Following odds only...

[suited_ace]

Just busted out of my first tournament at UB. I really liked the structure, way better than PokerRoom (I guess this is not surprising). The average player is way better than at PokerRoom and the average fish is way more aggressive.

One hand set aside (I flopped trip 5s against a guy who flopped trip 8s), my stack lingered on draws where I had always the odds to stick around for the next card but never made it.

So this is my question: if the odds are favorable, will you always stick around or there are other factors that will make you fold even if the odds should make you stay?

[MLG]

If you have odds then the issue shouldnt be between calling and folding, it should be between calling and raising.

[niin]

In tournaments, it depends on your stack size. If the money isn't deep, having the odds to call a low-percentage hand can be a mistake.

[MLG]

no, thats wrong. you are attaching an inherent value to survival which does not exist.

[Snoogins47]

[ QUOTE ]
no, thats wrong. you are attaching an inherent value to survival which does not exist.

[/ QUOTE ]

You may be able to argue that there's no intrinsic value to survival, but clearly survival does have value in many, many tournament situations.

[MLG]

only in bubble situations, and even then its less than most people think.

[suited_ace]

[ QUOTE ]
If you have odds then the issue shouldnt be between calling and folding, it should be between calling and raising.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmmm... Very interesting... What is usually your criteria for calling or raising? Where can I read more about this?

[DireWolf]

MLG could you explain your theory a little more for the not so bright ones around here

[slickpoppa]

I would like to cautiously add that there are some situtations that are not on the bubble where you probably should fold small edges. For example, there are some home tournaments that I have played in that I would not hesitate to fold a 55:45 favorite for all of my chips early on because the level of play is so atrocious.

Nevertheless, in most online play the competition is good enough and the blinds go up so fast that you should never be folding edges. When in doubt, follow the odds.

[suited_ace]

Yeah, but the question here is when should I be calling and when should I be raising. It's pretty easy to raise when you have a straight flush draw with 2 live overcards against someone that you're putting on a high pair, but these situations don't come very often. I want to know exactly how to play these draws, how much to bet, etc...

I'm a newbie, but I don't plan on being one for very long.

[MLG]

you have a really good attitude towards learning this stuff The problem is, I'm not sure there are concrete answers to the questions you are asking. To get you started I'll simply say that you need to consider more factors than the cards. The two biggest factors in whether I raise with my draws are relative chip positions and the range of hands I put my opponents on. If the stack sizes are relatively shallow im more likely to push, and if I put my opponent on a wide range of hands (meaning he will fold to me raise often) I will push. A good draw (nut flush, flush+overcard, straight flush, flush+gutshot, and the like) plus folding equity is a very powerful thing.

[binions]

The very best players should avoid close gambles for most or all of their chips early in a tournament, and may even be right to fold small edges early to get bigger edges later.

For most, however, small edges should always be taken and even small -EV situations should be gambled, except if you are on the bubble. Then you need a little more than a small edge.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
If you have odds then the issue shouldnt be between calling and folding, it should be between calling and raising.

[/ QUOTE ]


is there a point where variance makes a +EV-chip call -$EV? I'm sure it must be pretty rare as I'm having trouble thinking of a situation. let's say you have a flush draw on the turn, and no overs, and you're pretty sure your opponent has TPTK. you need 4-1 to continue. is there a situation where it's not worth calling, getting 4-1? I guess that would mean you'd have to have a reasonable amount of chips left, which would mean that the pot is enormous and would give you a great chance of winning. so I guess a situation like that doesn't exist

I just answered my own question

[suited_ace]

When the situation is clear enough for me, I can easily raise my draws. Having a big stack and a good draw will definitely encourage me to raise.

My problem is navigating through the murkier waters. Can I give you an example and you tell me what you think you'd do?

