Lack of folding equity

[DaffyDuck]

Lately, I have been killed by limpers or min-raisers calling large preflop raises with crap. I know they're playing crap and when they call I usually have the best of it but I have been sucked out on unmercifully.

There is a logic that says that you want these people to call but I seriously question it. In the middle stages of a tourney or SNG, I don't really want to have all my chips in preflop when I am a 55:45 or a 65:35 or even a 70:30 favorite, that's why I raised him, so he would fold. I want all that dead money to build my stack up and I don't want to race or risk busting 3 or 4 or 4.5 out of 10 times, not in the middle stages of the event.

In a ring game situation this is obviously great, you will have huge variance but you will be very profitable. But in a tourney you know that eventually you will be crippled since you can't win them all.

Today I raised 4 times preflop all-in and had people call me with crap. In 2 of the 4 they hit and I was badly damaged, only to battle back and have it happen again. Math dictates that if I get into this situation many times I will lose some of them so I want to avoid the situation entirely. I want them to FOLD. But people will apparently limp with A7o and then call their stack on a raise from a tight player with AK. Jeez.

So, what to do? What if you KNOW that, even if you put these people all-in they will still call with crap, but their crap will still make them 40:60 or 35:65? What if you know that EVERY stinkin time you have a hand you will have no way to prevent these people from seeing a flop no matter how much you bet. Are you supposed to be happy with this? Am I just on a bad run (3 weeks)? Do I really want this situation, even knowing eventually I will lose a fair share of these?

Should I make small bets/raises and keep the pots relatively small, let them see their flops, get them off if they miss and fold if they show strength? Win many more of these then I lose by playing them this way and gradually build my stack up this way? Stop trying to get them to fold preflop and just beat them on the flop? I really hate doing this, especially when the dead money dictates a large or all-in raise preflop is the correct amount.

Bob

[Scuba Chuck]

Mr Duck, poker is a game that follows the laws of probabilities. If you have the edge by 2:1 on your pushes/raises etc. there will be times that it feels like you're losing 2:1.

My experience has been that when the times are good, they are really good, as I win all my 2:1's and I win all my 1:2's. But we all know the law of averages, and that is life in the game of poker.

[DaffyDuck]

Thanks Chuck. I've been reading your posts lately and you really have some good things to say.

However, you haven't answered my question and your insights would be appreciated.

If you go in as a 2:1 favorite 3 times you will lose one, on average. So, if you are all-in 3 times in a SNG or tourney on average you will lose one if called. If these situations have the potential to cripple you then you will be inevitably be crippled if you keep getting into them.

I have apparently been dramatically over-estimating my folding equity in these situations so should I just stop trying to make them fold? Should I let them just see a flop (with bad odds if my stack is big enough to make a sensible or even min-raise without pot committing) and play it from there? I am honestly tired of saying "well I'm out again but gosh darn it I had the best hand and the dummy called and sucked me out".

I think a lot of this lies in the opinions I have read here, such as "if you're willing to call a reraise all-in why not just raise all-in?" or "if you are betting 40% of your stack just go all-in". I understand these in principle, but if there is no folding equity does this continue to hold true?

Bob

[The Yugoslavian]

The problem is that you're assuming you have *no* FE.

You always have some FE in the situations you describe. Of course, without knowing the exact situations and the risk/reward that is effect, all I can say is that psychologically making good plays can often feel like making bad plays. You have to go back and look at them using reasonable assumptions about your opponents.

You are right in thinking that being allin to showdown frequently is not good. You are also right to think that won without showdown chips are the best kind of chips. Generally your edges when called allin will only be ~55/45 or 60/40 (and of course you will be behind sometimes too). But, you definitely have FE if your pushing on limpers or open pushing. If you didn't you could get 3rd or 2nd in just about every SNG by folding every single hand (see why /images/graemlins/wink.gif ).

At the lower levels it will sometimes seem like fish call with *any two* but they don't and you thus, have to have FE.


Yugoslav

[Scuba Chuck]

Mr Duck, there was a thread written about six months ago (subject line: Folding Equity), written by a poster named after a bug (clue) that would be very helpful to you (and to many others on this forum).

I highly suggest you search the archives for that post.

In regards to your question, your objective is to avoid a showdown until you are ITM. That's why, as one guy put it, "do i need to just be a submissive bitch when i am in the bb unless i am strong as steel? "

There is no one answer to your questions and thoughts. Sometimes a table is very tight, so you need to recognize this, and blind steal like crazy with any two cards. Some times a table is extremely loose, so you should be content to just watch the other guys beat each other up and coast ITM (usually getting third). But usually, the game is somewhere in between.

That being said, many times you need to realize what station in poker that you are in. As the original Folding Equity thread states "FE, for any given hand, increases *dramatically*, as the buy-in increases (For "same hands", played in different buy-in SNGs)."

