What the hell does this mean?

[ddubois]

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t15 (10 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

saw flop|<font color="C00000">saw showdown</font>

SB (t1235)
Hero (t925)
UTG (t1175)
UTG+1 (t1000)
UTG+2 (t805)
MP1 (t1020)
MP2 (t750)
MP3 (t960)
CO (t975)
Button (t1155)

Preflop: Hero is BB with J/images/graemlins/spade.gif, J/images/graemlins/club.gif.
UTG calls t15, <font color="666666">3 folds</font>, MP2 calls t15, MP3 calls t15, <font color="CC3333">CO raises to t975 (All-In)</font>, <font color="666666">3 folds</font>, UTG folds, MP2 folds, MP3 folds.

Final Pot: t1045
<font color="green">Main Pot: t85 (t85), won by CO.</font>
<font color="green">Pot 2: t960 (t960), returned to CO.</font>

Does it mean 88-JJ and he doesn't want any callers? Does it mean AK/QQ and he's afraid to play post flop? Does it mean AA/KK and he's hoping it will look like a bluff?

I ended up going card dead the rest of the tournament and busting out when blinds got big, so I had some regrets about giving up here against such a fishy move.

[mhcmarty]

I'd guess a pair similar to yours. Perhaps KK and doesn't want to see the flop. Probably not AK, I'd want to see the flop witht this.

[durron597]

The last time I called one of these I unexpectedly had to go so I reluctantly called a UTG push with A/images/graemlins/heart.gif K/images/graemlins/heart.gif. There's another caller with Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif Q/images/graemlins/club.gif, and he flips over K/images/graemlins/spade.gif K/images/graemlins/club.gif, reminding me why I never call these. He then busted me when I pushed my last 100 chips with 55 the next hand and he had JJ. This is why in most cases I never call here; good fold.

[gergery]

I think this means:
1. He is a terrible, bad player
2. He is most likely to have 22-99, or A9-2s. Players that go allin preflop with huge overbets love to limp (trap themselves?) with AA/KK
3. It’s a great spot to call, since you are ahead far more often than you are behind and you don’t even want to give up EV+ spots vs. AK early in the tourney.

--Greg

[Potowame]

It looks like the old don't limp on my button with anytwo. I would not expect to see a hand that you are behind here, AA-QQ i really don't see them trying to take it down with out a caller.

[Stoneii]

If I were to guess, weak Ace.

stoneii

[Vuron00]

It means... "Please add me to your buddy list so that you can find me and take all my chips"

Seriously, though.. I've seen this play with any two cards from AA to to something like J9s.

I've actually done it myself a couple of times with big hands if there are guys that I know will call it.

[Stoneii]

[ QUOTE ]
I've actually done it myself a couple of times with big hands if there are guys that I know will call it.


[/ QUOTE ]

But given in this case no-one did call him (he probably doesn't have a read on their play since it's still 10 handed), then I'd imagine AA would certainly raise but want caller(s) - just not a lot of 'em. I'd still plump for a weak Ace.

stoneii

[patrick dicaprio]

with low blinds it is hard for me to believe he has AA or KK. but look at it this way, do you want to bet all your chips to find out with JJ? usually this move is AK or medium pairs, as I am sure others have pointed out, and as I am sure you thought. but the key in my mind as to why i think you made the right play is that it is early and you dont want to be shown AA or KK just to have your worst fears proven.

Pat

[Jason Strasser]

This strikes me as very similar to the AK post a few days ago. It's early in a tournament, you are in a spot where you have to commit your stack. I am really never against doing this if you have an edge. Passing on spots like this because its early, or because you have to commit your stack is pointless.

Remember, as it has been said, at this point, CEV and $EV are the same. There may be very subtle differences, but they really don't matter.

Historically, a play like this reads mid-pocket pair. You are going to be a huge favorite, a smaller favorite (one over card), or in a 50/50 spot a large majority of the time. I would say it is very rare for a player at this buy in to play QQ-AA like this, I certainly never (read: very, very rarely) see it. I call here almost instantly with JJ, TT is a harder decision for me, and I'd say a hand like 99 is worthy of a fold.

Those are just my instincts though, but I don't feel at all uncomfortable calling this.

-Jason

[stripsqueez]

the couple that i can recall seeing were K10o, Q9s, and 88

i would probably fold - i'm a bit scared of the limpers behind me

stripsqueez - chickenhawk

[SmileyEH]

gamboool!