Here it goes (this is a hand from today's $3000 guaranteed at UB):

Blinds are at 30-60, I'm in the BB with 75off and about $1200. Pot is unraised pre-flop, 5 players to see the flop. $300 in the pot. Flop comes 48Q rainbow. SB checks, I check, UTG bets $60 and everyone calls. Pot is $540, I'm getting 9-to-1 odds. I call. Turn is a deuce. SB checks, I check, UTG bets $120, 2 call, pot is $960, I'm getting 8-to-1 so I call. River comes a 10. UTG bets again and I fold.

I know I played very passively post-flop, but against so many players there's just too much chance I *will* get called. It's important to know that these guys are low buy-in tourney players. Most of them don't even know what TPFAP is. They don't know what to do with slightly positive EV situation (they probably don't know what EV is) and the Gap Concept is almost inexistent in the early and middle stages of the tournament.

All I could do in this situation was to sit there and call the bets...

This is probably a subject for another post, but I really have a hard time playing against the bad players that don't even know what a probe or a continuation bet is. It's like not speaking the same language.

[MaGi]

this is simply wrong in a tournament. in cash games pushing small edges is always right, in a tournament it is often wrong.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
this is simply wrong in a tournament. in cash games pushing small edges is always right, in a tournament it is often wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

since when does calling = pushing?

[MLG]

this is an old argument, and one that can be found in all sorts of threads. you should push every edge you have early in tournaments, even if you are better than the field.

let me put it another way. being a good player lets you analyze situations better than your opponents. this means that you will recognize small edges. to not press those edges removes the very advantage you have by being a better player. in case you haven't noticed I feel very strongly about this.

[suited_ace]

I get that, but do you think that my calling was pushing a small edge? I'd think that raising it (on the flop? turn? river?) would, but is the "calling station behaviour" an example of pushing a slightly +EV situation?

[MLG]

I think you played this fine. The turn call is borderline ok, and I would think my default action is a fold there. Sometimes calling is the way to go, and here in this field it is.

[niin]

Well, I said 'can' be wrong; not is always wrong. I used that word for a reason.

I also said if your chip stack is not very deep. There are often -EV situations for the current hand that might be worth the gamble if having those chips will gain you proportionally more later on. There are also +EV situations that you should fold if the chances of winning are low, depending on the situation, mainly the depth of your chip stack; the bigger your stack, smaller edges you can push.

Of course, it always depends on the situation and who you are playing, your stack size relative to who you are playing against, etc.

[ QUOTE ]
you should push every edge you have early in tournaments

[/ QUOTE ]

I completely agree with this. The money is deep early in a tournament, so you can push smaller edges more often.

To appeal to authority, I offer some words from TPfAP, in the QA section on page 201:

[ QUOTE ]
2. Why is it not always right to choose the play with the highest EV?
-- Because the higher EV bet may be more likely to lose.

3. What if you have enough money to withstand short-term fluctuations?
-- In that case it is always better to choose the bet with the higher EV.

4. What if you do not have that cushion?
-- It may well be right to choose the slightly smaller EV if that bet will win more often.

5. When is this especially true?
-- If going broke keeps you from making lots more positive EV bets.

[/ QUOTE ]

[niin]

I think the flop call is fine; the turn call for over 1/10th your stack is a bit loose. I'd probably fold there.

This is one of the situations I was talking about; the chip stacks are getting shallow, so even tho you had a +EV bet, the chance that you'll hit that bet is low, so you won't be able to survive the short-term fluctuations to have the long-term +EV-ness of this bet bear fruit.

In a ring game, this call is always 100% correct. Every +EV situation in a ring game is always 100% correct to make, since you should have enough of a bankroll to ride out the short-term.

I think we're saying the same thing from two different points of view. In this hand, he'd have to call over 1/10th his stack to see if he can hit his 5-1 shot. You just can't survive very many of those 5-1 shots with that shallow of a stack, so I'd probably fold this since the chance of winning is low.

If I had some of the other draws you stated (nut flush, flush + overcards, etc) those tend to be higher percentage hands, so it's usually correct to play those.

