Slansky makes me think

I have just finished reading Tournament Poker, and last night was the 1st opportunity I have had to play live since. There is a gap between the acquisition of knowledge and application of knowledge particularly in the case of Tournament Poker because some of the key concepts are quite subtle and will only be fully incorporated into my game following a lot of practice.


However the book is starting to make me think about some hands differently. An example of which is the following hand.


PL HE tourney I’m on the button on a 6 handed table blinds are T200 & T400. I am low stack on the table with T1700. Two players BB & UTG have large stacks (T10,000 plus) All the other players have around T3000. There are 25 players remaining final table of 9 gets paid. UTG limps (he is a loose player who has a very broad range of opening hands particularly when he has chips). All fold to me I look at my hand and see AsQh I raise all in. SB folds BB & UTG call.


Flop 2sThJc


BB checks, UTG checks,


T9s BB checks UTG bets pot, BB folds


UTG turns over 7d9d.


River 6c


Thank you good night.


Before reading tournament poker by David Slansky I shrug my shoulders and walk away. Now I ask myself “Did my pre-flop raise make the pot to big?” “Is my all-in strategy sound here?”


If anyone has the answers to these questions I’d be pleased to hear from you.


Regards


Ross

Ross,


You can't wait for ever, what with T600 going in there every six hands- this is a hand you must play.


You didn't give an impression of the big blind's play, but I suspect he called, thinking

you were putting a move on, since he had no overpair, jack, or ten.


The under-the-gun player is someone I'd like to play with; bet he didn't even make the final table!!!


perfidious

Ross,


I think you need to check the relevant section again. The book talks about making the pot too big such that your opponents are less likely to fold later on, and you yourself are obliged to put in more bets because of the size of the pot.


None of this applies at all when you are all in ! Let me know if this makes sense.


Andy.

andy


Thanks, yes of course it does. The problem I have read it taken on board the broad concepts but I am still hazy on detailed application. Hence half baked post.


As a rule of thumb I am not going to make a concerted effort to incorporate the concepts into my game, rather I will continue to study & over time my game will evolve.


For the record before my post hand rationalisation my thinking at the table was along the lines "AQ, need chips here we go"


Ross