Where's the logic (SNG's)

[jackaaron]

I see this so often on the different sites I play that I stopped trying to figure why people do it, but it is starting to get on my nerves....lol....
Let's take player A, B, and C.
Player A goes all in. B and C have him more than covered. B calls, C calls.
The flop comes, and B bets huge representing that he has player A beat. C folds, and B shows absolutely nothing. Maybe he has a low pair or something.
Player A most definitely wins, and Player B gets nothing.
In a SNG, you want players out, and B just kept a player in.
Why are people this stupid? When I say something, the amateur says that he is playing to win. When I point out that he had little chance to win with nothing, and that we are trying to get people out, he doesn't understand.

[tigerite]

I don't say anything to them. I find it works best to keep them dumb.

[downtown]

Be glad that your opponents play illogically, as it should give you an advantage on other areas of the game.

[kyro]

Where's the logic in trying to teach idiots?

[jackaaron]

Man, you're so right. I just need to keep quiet, and enjoy.

[wildzer0]

Well, you probably shouldn't pointing out other players mistakes to them. But, yeah, it can be annoying. Just accept it as one more mistake bad sng players tend to make. Of course there are times to bet in this situation, but a lot of players seem to always bet or never bet, no matter the situation.

[Nicok7]

There are cases were you would want to bet, addressed for example in Tournament Poker (Sklansky).
Otherwise do not point out opponents mistake to them, knwoledge is made out of two words, 'know' and... /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[nWirb]

[ QUOTE ]
Where's the logic in trying to teach idiots?

[/ QUOTE ]

pwned

[Wes ManTooth]

you shouldn't be playing $5 SNGs

[citanul]

I often make plays similar to this, though probably in situations more correct than the ones you're complaining about. And yeah, I try to do it with more than high card 6 or so. And yeah, preferably I get the pot heads up preflop, but that doesn't really matter.

It's often not a mistake to do this, and I often have to restrain myself from having to explain to the idiots why it would be stupid for me to check down.

PS: thinking that a hand like a small pair has very little chance to win because it's "nothing" is stupid. Not like that has much to do with the overall point.

citanul

[The Don]

Yay for bluffing the dry side. It has shafted/helped me numerous times.

[jackaaron]

I had it happen in a 50.00 tourney just the other day. In fact, this particular guy told me, "I play to win man. I'm not playing for 3rd place." I laughed because that was all I could do. The funny thing is, I've heard pretty much that same phrase a number of other times. It's like this culture of people read somewhere that you need to perform this idiotic move.

[jackaaron]

Often times I see people do the things you describe yourself as doing. Instead of checking down, they bet big with one pair, and the small stack wins.

[Wes ManTooth]

[ QUOTE ]
Often times I see people do the things you describe yourself as doing. Instead of checking down, they bet big with one pair, and the small stack wins.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most of the time that someone bets with a pair they will win over the small/crippled stacks in these situations.

Edited: FMP

[37offsuit]

[ QUOTE ]

Let's take player A, B, and C.
Player A goes all in. B and C have him more than covered. B calls, C calls.
The flop comes, and B bets huge representing that he has player A beat. C folds, and B shows absolutely nothing. Maybe he has a low pair or something.


[/ QUOTE ]

There are two reasons for B to make this move. I often find myself, when I get down to three or four handed, as the aggressor stealing blinds because the other decent stacks figure that I will bust the smaller stack and they will move up a spot, then they can loosen back up. Many times the small stack and the other decent stack will lose a bunch of chips to me, then the small stack doubles up, and the medium stack still plays passively, eventually getting ground down to a similar small stack. Depending on position, I'll fold my small blind to the small stack to keep the button moving around the table, knowing that I will just take it back the next hand. I will bluff into a dry side pot because it does two things for me:

A) if the small stack triples up, I don't care. I can go back to stealing.

B) if my small pair or other weak holding beats the small stack but wouldn't have beaten the other decent stack, that's great too. This essentially doubles the chips I just won (say t1500 extra in my stack and t1500 less for my decent stacked opponent).

I'm not saying this is what you are seeing, just why players like myself at times bluff into dry side pots. You can get your opponent to lay down all sorts of better hands like second pair to your suited undercards because they think you wouldn't bet without a lock.

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Often times I see people do the things you describe yourself as doing. Instead of checking down, they bet big with one pair, and the small stack wins.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Often"?... I doubt that, MOST of the time that someone bets with a "big pair" they will win over the small stack.

[/ QUOTE ]

reading comprehension wes...

citanul

[37offsuit]

lol

[Wes ManTooth]

[ QUOTE ]

reading comprehension wes...

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

My bad... I will blame this on skipping almost all of English101

[djj6835]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't say anything to them. I find it works best to keep them dumb.

[/ QUOTE ]
Normally I would agree, but for the most part bluffing at dry sidepots will only hurt you. I would think this might be one thing that would be beneficial to you if your opponents knew this. Unless of course you are the player that is all in...

