Interesting 109 Hand

[FatalError]

Talk amongst yourselves

***** Hand History for Game 2466085660 *****
NL Texas Hold'em $100 Buy-in + $9 Entry Fee Trny:14481803 Level:4 Blinds(50/100) - Tuesday, August 02, 15:19:44 EDT 2005
Table Table 39820 (Real Money)
Seat 1 is the button
Total number of players : 6
Seat 1: jimnova ( $1030 )
Seat 3: jljf3 ( $630 )
Seat 4: SickValueBet ( $3025 )
Seat 5: Trojan_01 ( $1780 )
Seat 8: soybalsero ( $2460 )
Seat 9: zzzzz69 ( $1075 )
Trny:14481803 Level:4
Blinds(50/100)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to SickValueBet [ 5s Tc ]
Trojan_01 folds.
soybalsero folds.
zzzzz69 folds.
jimnova folds.
jljf3 is all-In [580]
SickValueBet calls [530].

[curtains]

I think it's a pretty bad call. Even if you know they have any two Im almost positive its not +EV (if it is, it'll be exceptionally small +ev), and there is of course some chance they only have the top 50-70% of hands as it's tough to push into a huge stack sometimes in this spot, I definitely don't push 100% in this spot.

Also I'm suspecting of course that you know your opponent and play with them frequently, which makes it cheating that you didn't tell us that.

If this is just some random donkey you never played with before, then calling is even more terrible, because the chances they are pushing 100% of hands is much smaller.

[FatalError]

think outside the realm of this single hand though, try to get a little creative

[Newt_Buggs]

even if I knew that my opponent was aggressive pf I would fold. Most players, myself included, aren't pushing any two here.

[curtains]

lol try to get a little creative? Listen do you know your opponent and play with them often or not? Otherwise calling is stupid. And if you do know them, then not telling us is misleading and thus posing the question the way that you did was pointless. Note that even if I know my opponent and know they are aggressive I won't call here (However I would call with something like Q2o or J7o if I felt they were pushing any 2).

It's just too obvious what you are doing calling with T5o, in that you are trying to discourage them for the future. However calling with something like T5o makes it too obvious you are doing it for future reasons.

[45suited]

Not trying to be a smart aleck, but why is this interesting? Just looks like a bad call to me justified by convoluted reasoning.

FPS rears its head at the 109s.

[rydazzle]

seems like an expensive way to defend your blind...but what do I know...

[curtains]

I made a very similar call against someone with Q3o when the blinds were 75-150 and they had like 5.5-6BB to start the hand. However this was a case where I knew that if they had random 2 cards, I was signifigant +EV (And I was correct as they turned over some complete garbage). Also I was risking over half my stack when I called.

Anyway I think the main difference between this hand and mine is that I was clearly +EV by calling whereas T5o isn't. There are enough situations that you'll have where you can make a very very loose call but at least be clear +EV against any 2 cards. I don't see the point in going out of my way to call in a nuetral EV or -EV spot to send a "message".

[AliasMrJones]

[ QUOTE ]
think outside the realm of this single hand though, try to get a little creative

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, this was your buddy and you were trying to keep him alive by doubling him up?

Or, maybe this is some reference to your username?

[FatalError]

#1 SB's pushing frequency is quickly approaching 100%

#2 I show a willingness to defend my blinds with anything, in this SnG i finished 2nd not once having my blind raised

#3 Look at the stack sizes, losing this pot still leaves me in a dominating spot where i feel winning it gives me a decent shot at 1st (a la gigabet)

I just feel like making a call once in a while in a spot like this with a stack like that is possibly helpful

[45suited]

[ QUOTE ]
(a la gigabet)

[/ QUOTE ]

I knew that was coming but I didn't want to be the first to bring it up. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[FatalError]

the problem is that this is an actual reasonably application of gap theory

[Jman28]

I don't like it, but I'll grant that it's interesting.

I believe that sending messages like this can be great, but there are better ways to do it I think.

As Curtains mentioned, you can find spots that are even +EV but look like loose calls. You can certainly find spots that are less -EV than this.

Another very important part of the equation is how observant your opponents are.

Making a move like this against a player that you see very often at the tables, and who will note this down, may be a very good play.