saying i avoid this huge hand as a small favorite and have a 1,900 stack with blinds 15/30 and just play my normal game. i dont need the 7k stack after a win of that pot to do well in the s/g, but it would sure help...

so anyway to fold this hand? i was thinking if we were in different positions and i saw two big raises and a call in front of me its easier to get away from, but this way there was still folding equity and i could have won that pot right there or narrowed the field.

[tallstack]

How can you possibly be thinking about getting away from this? You played it right and had the about worst combination of possible opponent hands out there. Even if you were last to act and had the action in front of you I think it is an easy push. The fact that you have no problem cashing in these is due to people calling you bets with little or no pot equity. Here they had lots of pot equity, but this has to be the exeption.

Dave S

[NegativeEV]

Two thoughts:

1.) You can not fold here IMO. When it gets back to you the only course of action is to push. If there had been three all in's behind you after your flop bet, you may be right to fold as you can safely assume you are less than 50% to win the pot at that point and you are confident in your abilities to cash with a lesser chip stack.

2.) I think the proper play here was to check raise all in. Your hand is strong but vulnerable with the flush draw possibilities. With the maniac and three others yet to act, you can probably check raise this as you will very likely get action on your check. With a check raise push you are more likely to eliminate at least 1 or 2 other players as the pot would be laying them worse odds (i.e. since one or two players may not be invested in the pot by the time you CR). You want to eliminate players with this hand and a CR, push is the best way IMO.

[AtlBrvs4Life]

Come on man. This is a bad beat post. There is no way you can fold the nuts on the flop. All-in was the right move.

[MissOt]

its not a bad beat at all or even a bad beat post. first of all i was barely a favorite with a very vulnerable hand against 4 players... i have no problem with TT and a4h being in the hand. as i said i knew i had the best hand, but wasnt a huge favorite to win so i was just wondering if there was any way to get away from it. would a call and fold approach be better? although if i had just called the 240 and the K came on the turn i dont think i can fold, but if i called and a heart came i could easily fold that...

edit: i mean no one is folding top pair with nut flush draw in a $5 s/g so just calling here would have been better since there isnt really any folding equity with him. he got his stack from limping utg with t3h and rivered a flush lol so...

[Tosh]

Conceivably you could be up against QJ /images/graemlins/heart.gif and a set and be in bad shape but really you have to go with it.

[ddubois]

I agreee check-raise is better than the bet/raise/push line, because it protects the hand better.

But with this board, it must have hit so many people, I don't see you getting the folds you want. I know I will be accused of being weak-tight for even mentioning this, but would it be the worst thing in the world to find a line that lets us see the turn is not a pair or a heart before committing our entire stack?

[ethan]

[ QUOTE ]
Come on man. This is a bad beat post. There is no way you can fold the nuts on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

You clearly haven't spent enough time playing omaha /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[patrick dicaprio]

i thought the same thing. i usually will play thsi way when i dont have the nuts, or have something like TPGK vs draws out there when i know the draws wont fold. heads up of course is a differnet matter but with three guys in there i dont see a problem with playing the way you suggest. just because the book says to push doesnt mean you have to every time.

Pat

[PrayingMantis]

It's not a question of doing what the book says. You got the best hand NOW, there is a lot of action on the flop, which means that people are very interested in it, you must make them pay, as much as possible, in order to see more cards. It's the ABC of protecting your hand. If others want to call - so be it. But the pot is big enough also to take it down right there (it won't happen in lower buy-ins, though. people will call like crazy with all sorts of hands). It's a huge +CEV spot for you (3 people called in that specific spot! when you hold the current nuts!). Sure you'll bust some of the time, but the reward is far greater than the risk, especially if you know how to handle a huge stack. 1st place is not far from being guaranteed, the times you win this.

[AtlBrvs4Life]

No I haven't played much omaha at all. Fortunately for me, this post is about texas hold em. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[MissOt]

i dont need this pot to win the s/g. if i fold im still well ahead than normal with 1900.

60% of the time i lose and bust. 40% of the time and call and money 95% with a 7500 stack. or i could fold and still money probably 75%

[AtlBrvs4Life]

I think it's too early to be thinking like that. 1900 is by no means a guaranteed money finish. On PS you start with 1500 right? The fact that 60% of the time you lose and bust is unusual when you flop the nut straight. You can't put one guy on a set and the other on a flush draw with a pair. So without knowing the results of this and the other guy's hands I would still call.