[jackaaron]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Let's take player A, B, and C.
Player A goes all in. B and C have him more than covered. B calls, C calls.
The flop comes, and B bets huge representing that he has player A beat. C folds, and B shows absolutely nothing. Maybe he has a low pair or something.


[/ QUOTE ]

There are two reasons for B to make this move. I often find myself, when I get down to three or four handed, as the aggressor stealing blinds because the other decent stacks figure that I will bust the smaller stack and they will move up a spot, then they can loosen back up. Many times the small stack and the other decent stack will lose a bunch of chips to me, then the small stack doubles up, and the medium stack still plays passively, eventually getting ground down to a similar small stack. Depending on position, I'll fold my small blind to the small stack to keep the button moving around the table, knowing that I will just take it back the next hand. I will bluff into a dry side pot because it does two things for me:

A) if the small stack triples up, I don't care. I can go back to stealing.

B) if my small pair or other weak holding beats the small stack but wouldn't have beaten the other decent stack, that's great too. This essentially doubles the chips I just won (say t1500 extra in my stack and t1500 less for my decent stacked opponent).

I'm not saying this is what you are seeing, just why players like myself at times bluff into dry side pots. You can get your opponent to lay down all sorts of better hands like second pair to your suited undercards because they think you wouldn't bet without a lock.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really shouldn't have said anything. Since I've written this, I've called or overraised people doing this foolish play four times, and won each time giving me a substantial lead. Granted, that won't happen every time, but it's nice to stick it to the morons.

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
I often make plays similar to this, though probably in situations more correct than the ones you're complaining about. And yeah, I try to do it with more than high card 6 or so. And yeah, preferably I get the pot heads up preflop, but that doesn't really matter.

It's often not a mistake to do this, and I often have to restrain myself from having to explain to the idiots why it would be stupid for me to check down.

PS: thinking that a hand like a small pair has very little chance to win because it's "nothing" is stupid. Not like that has much to do with the overall point.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah...I get berated all of the time for betting at a dry side pot when i have say, 77 on a 6, 5 T board...the villain folds and his K comes on the turn or river and I lose the hand, I get lambasted...but they dont understand that I wasnt "bluffing" at a dry side pot, I was instead, giving myself a MUCH better chance at winning the hand and pushing out his overcard draws or what have you...anything else is stupid.

You think you are always schooling the fish for "bluffing" a dry side pot, when many times, you are the fish in this situation...(not per se in your example, but there are many times when it could be "right" to play like this). Getting the player out is not ALWAYS the right move...thinking so is a just bad dogma.

[jackaaron]

What reason would you have for not wanting to get a player out? To me, if a short stack is all in, and me and another player call, the chips I win are not near as substantial as getting a player out because I know that I can win against people with more chips. The extra chips are nice, but going from 4 people to 3 makes much more of a difference. Hand values increase, and you're in the money. In fact, going from 8 people to seven makes a difference. And, if I were to freaking bluff what would have been the winning hand off, and lose to the all in player, I gain absolutely nothing.

[jon462]

[ QUOTE ]
Yay for bluffing the dry side. It has shafted/helped me numerous times.

[/ QUOTE ]
I can remeber one instance where i had 2.5x or so the BB and had to push with Q9s.. i got 4 calls.. haha. some idiot with J high flush draw pushed everyone out and my Queen high won the pot - giving me a very healthy stack. Ah good times.

[jackaaron]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yay for bluffing the dry side. It has shafted/helped me numerous times.

[/ QUOTE ]
I can remeber one instance where i had 2.5x or so the BB and had to push with Q9s.. i got 4 calls.. haha. some idiot with J high flush draw pushed everyone out and my Queen high won the pot - giving me a very healthy stack. Ah good times.

[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe I shouldn't have said anything. I don't want to deter the idiots from making these moronic moves.

[KJ o]

Chances are if you listen more and reiterate your own arguments less, you would learn something along the way.

One obvious example of where getting someone out is bad: Four players remaining, the other three have tightened up too much for fear of finishing OOTM. If you know you will be able to steal a lot more if the small stack stays in, keeping him alive is definitely in order.

There are other examples of cases where this play could be good.

As others have stated repeatedly, in any number of the cases you have seen, it may be because your opponents are morons. That's good for you - if they were all better than you your BR would vanish in no time. Why educated the fish?

To summarize: either the play is good or the player is bad. Why complain in either case?

[45suited]

Like Citanul said, there are times when the play that you describe is good for strategic reasons.

But really, when you complain about stuff like this, it really just makes you look like a whiner who's going to play scared to ITM. If I'm the bigstack and see the numbers 2 or 3 stacks whining like this, I'm going to be all the more likely to hammer them every pot.

I basically never play to keep the bubble alive, but you really are setting yourself up for this if you complain in the chat when this happens, IMO.

[Michael C.]