[daveymck]

Surely though is the pot is offering 5-1+ you are going against the fundemental theory of poker by folding however deep the stacks are. I dont see how the fact its 1/10th of his stack is relevant, I could if it was for all his chips.

[woodguy]

[ QUOTE ]
The very best players should avoid close gambles for most or all of their chips early in a tournament, and may even be right to fold small edges early to get bigger edges later.


[/ QUOTE ]

For tourneys with very deep stacks and long levels (i.e. starting w/ 10,000 blinds at 25/50, 1-1.5hr levels) that has some truth. (and how much truth is often debated)

With online tourneys with shallow stacks (1000-1500) and 15-20 min levels giving up even a 55-45 edge is usually incorrect.

If you post and fold in your typical online tourney you will be down to 10BB's in about 1-1.5hrs.

If you post and fold in a deep stack long level tourney you will be short stacked in about 1.5 days.

That is all the difference in the world when it comes to taking an edge.

Regards,
Woodguy

[woodguy]

[ QUOTE ]
this is simply wrong in a tournament. in cash games pushing small edges is always right, in a tournament it is often wrong.


[/ QUOTE ]

There has been a few threads, including some involving Paul Phillips where this has been discounted.

I will try to dig them up.

$EV=ChipEV up until your or so deep into the payout structure that every placement in the tourney has an increase in payout over the previous placement.

Even Harrington says in HoH that the early stages of a tournament should be played exactly like a cash game.

Regards,
Woodguy

[woodguy]

Here is a link everyone should bookmark . Paul Phillips, Sossman and other on early edges (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=1030662&page=2&view=c ollapsed&sb=5&o=14&fpart=1#1030662)

edit: Follow the link that Paul Phillips posts in this thread, it is excellent as well.


BTW what happened to fnurt? I learned a ton from him, he is missed in this forum.

Regards,
Woodguy

[mcteecho]

He can't be "attaching an inherent value". If it's inherent, it can't be attached. If it can be attached, it's not inherent. You mean he's claiming that a value inherently exists. And it's absurd to see that there's no inherent value to survival in tournaments. If you survive, you may win. If you don't survive, you won't win. Survival has value. The value is inherent.

[MLG]

saying something like, "if you survive you might win" is like saying "if you see a pretty girl on the street you might get to have sex with her." while technically it might be true you have an awful lot of work to do till it happens.

[asofel]

[ QUOTE ]
saying something like, "if you survive you might win" is like saying "if you see a pretty girl on the street you might get to have sex with her." while technically it might be true you have an awful lot of work to do till it happens.

[/ QUOTE ]

nah. i see videos of guys driving around town and picking up 38DD girls who jump in their truck and have sex with them all the time, and its DEFINITELY real...

[Pulplife]

[ QUOTE ]
When the situation is clear enough for me, I can easily raise my draws. Having a big stack and a good draw will definitely encourage me to raise.

My problem is navigating through the murkier waters. Can I give you an example and you tell me what you think you'd do?

Here it goes (this is a hand from today's $3000 guaranteed at UB):

Blinds are at 30-60, I'm in the BB with 75off and about $1200. Pot is unraised pre-flop, 5 players to see the flop. $300 in the pot. Flop comes 48Q rainbow. SB checks, I check, UTG bets $60 and everyone calls. Pot is $540, I'm getting 9-to-1 odds. I call. Turn is a deuce. SB checks, I check, UTG bets $120, 2 call, pot is $960, I'm getting 8-to-1 so I call. River comes a 10. UTG bets again and I fold.

I know I played very passively post-flop, but against so many players there's just too much chance I *will* get called. It's important to know that these guys are low buy-in tourney players. Most of them don't even know what TPFAP is. They don't know what to do with slightly positive EV situation (they probably don't know what EV is) and the Gap Concept is almost inexistent in the early and middle stages of the tournament.

All I could do in this situation was to sit there and call the bets...