-SmileyEH

[adanthar]

I've seen AK, AJs, A8o, 33-99 (all of them) and about a billion completely worthless hands doing this. I saw QQ once, AA once (after he did that once earlier that round) and one guy who does it *at least once* early in each tournament he plays (usually 2-3 times during L1) to set up his big pairs later.

In other words, call and it's not close.

[Irieguy]

Wow, this response amazes me from strassa2. I always enjoy Jason's clear, concise answers to situational questions... but this is the first time I remember wondering how I could disagree so much.

this is such a clear fold I can't believe it. If you compare the outcomes of calling with JJ here vs. folding and playing your standard game for the rest of the SNG, you are way way way behind over the long haul by calling. Whatever your edge may be (and it's small if it's even there at all), it's not worth it.

To answer the question "what does this mean,"... it means you should fold. It doesn't matter what he has. My calling standards here are KK and AA. If you want to steal $25 of blinds and zero from me... you can do it everytime except when I have aces (kings if I'm drinking, which is always... explaining why I included KK in my calling standards.)

Irieguy

[lastchance]

What was the level of the SNG? Rough estimate of how good the play is. Has he done this before? If so, instant call. If not, eh..

[ddubois]

What was the level of the SNG?

Mea culpa, I definately should have mentioned it was $50/5.

playing your standard game for the rest of the SNG, you are way way way behind over the long haul by calling. Whatever your edge may be (and it's small if it's even there at all), it's not worth it.

So far I am merely a 10% ROI player at the $50/5. I have not properly adjusted to the tightness of these games and have many times been blinded down and gone out 6th. So my edge over the field is apparently very small. Doubling up early puts me in a position I'm much more comfortable with and allows me freedom to bully people. And in terms of $/hr, it's alot better to die here than to be grinded down to 400-500 chips by the blinds and start making desparate pushes. So what I'm saying is, if he will have a larger pair or AK less than half the time, I think I agree with most of the other posters that it's a call. I just didn't have the balls to look him up (with QQ I would have).

[Irieguy]

You really believe that it is better for your hourly rate to go broke faster? What will you do instead of playing that SNG? You will play another one, right? If in the next SNG you are also willing to go broke fast, in the interest of making more per hour, what will happen to your ITM%? Will it go up? If calling all-in with marginal holdings improves your ITM%, there would be some advice on this forum recommending it, right?

Wow, there's some really fuzzy thinking in this thread... perhaps it's mine.

Irieguy

[LinusKS]

I have to agree. I don't know what he has, and I don't know how to know, but it seems to me you have to be way out ahead a whole lot of the time to make a call here worthwhile.

Don't get me wrong - I'd actually like to be persuaded - I'd like to play this hand.

But how far ahead to you have to be to make an all-in call early right?

It depends on how big a winner you think you are, but even if your ROI was small, it seems like you'd need a big edge with your JJ to make it pay off.

Doesn't it seem like there should be a math way to figure this out...?

[Irieguy]

The way you figure this mathematically is to count all of the different hands he could possibly have based on whatever relatively arbitrary way you wish to come up with this range. Then you count the possible ways he could hold each hand, and multiply that by its hand equity vs. your Jacks. Then you add all of the individual hand equities together and average them to get your average chip equity by calling that hand.

Then you can use an independent chip model calculator to calculate your equity in the SNG based on that chip equity. Then you compare that to your SNG equity based on your chip count if you fold.

There's your mathematical answer. The problem is that you have to make a lot of assumptions along the way with these calculations. So many assumptions, in fact, that it makes the conclusion dubious at best.

You could argue that this method is helpful if you know your opponent's exact holding, but when you don't know, it's not very helpful. In this case, you have to rely on experience, judgement, and fundamental SNG concepts.

Irieguy

[ddubois]

[ QUOTE ]
You really believe that it is better for your hourly rate to go broke faster?

[/ QUOTE ]
That is not remotely what I said. What I effectively said was, even if this is only a small +EV edge, I should take it, because I will probably not be getting better ones later.

[Irieguy]

[ QUOTE ]

And in terms of $/hr, it's alot better to die here than to be grinded down to 400-500 chips by the blinds and start making desparate pushes.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are underestimating survival equity in a fixed payout tournament structure. With 400-500 in chips and a few players gone, your equity in the SNG is often higher than when you first sat down. (at the lower limits).

When you move up the the $55 level and people have more chips, bad players will accidently make the correct adjustment of not getting desperate so fast. This makes bubble play more challenging at the higher limits. But at the $33 and below, bad players get desperate too fast and make enormous errors on the bubble by overcalling. This translates into significant equity per chip for a skilled player if he/she can survive that long. That's why you fold JJ early to an all-in raise.