[tallstack]

I think you have inflated your estimate of finishing in the money by folding with a somewhat average stack. I would be willing to bet that nobody finishes in the money 75% in 2-table SNGs (paying the top 22% of finishers). I'm sure you do well, but not that well (I thought I was doing really well in those when I was getting 39% ITM).

Also, your ITM finishes in the case of the 7500 stack should be skewed towards first rather than fourth, much more than in the folding case, so ITM alone is not the only factor.

Dave S

[MissOt]

obviously you havent played that many $5 s/g 2 tables on stars lol. its not my skill, thats the overwhelming factor, its just there lack there of lol

[PrayingMantis]

Turning down such a HUGE EV proposition, is a wrong way to play poker. Your reasoning in regard to in-the-money finishes is wrong. Do some serious search in this and other forums (MTT, theory forum, etc.) about risk vs. reward and such. Read a few hundreds, if not more, threads. Play more. Much more. Think about it. I'm sure you will understand why getting all your chips in, while holding the best (although vulnerable) hand on the flop, against few opponents who are *ready* to chase, is the right way to go.

[ddubois]

you must make them pay, as much as possible, in order to see more cards. It's the ABC of protecting your hand

My understanding of protecting one's hand includes that there is a connotation that the bet is such that it lays inappropriate odds (implied or pot? I'm not sure?) for the caller to call. Given our recent discussion about equity somewhat devolving into semanatics, I want to ensure they we agree this is an aspect of a protection bet, and that kept in mind when I make my following statemtents....

My question isn't whether protecting your hand is a good thing, or something you should do if you can, my question is - is it possible? With this many players and this flop? If you push and some yahoo with 2pair or TpGutshot calls, a highly likely occurance, his mistake approximately gives odds to any player left to act to properly chase their flush or their house. Also, I don't think pushing has any fold equity against a set here. A player with a set will be very quick to put you on 2pair or a flush (because that's hands he beats; people love to assume you have something they beat), and he has a good redraw. So, I am dubious that we can really protect our hand - that is to say - make a bet that lays appropriately bad odds, until we get to the turn.

It would definately be seeing monsters under the bed to assume our opponents collectively have both a flush and a set between them, and thus think of oneself as a 1:2 dog to the field, but getting two callers and being a coinflip to win is very probable, i.e.:
Qs Js 459 50.83 440 48.73 4 0.44 0.510
Ac Tc 164 18.16 735 81.40 4 0.44 0.183
8h 7h 276 30.56 623 68.99 4 0.44 0.307
Which leads me to at least give pause for a moment, and think about this some. (On the other hand, a coinflip to triple up is very +chipEV!)

Now, I'm certaintly not arguing that getting it all-in on the flop (particularly via check-raise) is wrong, bad, or sub-optimal. I'm just thinking maybe there is some line that involves turn play as a legitimate and reasonable alternative. After all, if someone will pay you on the flop with two-pair or a set, won't this player still pay you off on the turn? All that said, if there is some reasonable line that involves turn play, I have no clue on which one might be best.

[ddubois]

I suppose this is like saying, if you are dealt QQ, would you like to be all-in against AT and KJ before the flop (coinflop to triple up). The answer is a resounding yes, so maybe I am overanalysing this.

[PrayingMantis]

OK, long reply.

I fully understand what you are trying to say. But let's analyze this point by point.

[ QUOTE ]
My understanding of protecting one's hand includes that there is a connotation that the bet is such that it lays inappropriate odds (implied or pot? I'm not sure?) for the caller to call.

[/ QUOTE ]

First, In this case, and similar cases, we're basically not talking about implied odds. Situations where implied-odds mean anything in SNGs are basically PF, with very low blinds. Here we're talking about pot-odds. Now - the idea of protecting in this sense is that you are trying to make your opponents pay more than what the "pot-oods" allow them. Example: if you are 2:1 to win the hand, you push and your op calls all-in, he's getting only a bit more than 1:1 (assuming there's already a pot). So protecting, in this sense, is forcing your opponent to make a mistake BY PAYING.

The thing is, different opponents will be ready to make different mistakes. The worse your opponent, the bigger mistake he'll do. He will be ready to call all-in, when he's way behind: i.e, chasing without odds. You are right in what you say about folding equity against these players: it is almost non-existent, and in many cases, you really prefer them to fold, even if they are behind, since the pot is big enough and you don't want to risk. HOWEVER, this does mean that forcing them into the biggest calling mistake possible, is not the best play. They might even make a correct call (according to FTOP), but still, you much better bet than not. (DS addresses this general concept in TOP, I believe)

[ QUOTE ]
My question isn't whether protecting your hand is a good thing, or something you should do if you can, my question is - is it possible? With this many players and this flop? If you push and some yahoo with 2pair or TpGutshot calls, a highly likely occurance, his mistake approximately gives odds to any player left to act to properly chase their flush or their house.

