aggressive into 2nd place or passive?

[slydeni]

Party Poker 30+3 (stacks are close approximations)

Blinds= 200-400

Big stack= 7570 chips
Me= 180 chips (after posting SB)
other guy= 50 chips.

Small stack is on button and folds. I have A9suited (and again...250 chips). Next hand...the small stack will be mandatory all in against big stack and I can sit and watch.

Do I play this hand and gamble here; or do I let short stack play random hand against Goliath?

MY CHOICE:

I folded as I did not want to gamble here.Even if I win the hand I am at 750 and change, and I have to sweat the blinds again in one hand. If I lose I give up 2nd.

Did I do this right?

sly

[MrMon]

Yes, but you don't realize why. Since he only has 50 and will be BB next time while you will be the button, not only does he have to win the next hand, he also has to win the following hand. With only 50 chips, the best he can do is double to 100. He's then SB all-in with you BB all-in, but you have more chips, so you'll still finish in second if you both lose.

I'd have to think about it some more, but even if you had AA here (80% win), it might be worth laying it down. Winning will gain you little vs. him having to defeat first one random hand and then two random hands.

[slydeni]

yes that sounds logical. I would be very curious as to what people think the decision here is if I had great hand : AA, KK.

sly