The point is, despite the fact that your opponenets are incorrectly calling you with bad hands, doesn't mean that you are playing incorrectly. In fact, I had a game recently where the BB wrote in the chatbox, "I know you have nothing." So he called my K4o, with Q8 suited. Is that call a good poker move? Luckily, I won that hand with King high. I always wonder why I play the $33s (because you don't have a bankroll stupid)? You just need to learn to adjust, or accept the consequences. Both of the previous lines of action are correct. Poker is also a game of patience. Be patient, build your bankroll correctly, it may take a while, but as you move up in buyins, more people understand the correct way to play. But be aware, you'll then find new reasons to bitch about people.

Finally, and perhaps more importantly, and said ad nauseum on this forum. You SHOULD BE HAPPY, that fish call your AK with A7. You are a 3:1 favorite on this hand. But despite the odds, money is won by capitalizing on others mistakes. You should be happy to know that you're playing at tables where people are happy to make as many mistakes as they do. Thank you fish. Good Game, Nice Hand.

[DaffyDuck]

Chuck - thanks. I probably just need to work through this.

My big problem has been that I have been busted OTM so many times lately where we were all-in preflop and I was a favorite. But the turn or river killed me. So, I think, well that was just another bad beat. I should be happy I got him all-in preflop as a dog.

But then I start to think, well if I had just let him see the flop I could have gotten him off it and we would never have seen the turn or river.

So, I have been questioning the logic "if you are willing to call a preflop raise all-in why not go all-in yourself as it increases folding equity" or "if you are betting 40% of your stack just go all-in". Yugo says we do have folding equity and I know he is correct but I have had trouble finding it lately. I think all-ins look more like bluffs sometimes to these people and are prone to be called more.

I'm thinking of adding a new strategy to my toolbox. One of "if I'm willing to go all-in preflop, then I should just put in a small raise to hopefully get the blinds to fold their crap, see the flop and then go all-in". I think I would have more folding equity if the limpers miss their flop, and if they don't miss, well, the net effect is still the same as being all-in preflop anyway.

Plus, this allows you to get off it on the flop, although people here will call this horrible play. I wouldn't do this often but I think there are situations where I need to consider it. Here's an example:

You have TT. You have 2 limpers and you figure with a high degree of certainty that they have Ax or Kxs, because if they had a big Ace or PP they would have raised. You know if you go all-in preflop with TT one or both will make a bad call and you are a good favorite but you don't want to be all-in preflop with TT. However, making a 4x-5x raise will be half your stack. So, you min raise to hopefully get the blinds to fold their complete junk and the flop comes Axx or QKx or something and one of the limpers goes all-in. Well you believe they hit and you fold. Everybody here screams "OMG what a weak-ass play! You should have raised bigger preflop and made them fold their crappy hand." Or I raise 5x preflop, get 2 callers and the same flop hits and they go all-in and I fold. Then everybody here screams "OMG how could you raise half your stack preflop and then fold on the flop? You should have just pushed preflop".

Of course, sometimes doubt creeps in here and you think "well they're just making a play at it and I would be laying down the best hand just because there's one overcard" so you can call. This is no different then being all-in preflop anyway.

Does this make sense? Or should keep playing the way I have been and assume I have been on a bad run and I have more folding equity then I have had lately and I have been sucked out more lately then I should expect?

I would love to play the higher buy-ins where my folding equity is larger but I am building my bankroll properly so it's the $10 and $20 SNGs for me right now. I think a lot of the advice I have been listening to on this forum is better for higher buy-ins and I am wondering if what I am thinking about is a better strategy for lower buy-ins.

Thanks for your help and thanks for this forum.

Bob

[spentrent]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm thinking of adding a new strategy to my toolbox. One of "if I'm willing to go all-in preflop, then I should just put in a small raise to hopefully get the blinds to fold their crap, see the flop and then go all-in". I think I would have more folding equity if the limpers miss their flop, and if they don't miss, well, the net effect is still the same as being all-in preflop anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem with this is that you are allowing the fish to play correctly-- and they don't even have to know why. You might be laying better than 2 to 1 pre-flop; you're making a pre-flop call correct.

Mind you, this call might not be "correct" by 2+2 standards, but it's +CEV and mathematically correct. It's one thing to be sucked out, another thing to be outplayed, but INSANE to set the stage for an inferior player to play correctly without knowing it.

Don't give up hope. Variance happens.

[dt133]

I had this problem in the 10 and 20 SNGs before and i solved it by realizing my timing of raises were not correct. I suspect here that you are playing your own cards too much and not factoring in other circumstances. As i found, folding equity at these levels is much lower; I will NOT raise a guy in the BB who I know sees the flop >20% of the time. What I really want to do is raise a rock, who may be 4 seats away from me, but will fold to a 2.5BB raise. Pay attention to the players and their folding standards - its better to raise any two against a rock rather than raise w AK against a fish.