[/ QUOTE ]


Protecting is indeed a problematic expression. Especially when people are chasing you like crazy with anything. You protect it in the sense you make them pay A LOT for chasing. MUCH MUCH more than what they should. This is a case where FTOP is actually in work. Protecting, as opposed to letting them in cheaply. Making them pay when they still have something to hope for: their flush didn't hit YET, their 2p didn't become a full-house YET, etc. They are paying for their hopes, and they are paying way too much. You profit.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I don't think pushing has any fold equity against a set here. A player with a set will be very quick to put you on 2pair or a flush (because that's hands he beats; people love to assume you have something they beat), and he has a good redraw. So, I am dubious that we can really protect our hand - that is to say - make a bet that lays appropriately bad odds, until we get to the turn.


[/ QUOTE ]

You are right: pushing has 0 folding equity against sets. But sets are not the problem here. With sets all the money will and must go in, and you should be VERY happy about it. Sets have smaller chance to improve than flush-draws, BUT sets will always pay you. Against some flush draws you might gain folding equity, which can be very nice in such a multi-way pot.

As to the other point you make, regarding appropriate odds for other players behind. You can't do much about it with how NL SNGs are played. They might get the right odds to call, and you might prefer them to fold. But this does not mean that betting as much as you can, at least to cut down the first players' odds, is not the best thing you can do.

[ QUOTE ]
It would definately be seeing monsters under the bed to assume our opponents collectively have both a flush and a set between them, and thus think of oneself as a 1:2 dog to the field, but getting two callers and being a coinflip to win is very probable, i.e.:
Qs Js 459 50.83 440 48.73 4 0.44 0.510
Ac Tc 164 18.16 735 81.40 4 0.44 0.183
8h 7h 276 30.56 623 68.99 4 0.44 0.307
Which leads me to at least give pause for a moment, and think about this some. (On the other hand, a coinflip to triple up is very +chipEV!)


[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are looking at it from the right perspective. The risk is big, but so as the reward. You are 1:1 to win it, but getting close to 1:2 on your money. In the case with a set and a flush draw, you are not in a great shape, I agree. But this is relatively rare.

It is very important to understand, IMO, that by being the aggressor, i.e, reraising all-in, you achieve a few things in this spot: a) you put the pressure on others. They have to decide whether THEIR hand is good enough. b) you make others make mistakes by paying you much more than what they should, for chasing, and c) which I didn't adress here at all: you are avoiding potential mistakes on later streets(folding to bluffs, calling when you are already behind, etc.) This is critical too.

As to only calling the flop: it makes sense ONLY if you are ready to fold if certain scare-cards hit on the turn, i.e, if the board is paired, or a flush hits. The tricky thing is, you can never know if it did hit someone or not. It is preferable to be the one who attacks when you are sure you're ahead. If it was HU, it is a different story.

[JNash]

I believe that your line of thinking is basically on target.

What matters is not the EV of the bet per se, but the EV of how much money you will win in the tourney with 1900 chips vs with, say 7000 chips.

In any side-game situation, the PrayingMantiss EV argument is obviously the right answer. In a tournament setting, though, I disagree w Mantiss. In TPFAP, there are plenty of examples of when it may make sense to fold AA preflop, or more generally why you would turn down a positive EV bet.

The correct way to do the EV math goes something like this. (To keep it simple, the facts are not exactly like your situation, but you'll get the drift). Spose you go allin--and you have a 40% chance of busting or a 60% chance of incresing your stake to 7000. Spose also that if you have 1900 chips at that stage of the game, your EV (in terms of winning money) is quite high (say $10). With 7000 chips, the EV is clearly higher (say $15). The EV math for this case is that fold is worth $10 (since you'll still be in the game with 1900 chips), and the EV of going allin is 60%*$15 = $9.

The tricky part is figuring out how much your EV is with 1900 chips vs. 7000 chips. I actually keep statistics on this when I play sng's which give me some feel.

As to your particular situation. You made a pot-sized bet with your strong but vulnerabe hand. The TT called (good for you per FTOP). Once the board pairs on the turn, though, an allin bet is just plain stupid IMHO. You now know that there may be a boat out there, and should watch how the betting goes--and lay down if necessary.