I really don't have near enough information to comment on this. Were there four players left, five, or six? I'd be much more likely to do this move with 5,6, where with 4 I almost always check it down. Was the small stack crippled, or did he hardly have any chips anyway? What is my chip position relative to the others? How passive is the other big stack? If we're at a table with six players left and a passive player has a flop that was unlikely to hit him and I'm a middle stack and there's 600 in the pot and I flop middle pair (or maybe even low pair), I'd push here for sure, and I don't see how that's wrong. So like others have said, I think this could be an idiotic play or it can be reasonable, depending on circumstances. I do agree that some players bet into a dry sidepot on the bubble with nothing to gain, saving the short stack, and that pisses me off.

[ QUOTE ]
I see this so often on the different sites I play that I stopped trying to figure why people do it, but it is starting to get on my nerves....lol....
Let's take player A, B, and C.
Player A goes all in. B and C have him more than covered. B calls, C calls.
The flop comes, and B bets huge representing that he has player A beat. C folds, and B shows absolutely nothing. Maybe he has a low pair or something.
Player A most definitely wins, and Player B gets nothing.
In a SNG, you want players out, and B just kept a player in.
Why are people this stupid? When I say something, the amateur says that he is playing to win. When I point out that he had little chance to win with nothing, and that we are trying to get people out, he doesn't understand.

[/ QUOTE ]

[jackaaron]

I agree that whining serves no purpose. I've said one thing once in chat, and that was the last time.
As I said earlier, as well, since my first post on this only a few days ago, I've benefitted from people making this rediculous move about four times. So, no complaining from me!

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
What reason would you have for not wanting to get a player out? To me, if a short stack is all in, and me and another player call, the chips I win are not near as substantial as getting a player out because I know that I can win against people with more chips. The extra chips are nice, but going from 4 people to 3 makes much more of a difference. Hand values increase, and you're in the money. In fact, going from 8 people to seven makes a difference. And, if I were to freaking bluff what would have been the winning hand off, and lose to the all in player, I gain absolutely nothing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have chosen silence at the tables on this issue because so many players who are better than the average joe hear this reasoning and take it as absolute instead of thinking how different situations call for different actions to boost one's own standing in the tournament.

Like I said, a complete bluff at a dry side pot is usually wrong...usually. (unless like poster above stated when you are big stack and keeping ss alive might be right given their postures). But, in the example I gave, you are most likely best NOW...but giving free cards to the other live player lessens your chances at the pot. Why do you think it is still better to collaborate?

In the hand as it stands, you are a 60% 3 way:

HERO: 60%
Live VILLAIN: 25%
ALL-IN VILLAIN: 15%

Bet and Live villain folds and your % increases probably 15% or greater. (dont quote me on that)

Why let live-villain draw for free? To knock a player out? Again, its not bluffing, its straight-up value betting your better hand.

A complete drypot bluff is usually wrong however. My problem with most players on this subject is that they feel anything short of betting the nuts is a "bluff" in this instance...that is just a plain misapplication the anti-drysidepotbluff theory.

[Lucid1]

Yup.

When I bet in a "dry sidepot" it's not because I'm bluffing - it's because I want to protect my hand (not give away free cards) because I think it's good enough to win against the small stack...

When some dude tells me I'm an idiot for doing that, I tend to think that there's a good chance the guy is at best a slightly-above-break-even weak-tight whiner who I have an edge against /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
I've benefitted from people making this rediculous move about four times. So, no complaining from me!

[/ QUOTE ]

And there will be times when you dont benefit:

4 players:

HERO 1500
A: 3000
B: 400
C: 1000

B- UTG goes all in for last 500 C folds on button, you call in SB with JQ (blinds are 150/300)---A also just calls.

FLOP: 3, 5, T (suits irrelevant). A bets 1300 which would put you in. You fold, and A shows T7. B turns over AT and turn and river both come Q. B goes on to win the hand and eventually you finish in 4th.

A made the right move. But you would feel awful wouldnt ya? Doesnt mean A's move was wrong.

[Nicholasp27]

well then it's a good thing you posted here, because you need to know why people do it

in fact, player B looks like he understands this part of the game more than you do

we can't say for certain without stack sizes, blinds, etc but if he has a pair there and u'll fold to his raise, then he should raise


if u are folding, then he loses no chips by doing it...
he knows player A prolly has nothing and is pushing to steal and stay alive, so his low pair has a good chance of being the best hand

he also knows that he could hit trips, etc and improve to best hand

if he does, then he gains a lot...knocks out a player AND gets all those chips that he may not have gotten had u stayed in and won the hand...so he's playing for 1st, not for itm here

however, if he loses, then he may be in trouble and he'll definitely lose some ev over him just checking and u winning the pot...but again it depends on stack sizes, blinds, etc to make a determination on that particular hand

but it's definitely a play that should be in your arsenal and should be used in the right conditions


maybe u should take some more time to try and figure out why and when u should do this...so then u can become a better player