Tourn EV vs. Ring Game EV vs. "Read".......

The following situation arose during a single table PL HE tournament online last night. It addresses the question of "Ring Game EV" vs. "Tournament EV" vs. "Read on Opponent". I would like some opinions if you all would be so kind.


Here's the situation:


$5 buy-in PL single table tournament. It's down to 2 players; "J" & "K". It was a re-buy tourn, & "J" had re-bought 3 times @ $5 each for a total of $20, as had "K". 1st is $22.54: 2nd is $17.53, so both had to win to show a profit. (For this discussion, I am not so much concerned with the wisdom of either's rebuy strategy, given the payout).


Blinds are 75/150. "J" has 3k in chips: "K" has 2K. "J" is in the BB. "K" rr's the minimum 150, making it 300 to go, requiring "J" to put in 150 to call.


Other important information: These two have played against each other hundreds of times. "J" is clearly the stronger player by a significant amount. "J" also knows that "K" is intimidated by him, and takes advantage of it.


"J" holds J6hearts. He flat calls the rr.


Heated discussion between myself and friend about this call. We both know both players "play" well. We both agree that "J" is much stronger pre & post player than "K".


Friend says….."Bad Call: -EV, regardless of J's advantages".


I say "Call OK, as "J" can make call for minimum, fully knowing he can get away from hand very easily if no connection on flop, and it doesn't seriously impact his stack size".


We both agree that call is -EV in a ring game. Friend maintains that "-EV is -EV, and "J" should have mucked."


Both friend & I chatted with "J' after game, and here was his thinking on the play:


"I know "K"'s play inside out. I believe he's on an Ax or something like Kx or Qx to make a minimum raise like that in PL game under these situations. If he had a "real" hand, he would definitely "pot" it pre-flop. I believe that I am behind calling with J6h, but I make the flat call for the following reasons:"


- If I whiff the flop, I can easily get away from the hand.


- I have position on "K", and can play at him post flop, depending on situation.

- If I connect on the flop, I can play for his whole stack and win the tournament.


My questions to all readers therefore are:


- Is this an EV situation such as the one addressed in TPFAP where Sklansky defines the difference in "ring game" EV vs. "tournament" EV?

- Is this a situation where "read" and the specifics of this particular tournament situation justifies "J"'s flat call?


- Does the straight -EV of the call take precedence over all, and should have "J" mucked the hand because of it regardless of other factors?


I will post results of hand after responses.


I will also post this in both Tournament and General Theory Forums to get maximum feedback.

There are a couple different questions here, but your main one is easy: There is practically no difference between "tournament" e.v. and ring game e.v. in this situation.


First, your statement that "both need to win to make a profit" is completely irrelevant -- the tournament entry fees are a sunk cost, and can't affect the e.v. of the play.


Also, at this point, both players have locked up 17.53, and they're playing heads up for 5 bucks, so there is no concern that they should take a negative e.v. play in order to lock up a higher position.


That said, the one area where the e.v. is different is when one player is significantly better than the other in a freezeout situation like this one. In this case, it is positive e.v. for the underdog to take more risks (even taking the worst of it in some cases), and +e.v. for the favorite to avoid marginal situations when he knows he can get better opportunities in the future. (Though this is dangerous. It is essentially giving money to your opponent to reduce variance, and gets extremely costly.)


In your scenario, I think the player with J6 would have a hard time justifying the play from the tournament vs. ring game perspective: it's not exactly a trap hand or one that will give you a huge edge, which is what the better player wants.


However, I think you and your friend are jumping to conclusions, as I do think the player can justify his call as + e.v. First, he's getting 3-1 on the pot as it stands preflop, and he's calling with a suited hand in a heads up scenario against what he seems to think is a low-end raising hand -i.e., if played to the river, his hand is less than a 3-1 dog. The call is also only 5% of his stack, very acceptable for a speculative hand. If he's a much better player, and expects to outplay his opponent on later streets (in pot limit, with position, no less, yielding the biggest advantage to the better players), the call is definitely positive e.v.


The biggest problem, of course, is the jack. (give me 6 3s anyday) If the jack hits, he's in danger of being outkicked, particularly against a middling hand (J10!) But if the guy thinks he'll be able to defend that, (say, if the opponent is one of those people who never checks top pair, but calls with less) he should feel free.


or maybe i'm too loose in PLH,


ben

Wow Ben!


Thank you so much for taking the time to think through the scenario so thorougly and then respond!


I had also posted this situation in the tournament Forum, and received a number of responses there.


What I was trying to get at (in my muddled fashion) was, given all the variables involved, how does one prioritize those variables?


I believe "J" is, indeed, a MUCH better player (especially in h/u situations) than "K", and that is why I felt that his flat call was justified in this particular situation.


I constantly struggle on the horns of the "read vs. math" dilemma.


If I understand your response correctly, you are saying that if you were "J" and were confident that you could outplay "K" post-flop, you also would have called?


By the way, the flop was 668, and J took K's stack and won the tournament.

I'm curious what K had.. did he show?


If I was really confident of my superiority, I would play the hand, as well as many others. Heck, I've played no-limit games so soft I could play 74o profitably, but that's a different cookie.


As for reads vs. math, there's a whole poker theory about this, but they don't really contradict each other. In my philosophy, I think there are only 3 skills in poker: 1) Figuring out where you stand. 2) Figuring out what the most profitable strategy is, given 1., and 3) Having the discipline to play it.


I do think people who say things like "J6 is always unprofitable, just look at the ranking table" are clearly wrong, but any serious poker player knows that.


b

Ben,


His hand was auto-mucked, so we don't know.


My guess is that he was ahead of J6h. Knowing how he plays, I would have put him on a range of hands from Ax - JT.


I'm constantly trying to learn more about the game. IMO, it's like any other skill that needs to be mastered. As you increase your understanding of the skill, the delineation between the finer points becomes hazier.


It is the more arcane shades of gray (that I think I perceive as I attempt to learn more about the game) that give me fits.


Thanks again for you help.