Should you have shoved allin on the flop to scare away the draws? Stupid players (those that don't respect the potodds) won't be scared away anyway (no foldem holdem types). Betting strong enough to shut out draws from sane players makes sense, but allin is to risky IN A TOURNAMENT with weak players.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you have inflated your estimate of finishing in the money by folding with a somewhat average stack. I would be willing to bet that nobody finishes in the money 75% in 2-table SNGs (paying the top 22% of finishers). I'm sure you do well, but not that well (I thought I was doing really well in those when I was getting 39% ITM).


[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed 40% is a good rate for these things, imo even the best 200+15 sng guys would struggle to finish ITM over 60% of the time, even at these levels.

Regards Mack

[bweiser8311962]

how about taking a different tact once in a while, like trying to win rather than just getting in the money. if it is as easy as you say to cash, then take a shot like this.

frankly, i'm tired of cashing and not winning in the tournaments i'm playing. ok, not tired. but i want to win one just to win one.

[PrayingMantis]

I won't get into details, because this was discussed many times around these boards, and is *very* basic material, but your reasonining is completely wrong. Many of the points you make are way way off. I'll take one of them:

[ QUOTE ]
there are plenty of examples of when it may make sense to fold AA preflop

[/ QUOTE ]

This is one of most erroneous sentences I'v seen here for a while. You can play SNGs for thousands and thousands and tens of thousands of games, practically for a life time, WITHOUT folding AA PF ONCE, and you'll *never* be mistaken. The one rare example DS gives in TPFAP is only relevant to a VERY VERY VERY SPECIFIC siutuation, and is VERY uncommon. He only gave it to make some extreme theoretical point, but some people, like you, are taking it WAY WAY WAY WAY too far. This is WRONG. You are confusing few totally different things here, and getting to the most incorrect conclusions possible.

Playing the way you suggest, is severely hurting your ROI in order to get more ITM. This is a WRONG way to play SNGs, or any kind of poker. You are basically LOSING money this way.

I don't want to sound rude, but the advice in your post is VERY bad. Which is, sadly, not uncommon of this board, recently.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
You can play SNGs for thousands and thousands and tens of thousands of games, practically for a life time, WITHOUT folding AA PF ONCE, and you'll *never* be mistaken.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats so obvious it should not need saying.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't want to sound rude, but the advice in your post is VERY bad. Which is, sadly, not uncommon of this board, recently.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like any collection of sources, there are good and bad, true and false statements, the importance of confirming anything you hear for yourself in practice cannot be overstated enough in my opinion, thats something that everyone would benefit from taking on board, no matter how good they are.

On another matter, Praying Mantis I read a lot of your posts with interest and often see a line which suggests aggresively pushing small edges, I just wonder if this is as good in sngs as it is in ring games, and if so what makes it so. I would be interested to hear your views on the subject.

Regards Mack

[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
On another matter, Praying Mantis I read a lot of your posts with interest and often see a line which suggests aggresively pushing small edges, I just wonder if this is as good in sngs as it is in ring games, and if so what makes it so. I would be interested to hear your views on the subject.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I know your question is more general, but I just want to make clear that re-raising all-in with the nuts on the flop is not "pushing small edges". On low buy-ins people will call you with hands you are way way way ahead of.

But to answer your question: I think that as you climb up in buy-ins, taking advantage of every small edge is very very important. Playing these small edges aggressively allow you to win pots in 2 ways (this is kind of basic): 1) uncontested 2) on show-down, while you are in a +EV spot chip wise to begin with, i.e, your opp. will make a mistake by calling.

It is more important to profit from small advantages in higher buy-ins, because people generally make less mistakes, so you can't just sit there and out-last few of them. As the skill-level climbs, the fact that it's YOU who are profiting from small-advantages, and not OTHERS, puts you in a better long-term position.

This is a complicted issue, but it also has to do with CEV and $EV in the early stages of the game. The relation between these two, which is very important in decisions you make, is dependant (along other variables) on your ROI (in a sense, your ROI signifies your advantage against your general field of opponents). As your opponents are more tough, $EV and CEV at early stages become closer. When your opposition is bad, it makes more sense to pass up marginally +CEV opportunities, if the risk is too high. As the skill climbs, passing these opportunities is not something you want to do.

In a way, I believe it's like the difference between playing small and high stakes limit games. As the level climbs, every small advantage is much more significant. In low limits you can still be very much ahead of the game, even without knowing how to take advantage of *every* mistake your opponents make.

