05-02-2002, 01:18 AM
An email list I subscribe to is abuzz over another subscriber's bustout hand from the $2,000 no-limit hold'em tournament a week ago.
Here's the situation. He's got a smallish stack, enough to last several orbits of the button at the present level of blinds, and there are some substantially larger stacks to his left. All three of the big-stack players have been hammering the small stacks, attacking their blinds, and coming over the top when the small stacks themselves make plays for the blinds.
My correspondent claims that one particular player has reraised all-in six consecutive times running when my correspondent opened with a raise. My correspondent felt compelled to let his hand go (including, he said, some suited aces and some pocket pairs) to the reraises, but he was growing increasingly sure that the opponent who reraised was doing so with *anything*, taking advantage of my correspondent's (and the other small stacks') unwillingness to make a stand.
My correspondent picks up a suited KQ in late position. He figures KQs plays showdown well against a random hand, so he decides that it's a mile ahead of a random hand, so he plays it like before -- opens with a reasonable-sized raise -- and expects his opponent to come over the top. Sure enough, the raise comes, and my correspondent calls, pretty much without hesitation.
Turn the cards up: the other guy has JJ. No help when the board is burned and turned, and my correspondent goes home empty-handed.
The debate on the email list is running heavily on both sides. One side insists that KQs is not a hand you want to play showdown with, and if you *expect* your opponent to raise you all-in, you should just muck it and wait for a better hand. On the other side, people are claiming that if you do indeed believe your opponent is reraising with random hands, KQs holds up about 63% of the time versus random hands, comparable to pocket sixes, or somewhere between AT and A9. The people who like my correspondent's call also point out that KQ is only a 54:46 dog versus JJ, and he was getting the right price to call the reraise.
Some people have suggested pushing all-in with the hand in order to rule out resteals. Others have suggested that if the odds favor a reraise by a hand that is massively dominated by KQ (say, by J8), then you *want* to get that money into the middle of the pot before you call.
In the discussion on this email list, I've weighed in on the side of the people who like my correspondent's play ... although I am wondering if the edge in a 63:37 shot is big enough.
What do people here think?
Here's the situation. He's got a smallish stack, enough to last several orbits of the button at the present level of blinds, and there are some substantially larger stacks to his left. All three of the big-stack players have been hammering the small stacks, attacking their blinds, and coming over the top when the small stacks themselves make plays for the blinds.
My correspondent claims that one particular player has reraised all-in six consecutive times running when my correspondent opened with a raise. My correspondent felt compelled to let his hand go (including, he said, some suited aces and some pocket pairs) to the reraises, but he was growing increasingly sure that the opponent who reraised was doing so with *anything*, taking advantage of my correspondent's (and the other small stacks') unwillingness to make a stand.
My correspondent picks up a suited KQ in late position. He figures KQs plays showdown well against a random hand, so he decides that it's a mile ahead of a random hand, so he plays it like before -- opens with a reasonable-sized raise -- and expects his opponent to come over the top. Sure enough, the raise comes, and my correspondent calls, pretty much without hesitation.
Turn the cards up: the other guy has JJ. No help when the board is burned and turned, and my correspondent goes home empty-handed.
The debate on the email list is running heavily on both sides. One side insists that KQs is not a hand you want to play showdown with, and if you *expect* your opponent to raise you all-in, you should just muck it and wait for a better hand. On the other side, people are claiming that if you do indeed believe your opponent is reraising with random hands, KQs holds up about 63% of the time versus random hands, comparable to pocket sixes, or somewhere between AT and A9. The people who like my correspondent's call also point out that KQ is only a 54:46 dog versus JJ, and he was getting the right price to call the reraise.
Some people have suggested pushing all-in with the hand in order to rule out resteals. Others have suggested that if the odds favor a reraise by a hand that is massively dominated by KQ (say, by J8), then you *want* to get that money into the middle of the pot before you call.
In the discussion on this email list, I've weighed in on the side of the people who like my correspondent's play ... although I am wondering if the edge in a 63:37 shot is big enough.
What do people here think?