Now, as you move up in limits and the value of a short stack is not as significant, it starts to make more sense to push marginal situations that have the potential to double you up. I think that's why Jason Strasser said he would call... he plays at the $200 level. I still think it's a mistake in this particular circumstance, though, even at the $200 level.

Irieguy

[LinusKS]

Actually, what I'm looking for here is a way to calculate how much your equity in the tournament prize money improves when you double up.

Your "independent chip model calculator" is probably what I'm looking for. If you have a link or a hint, I'd appreciate it (so far I'm coming up blank).

My intuition is you don't double your prize EV by doubling your chips - I'm curious if I'm wrong about that.

[ QUOTE ]
The way you figure this mathematically is to count all of the different hands he could possibly have based on whatever relatively arbitrary way you wish to come up with this range. Then you count the possible ways he could hold each hand, and multiply that by its hand equity vs. your Jacks. Then you add all of the individual hand equities together and average them to get your average chip equity by calling that hand.

Then you can use an independent chip model calculator to calculate your equity in the SNG based on that chip equity. Then you compare that to your SNG equity based on your chip count if you fold.

There's your mathematical answer. The problem is that you have to make a lot of assumptions along the way with these calculations. So many assumptions, in fact, that it makes the conclusion dubious at best.

You could argue that this method is helpful if you know your opponent's exact holding, but when you don't know, it's not very helpful. In this case, you have to rely on experience, judgement, and fundamental SNG concepts.

Irieguy

[/ QUOTE ]

[runnerunner]

I had this same situation come up in a $30 1-table. I called, got shown Kings and was kicking myself when I was out on the fourth hand. I would rather fold this and take my chances in the rest of the tourney to get my money in in a spot where I was not completely guessing if I was ahead or not. That's how I look at this. I am not ready to make a complete guess for all of my stack at this stage of a tournament.

[Gator]

I think you can shortcut the calculation a bit by estimating what percent chance you win this hand if you call. My answer is 60% overall. I've seen (and I've played) Aces played this way to induce a call. I've also seen all types of other pairs (dominating and dominated) played this way. Bottom line is maniac could have a wide range of holdings. Against that wide range, I think the 60% win estimate is pretty close. Especially if you take into account the possibility of a caller behind you.
By the way, in this particular case the lunatic had AT suited (that's my guess anyway).
I fold (not if I knew he had AT suited! but based on my 60% win frequency - living to fight another day, etc.)

By the way, you limped with the Jacks to flop a set - you just didn't flop the set this hand!

[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
My intuition is you don't double your prize EV by doubling your chips - I'm curious if I'm wrong about that.


[/ QUOTE ]

Your intuition is basically right, and you don't even need the independent chip model for realizing this - the fact that it's a structured pay-out, means that any chips you add to your stack, are worth less than the ones you already have. However, you won't be very far from doubling your potential ROI (or $EV for that matter), and if you are a strong aggressive player, who knows how to maximize the use of a big stack, doublind up early might be very rewarding for you, especially at higher buy-ins.

[LinusKS]

[ QUOTE ]

Your intuition is basically right, and you don't even need the independent chip model for realizing this - the fact that it's a structured pay-out, means that any chips you add to your stack, are worth less than the ones you already have.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not seeing the logic here. I'm not disagreeing - I just don't see how the one (structured payout) implies the other (more chips are worth less).

[ QUOTE ]
However, you won't be very far from doubling your potential ROI (or $EV for that matter), and if you are a strong aggressive player, who knows how to maximize the use of a big stack, doublind up early might be very rewarding for you, especially at higher buy-ins.

[/ QUOTE ]

On the other hand, if you're a strong aggressive player, you should be more reluctant to risk all your chips than a poor player would be.

[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not seeing the logic here. I'm not disagreeing - I just don't see how the one (structured payout) implies the other (more chips are worth less).


[/ QUOTE ]

This is probably one of the most important aspects (if not THE most important) of tournament poker (as long as it's not winner-takes-all). The whole idea of "survival" in tournaments, is actually a variation on this point. I could go on and explain exactly why it is so (it is not very complicated), but I'd suggest you'll read TPFAP, as it deals with this quite thoroughly, and better than what I can do here. This book is a basic theoretical read if you are serious about tournament poker.

[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand, if you're a strong aggressive player, you should be more reluctant to risk all your chips than a poor player would be.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is true for any player. However, agressiveness can be applied in a much much more efficient way if you have a significantly big stack (bigger stack than others, that is). Again, this is very important aspect of tournamnet play at large (see fossilman at the WSOP, for instance).