Anyway, even if you decide to pass up a small +CEV spot, you better understand why you are doing this, and how much EV you are giving up. In this sense, the idea of folding the nuts on the flop is just horrible. You can not be a real winning player by passig up such opportunities.

[Atropos]

I dont think you can fold this here. Of course its quite possible that you will reach the money if you fold here, but it's not too sure. Can you reach the money only with blind-stealing? I dont think so, if you get shortstacked you need to win one coinflip or worse to stay in the tournament. That's why I think taking an early chance in such a situation is always a good idea, since the +EV of winning is much more than only the chips you get.

[fnurt]

Actually, if you could see your opponents' cards (and you knew the set and flush draw would call), it would be mathematically correct to fold the nuts, which is kind of a surprising result. There's no way you can expect to see hands that good though, and I think you really overestimate your EV after folding. You would have 100 chips more than average with 15 players remaining, that's certainly not worth double the buyin, as one poster suggested.

[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, if you could see your opponents' cards (and you knew the set and flush draw would call), it would be mathematically correct to fold the nuts, which is kind of a surprising result.

[/ QUOTE ]

fnurt, I don't understand how you got to this conclusion, even if you know their cards, and you know they won't fold (2 things that you never know exactly, but that's not the point).

If these two hands call all-in, Hero is getting about 1:2 on his money, while being about 1:1.6 dog. It is not a huge +CEV spot, I admit, but saying it's mathematically correct to fold seems a bit exaggerated to me. You might say the risk is to big for the level of buy-in, etc, etc, and that your oppoennts are so bad you don't need it, but it doesn't make it "mathematically correct", IMO.

Just note that in the actual hand Hero got another call (third call!) from some garbage like Q9o, that was probaby thinking he's getting "good odds", but was actually drawing dead. These calls are part of the reason why pushing these advantages, even in low-limits, is so profitable.

[cferejohn]

[ QUOTE ]
In TPFAP, there are plenty of examples of when it may make sense to fold AA preflop, or more generally why you would turn down a positive EV bet.


[/ QUOTE ]

*cough* *sputter*. Where are those weak-tight police when we need them?

TPFAP does not give "plenty" of examples of where laying down AA is a good thing. Really the only time is would be appropriate is on the bubble of a tournament with an extrememly flat (or perfectly flat - i.e. supersattelite) payout structure.

While this is somewhat less true in sit-n-goes vs. MTTs, the vast majority of the time chipEV and cashEV are close enough that passing up significant chipEV edges is a mistake. If you are passing up a small edge (like say playing 22 for all your chips vs. somehow "known" overcards), fine, but laying down AA preflop is going to be a huge mistake 999 times out of 1000. At least.

Overemphesis on survival vs. chip-EV is the single greatest weakness of otherwise pretty good internet tournament players (who may still be winning players since there are plenty of lag nitwits to pay them off). Aggressive players (both good ones and bad ones) can take huge advantage of this on the bubble.

Passing up a 50/50 shot getting 2:1 on your money is usually a mistake. Passing up a 60% shot getting 1:1 is usually a mistake.

Sorry I'm not addressing the specific hand here, I just wanted to jump on "sometimes folding AA is good" and the underlying thought process because I think it is alot of what seperates decent tournament players from very good ones...

Chris

[gergery]

Actually, if I could have magically seen my opponents cards, I would have flat called the reraise on the flop and seen the turn card, and tried to see the river for cheap too. Once I know what they have, I know they are not going to fold. And you if knew with certainty they are going to the showdown, then leave yourself the out of folding if the turn or river comes and you know you’re beat (say, running hearts or AK for turn/river)

I might even argue that in a lowlimit $5 sng, you can predict with a fair amount of certainty that once 3 people are in for half their stack, that they will go in for the rest of it. But you’d be hard pressed to give them credit for hands that good very often. But really, who are we kidding, you never see their hand and play is bad so that pushing this has to be correct 99.9% of the time.

Folding the nuts where you are a favorite to win the hand, when its early in the tourney is just plain stupid, tho, in literally every case.

[fnurt]

You can roughly model it this way. If you win, you end up with about 25% of the chips in play. So assume you take 1st 25% of the time, then 25% of the remaining 75% you take 2nd, and so on. You end up with $17.55 in cash EV. Hero wins this hand 1/3 of the time for $5.85 cash EV.

Alternatively, folding gives you 100 more chips than average with 15 players left. The EV of an average stack would be 1/15 of the prize pool, or $6. So the cash EV of a bigger than average stack must be greater than $6. Therefore folding comes out ahead.