This is probably a subject for another post, but I really have a hard time playing against the bad players that don't even know what a probe or a continuation bet is. It's like not speaking the same language.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do not understand some of the feedback regarding this example. Many have said that calling the flop bet was correct (with 9:1 pot odds and 5:1 odds to hit his gutshot). Last I calculated, your only 10.75:1 to hit the gutshot on the turn.

So calling a 9:1 pot with a 10.75:1 chance to hit your 6 is -EV. So why is it correct to call here???

Pulp /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[Pulplife]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When the situation is clear enough for me, I can easily raise my draws. Having a big stack and a good draw will definitely encourage me to raise.

My problem is navigating through the murkier waters. Can I give you an example and you tell me what you think you'd do?

Here it goes (this is a hand from today's $3000 guaranteed at UB):

Blinds are at 30-60, I'm in the BB with 75off and about $1200. Pot is unraised pre-flop, 5 players to see the flop. $300 in the pot. Flop comes 48Q rainbow. SB checks, I check, UTG bets $60 and everyone calls. Pot is $540, I'm getting 9-to-1 odds. I call. Turn is a deuce. SB checks, I check, UTG bets $120, 2 call, pot is $960, I'm getting 8-to-1 so I call. River comes a 10. UTG bets again and I fold.

I know I played very passively post-flop, but against so many players there's just too much chance I *will* get called. It's important to know that these guys are low buy-in tourney players. Most of them don't even know what TPFAP is. They don't know what to do with slightly positive EV situation (they probably don't know what EV is) and the Gap Concept is almost inexistent in the early and middle stages of the tournament.

All I could do in this situation was to sit there and call the bets...

This is probably a subject for another post, but I really have a hard time playing against the bad players that don't even know what a probe or a continuation bet is. It's like not speaking the same language.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do not understand some of the feedback regarding this example. Many have said that calling the flop bet was correct (with 9:1 pot odds and 5:1 odds to hit his gutshot). Last I calculated, your only 10.75:1 to hit the gutshot on the turn.

So calling a 9:1 pot with a 10.75:1 chance to hit your 6 is -EV. So why is it correct to call here???

Pulp /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Is the edge the implied odds you get when you hit your gutshot?

[suited_ace]

[ QUOTE ]
Is the edge the implied odds you get when you hit your gutshot?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup. Or at least that's what I thought at the time. I would probably at least double up in that hand...

[niin]

[ QUOTE ]
Surely though is the pot is offering 5-1+ you are going against the fundemental theory of poker by folding however deep the stacks are. I dont see how the fact its 1/10th of his stack is relevant, I could if it was for all his chips.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because there is more at stake in tournaments that just straight +EV plays. There is just a lot more to consider in tournaments (stack sizes, blind structure, etc) that all worth either together or against each other, and the goal in a tournament is finding the right balance of +EV calls and not taking long-shot gambles.

Early in most tournaments, the play is the same as cash games. As the tournament progresses, the play diverges from cash games and low-percentage +EV plays become less appealing.

[MLG]

that's just not true. everybody forgets the second part of winning tournaments. the first is surviving, the second is getting all the chips. you can't win a tournament without getting all the chips at some point. in order to get the chips you should play every positive EV chance you have. it really is that simple.

[Potowame]

I think you miss understand what he is saying.

Yes the guy who wins is the #1 surviver. But he survived by getting chips, not by folding his way into the #1 spot.

I agree a gut shot is not a Ideal spot to get your chips in and hope for the best. I like the flop call, the turn I am not real wild about.

[woodguy]

[ QUOTE ]
Early in most tournaments, the play is the same as cash games. As the tournament progresses, the play diverges from cash games and low-percentage +EV plays become less appealing.


[/ QUOTE ]

It only divereges when you are deep enough into the payouts that each placement has its own pay level (i.e. final table)

This was mathematically proven by someone in one of the older threads discussing this topic (there are many, many threads that discuss this topic)

I think it was either fnurt or fnord who took a crack at the math.