Bubble play - you need to tighten up a lot, as the gap is really high here. 1010 is not a strong hand - you're very close in the money here, and I might even fold this to a raise if I know the guy is a pretty tight player. If this were level 1, would you call an all-in with 1010? At the bubble, the stakes are even higher, because you only need to advance one more. If you are first to open, and have ~10BB or less, always push (don't raise only 2-3 BB, giving the BB decent odds).

Notice stack sizes - is there someone that is small stack and about to bust out? Is there a medium stack playing every hand that could bust? I find that the 4th place finisher usually either plays too loose (yes, playing pocket 10s against a raise can be considered loose at this time) or is short stacked and plays too tight being blinded out. Notice if you are either of these guys, or if anyone else is in this situation so you can wait them out. To survive the blinds, keep raising the rock until he plays back at you.

Keep practicing your bubble play and i think your variance will decrease.

[DaffyDuck]

[ QUOTE ]
The problem with this is that you are allowing the fish to play correctly-- and they don't even have to know why. You might be laying better than 2 to 1 pre-flop; you're making a pre-flop call correct.

Mind you, this call might not be "correct" by 2+2 standards, but it's +CEV and mathematically correct. It's one thing to be sucked out, another thing to be outplayed, but INSANE to set the stage for an inferior player to play correctly without knowing it.

Don't give up hope. Variance happens.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand what you are saying. Someone said "a donkey will call any size bet if they are going to call, and fold to any size bet if they are going to fold". So, I'm not worrying about what odds I am giving to these limpers if I'm pretty sure they are going to call any bet.

To your point though, I am worried about giving the people left to act after me odds to call. If I push then I know the limpers will probably call but at least I probably don't have the blinds in the mix also. I think my proposed play might be effective if I am reasonably sure that the blinds will fold junk to a small/medium raise. So I raise enough to get them out regardless of what percentage of my stack it is, assuming I have enough left to make a reasonable bet on the flop and have some folding equity there.

Maybe it is all just normal variance. Maybe I'm just hitting an unlucky streak of people willing to call all-in with crap. Maybe I'm losing more of these then I should. Maybe I'm just losing the first one instead of winning a couple and getting a big stack and being able to weather it when I lose one.

I still think a modified "stop-n-go" when I am pretty sure I have no folding equity preflop needs to be in my playbook. Bet enough to get the blinds out and then go all-in regardless of the flop or action on the flop.

I hope some other folks with some experience in low buy-in SNGs chime in here.

Thanks,

Bob

[spentrent]

I play the low games, 10|20|30 with the occasional 50 when my bankroll permits it. I find that the players in the smaller buy-in games don't understand the strength implied by a stop and go play.

If your intent is to show insurmountable strength to knock out a marginal, yet pat, hand -- without a monster yourself -- I just don't think the villains will "get it."

[parappa]

I played about 500 5+1s and 1000 10+1s. I think that you'd definitely benefit from reading "Small Stakes Holdem." The book is for limit games, but is essentially the answer to your dilemma for those sorts of games.

Basically, what you need to understand is that callers take away bluffing as a weapon. They call; that's what they do. But there is compensation for this--they pay you off on your bigger hands. Value raises are good in very loose games--semi-bluffs, blind steals, raising limpers with marginal hands aren't moves that work at this limit.

You want to get your chips in with a big advantage. Being good at playing post-flop helps, but when you're in push/fold mode, you've got to take what you can get. The "I'm a better player so I don't want to get my chips in in tossup situations" is easily overdone. Yes, you want to avoid getting into a 55/45 for all your chips, but you also toss in the numbers 60:40 and 70:30. Imo, you have to be right onto the bubble in a situation where ChipEV and $EV are wildly divergent to pass up on a 60:40. Assume that you can; that's the limit. No one is good enough to pass on a 70:30 situation in an Sng, period. 70:30 is the situation you're waiting for! Get your chips in and pray that they call. What that means is that 3 out of 10 times, on average, you're going to lose all your chips with your monster to some dumb hand, 2 out of 5 times you're going to lose with your 60:40 solid favourite. This can, and will, add up to 25 all-ins in a row as a favourite lost at some point in your career. That's poker.

But if you limp with your premium hand, the fish are no longer making a mistake by caliing. You've gone out of your way to make their play correct. The cure is much worse than the disease.

I think we've all been here. I made a post just like this when I was starting. This whole idea of avoiding suckouts, avoiding bad beats, folding good hands, or playing good hands weakly to prevent getting beaten is an illusion, but it'll take a lot of play and a lot of thinking about the game before you'll really have your head around why (at least it did for me).