[MissOt]

lol fnurt i like your post. that is what i was basically trying to say but didnt word it as well. although, i consider having 1900 at the 15/30 blinds in one of these as very good because i didnt have any premium hands yet.

edit: thx for all the replies by everyone! normally my posts dont get any replies lol

[JNash]

I was trying to make a simple point: EV-math in tournaments cannot be done based on chip-EV like in sidegames. I stand by this statement.

I also stand by the statement that early in a SNG it often makes sense to throw away hands that have substantial positive chip-EV when this puts you allin. And this is not pure theory, it has worked quite well for me in practice as well.

I would be very interested (and I really mean this) in a sound logical argument to counter this point. Rather than saying that "this had all been discussed before," some specific on-point links would be helpful.

That said, my choice of the AA PF example was probably a poor one. I agree with you that I should not have said "there are PLENTY of times you would fold AA preflop." I should have said, "there MAY EVEN be times when you might fold AA preflop." I also agree that this hardly ever comes up in a SNG--in fact it never has for me (at least so far).

So please, do not distort my post into "advice" to fold AA preflop. That's not what my post was about at all.

My point was that throwing away positive EV hands CAN make sense in tourneys, and that this is not just far-fetched theory. I would guess that a decision where it may make sense to thow away a positive chip-EV hand comes up at least once or twice in each SNG I play. The key challenge of course is to figure out just how large an edge you might fold, and under what circumstances.

What I would be interested in discussing is the best theoretical way to think about these tradeoffs in a tournament context. What I am suggesting as a starting point is to consider the EV of your chip-count after the hand has been played. How much is a 7000 chip position "worth" versus a 1900 chip position? This strikes me as an interesting (and different) way of looking at things. If you know the answer to this question, you can begin to quantify how large a chip-EV edge you might throw away for the sake of survival. Perhaps this really belongs in the "poker theory" forum...but it does apply quite a lot to SNGs.

One last comment. While "playing to make it into the money" may sound a lot like "settling for third" in a 10-player SNG, my personal playing experience has been that if I make it into the final three, I actually come in first 50% of the time, second 30%, and third 20%--despite the fact that well more than 50% of the time I am the short stack when it's down to the last three.

[JNash]

Please see my related post "you missed my point" for an apology that yes, I misspoke when saying that there are "plenty" of reasons to fold AA. I was pointing to the extreme (and admittedly rare) situations like folding AA PF to illustrate the more general point that folding positive EV can be the correct play.

The crux of the question is--exactly WHEN does it make sense to fold positive EVs?

You suggest that folding a 50/50 shot at getting 2:1 or a 60% chane of 1:1 are both mistakes. (sorry, i haven't mastered the "quote" technology yet.)

I would agree with you if the bet size is small relative to your stack. But let me ask you, would you really play QQ vs AK allin against one player in the first hand of a tournament (assume no rebuys)? Let's say the first hand of the WSOP, just to make the question really interesting.

Perhaps you would--I wouldn't. I think there are other intelligent players who also wouldn't (e.g. see Cloutier's book).

So, what I would be REALLY interested in knowing is WHY AND WHEN you think that a 60% shot at doubling up is worth it.

In sidegames, the correct math "formula" of drawing odds vs. pot-odds (adjusted for difficult value judgements like implied odds, probability of getting opponent to fold, etc.) are pretty well known. On the other hand, I have yet to see any book with a sound EV-arithmetic for tournaments.

You state in your post that "the vast majority of the time chipEV and cashEV are close enough." If that's true, then the times you'd throw away chip EV edges would be few and far between.

Figuring out "the formula" for converting chip EV to cash EV is exactly what I'm after. To date, I haven't seen this problem cracked, but I would be grateful for any suggestions you may have.

[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
You can roughly model it this way. If you win, you end up with about 25% of the chips in play. So assume you take 1st 25% of the time, then 25% of the remaining 75% you take 2nd, and so on. You end up with $17.55 in cash EV. Hero wins this hand 1/3 of the time for $5.85 cash EV.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think the model you are using to get this figure is debatable. Having a huge stack and knowing how to use it is a very important factor, in the hands of a good player, and it's worth more than the correlating % from chips in play in regard to prize structure, according to any simulated model.

But even if you take the $17.55 figure, your $EV calculation is inaccurate, since hero will win 38.7% of the time, and not 1/3. This gives you $EV of $6.79, which is higher than what you get for folding according to your own calculation ($6).

So folding definitely does not come ahead. And when taking in more factors, it is even more behind, IMO.