When reading books like TPFAP you must realize that they are talking about very deep stacked tourneys, where you can fold for the first 5 hours and not lose a large % of your stack.

In the online tourneys we all know and love you cannot turn down any edge.

Lets say you want to win Super Monday.
There are 800 runners with 1000 chips each.
You need to get 800,000.
You have 1000.
The tourney will be over in 7 hours.
Better start getting some.

That's very simplistic, but true.

Here's another factor that doesn't get discussed enough.

The more chips you have, the easier it is to get more chips.

This fact alone, makes it worth it to take early edges. The quicker I have the largest stack at my table and cannot go broke on any one hand, the quicker I'm in a position to put my opponents to the test for all their chips (which they will fold and look for a better edge later /images/graemlins/grin.gif)

Regards,
Woodguy

[niin]

Tournaments are not that simple. There is more to it than just straight +EV plays. There is much more to tournaments than just straight odds plays; there are even times in tournaments where it might be right to make a -EV bet if hitting that bet now yields significantly larger +EV later (Negraneau talked about that in a recent CardPlayer article).

That's what is cool about tournaments, there is much more to it than just straight odds, and there are many ways to play that can yield positive results.

And, I'll say it again since it seems to have been missed. Early tournaments are much like cash games. That means that early in tournaments it is virtually always right to take your smaller edges.

[ QUOTE ]
makes it worth it to take early edges

[/ QUOTE ]

When did I say not take early edges? In fact, I think I said early in tournaments it's correct to take/push smaller or lower percentage +EV plays. I even said that it depends on the blind structure, starting chips, and many other things. Shorter/faster tournaments require you to push smaller edges than than longer/slower tournaments because you have to build chips at a higher rate; said a different way, the chip stacks become much shallower much faster, forcing you into more marginal situations, so you have to stay ahead of that.

I think a lot's being lost in translation; gotta love the Internet for discussions. I'm talking about low-pecentage plays that require a large investment on your part. Even if the play marginally +EV, there are times where I'll lay that down if it prevents me from making higher-percentage +EV bets later on. This has to be balanced with the speed the blinds increase, so I have to stay ahead of that curve if I plan on winning the thing. With a faster blind structure, you can't sit around waiting for higher percentage hands.

[ QUOTE ]
The more chips you have, the easier it is to get more chips.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can't argue that. I think I even said that in an around about way somewhere; because of this fact, it's often right to make real gambles (-EV plays) if it doesn't cost you your tournament and in doing so will help you gain proportionally more chips later on.

[Potowame]

I had a deep stack here the turn K didnt make me to happy but,, I took a huge pot.

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t200 (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

MP1 (t4831)
MP2 (t3730)
MP3 (t5170)
CO (t1020)
Button (t3470)
SB (t3475)
Hero (t10650)
UTG (t8325)
UTG+1 (t2010)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 8/images/graemlins/club.gif, T/images/graemlins/heart.gif.
<font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, UTG+1 calls t200, <font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, CO calls t200, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, SB completes, Hero checks.

Flop: (t900) 9/images/graemlins/heart.gif, K/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 7/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
SB checks, Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG+1 bets t400</font>, <font color="#CC3333">CO raises to t800</font>, SB folds, Hero calls t800, UTG+1 calls t400.

Turn: (t3300) K/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG+1 bets t600</font>, CO calls t20 (All-In), Hero calls t600.

River: (t4520) 6/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players, 1 all-in)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets t1400</font>, UTG+1 calls t1310 (All-In).

Final Pot: t7230

[evanski]

Stating this in absolute terms is just wrong. I agree with your message, but its quite obvious that you can come up with examples that stretch this principle to such an extent that it is obviously wrong. Youre playing a single table tournament, with 100 million billion BB's. The 9 people youre playing with are horrible. Some guy goes all in on the first hand and turns over AK. Everyone folds to you in the BB with 22. Youre ahead, should you call? Of course not. Sklansky talks about a bunch of these situations in his tournament book.

-Evan