[Eder]

If you're playing me its prob AA....early in a tourney playing AA with typical raise means normally winning 3-8 BB or losing big to 2 pair post flop etc....pushing AA after 1-2 limpers (or in EP)early often can get bites from QQ and AK...very nice and most players don't expect AA to push here...of course that's just me...on the other hand I could be lying to set up Codewarrior for tommorrows 2+2 tourneys /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Irieguy]

[ QUOTE ]

I'm not seeing the logic here. I'm not disagreeing - I just don't see how the one (structured payout) implies the other (more chips are worth less).


[/ QUOTE ]

As PM said, this is a very important concept. See TPFAP or Gambling Theory and Other Topics, where I believe Mason Malmuth first explains this concept.

I will give you an explanation, too, just for fun:

Take the simplest example of a fixed payout tourney: 1st place pays $100 and second place pays $50. There are 100 chips in play and 3 players left.

Player A: $98
Player B: $1
Player C: $1

Simple game theory says player A has a 98% chance of winning, and B and C each have a 1% chance of winning. Since first place is $100, each chip has $1 of equity in 1st place money for all 3 players. But, this is a percentage payout tourney. Both B and C have an equal chance of getting 2nd or 3rd place (player A's chance is negligible). So both player B and C have $25 of equity in 2nd place. That means their chip is worth $26 ($25 equity in 2nd place, plus $1 equity in first.) Well, if each of player A's chips were worth $26 as well, he would have $2548 of equity in the tournament. But there's only $150 to be won, so his chips are worth much less than B's and C's.

That's why any time you pay more than 1 spot in a tournament, your chips are worth more as your stack becomes smaller. That value is called survival equity.

Irieguy

[reecelights]

This thread is very similar to one on the World Poker Tour etc. forum about the Greg Raymer/John Murphy hand when Murphy had just sat down at the table. Granted the raising was different and less fishy, but Murphy laid down JJ to Raymer's AKs because he wanted to wait for a better spot to take a big stack off the bully, which he did a few hands (on the telecast) later. I think a JJ this early on is an easy lay down, as someone else said, to ANY hand.

I like the theory that he is setting up later hands. Just remember that and don't call when he does it again.

I know a 50/5 SnG and the WSOP are not the same thing, but by laying down, Murphy kept his stack intact and ended up 13th when I don't think they were even ITM yet when the hand was played.

[Gator]

This concept is well known. However, your example makes it crystal clear and kudos for you for explaining it so well.

So, now you are UTG with that $1 chip and you have JJ -- do you go all in or fold!!

Seriously, great example.

[LinusKS]

Well, in a structured payout, no one can have more equity than the equivalent for first place. If the top prize is 50% of the prize pool, your chips can never be worth more than 50% of the prize pool, no matter how many chips you have.

That makes sense.

But how does that apply when you're doubling your chips from 10% to 20%?


[ QUOTE ]

As PM said, this is a very important concept. See TPFAP or Gambling Theory and Other Topics, where I believe Mason Malmuth first explains this concept.

I will give you an explanation, too, just for fun:

Take the simplest example of a fixed payout tourney: 1st place pays $100 and second place pays $50. There are 100 chips in play and 3 players left.

Player A: $98
Player B: $1
Player C: $1

Simple game theory says player A has a 98% chance of winning, and B and C each have a 1% chance of winning. Since first place is $100, each chip has $1 of equity in 1st place money for all 3 players. But, this is a percentage payout tourney. Both B and C have an equal chance of getting 2nd or 3rd place (player A's chance is negligible). So both player B and C have $25 of equity in 2nd place. That means their chip is worth $26 ($25 equity in 2nd place, plus $1 equity in first.) Well, if each of player A's chips were worth $26 as well, he would have $2548 of equity in the tournament. But there's only $150 to be won, so his chips are worth much less than B's and C's.

That's why any time you pay more than 1 spot in a tournament, your chips are worth more as your stack becomes smaller. That value is called survival equity.

Irieguy

[/ QUOTE ]

[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
But how does that apply when you're doubling your chips from 10% to 20%?

[/ QUOTE ]

Your first X chips were worth Y in terms of prize-equity. If you double your stack, you add X more chips to your stack. Since we agree that every chip that is added to your stack is worth less than any chip already in your stack (in terms of prize-equity), than the *added X* chips are worth less than Y. In other words: Your prize-equity is now less than 2Y. It has not doubled up.