Bubble Play, Is Good, No?

[grandgnu]

As usual, cannot get the converter working.

Here's the situation:

One-table sit n' go with top three places paid. Four players remain with blinds at 75/150

Seat 1: 4795 chips (chip leader UTG)
Seat 2: 755 chips Villian short-stack on button
Seat 3: 895 chips Hero, short-stacked in SB
Seat 4: 1555 chips (Medium-Stack in BB)

Dealt To Hero: A /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 9 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

Seat 1: Folds
Seat 2: Raises to 375
Seat 3: Hero Pushes All-In For 895
Seat 4: Folds
Seat 2: Calls All-In

Seat 2 shows Q /images/graemlins/spade.gif Q /images/graemlins/heart.gif

Flop: 4 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 4 /images/graemlins/club.gif 3 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 10 /images/graemlins/club.gif 2 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

I figured both myself and the other short-stack were in desperation mode, and that his button raise could have been a steal attempt. Although he left himself very few chips behind, so it was obvious he was going to be putting all his chips in.

Did I let myself get trapped here? I figured this was my opportunity to knock out the other short-stack instead of being blinded down to nothing on the bubble. I was really hoping he had at best a small pocket pair, or if I was lucky a dominated Ace. Perhaps even just paint cards, where I could be a roughly 60/40 favorite.

The pot contained my 75 plus the BB's 150, for 225, plus the Villians raise to 375, so there was 600 chips in the pot and I had 820 left after posting my blind.

Villian has 380 after his raise, so he's committed half his stack, I know he isn't going to fold. There is 980 in the pot and he has to call 380 for a shot at it.

I wound up going out shortly thereafter when my A/2 didn't hold up against the chip leaders A/A.

[Myst]

[ QUOTE ]
As usual, cannot get the converter working.

Here's the situation:

One-table sit n' go with top three places paid. Four players remain with blinds at 75/150

Seat 1: 4795 chips (chip leader UTG)
Seat 2: 755 chips Villian short-stack on button
Seat 3: 895 chips Hero, short-stacked in SB
Seat 4: 1555 chips (Medium-Stack in BB)

Dealt To Hero: A /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 9 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

Seat 1: Folds
Seat 2: Raises to 375
Seat 3: Hero Pushes All-In For 895
Seat 4: Folds
Seat 2: Calls All-In

Seat 2 shows Q /images/graemlins/spade.gif Q /images/graemlins/heart.gif

Flop: 4 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 4 /images/graemlins/club.gif 3 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 10 /images/graemlins/club.gif 2 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

I figured both myself and the other short-stack were in desperation mode, and that his button raise could have been a steal attempt. Although he left himself very few chips behind, so it was obvious he was going to be putting all his chips in.

Did I let myself get trapped here? I figured this was my opportunity to knock out the other short-stack instead of being blinded down to nothing on the bubble. I was really hoping he had at best a small pocket pair, or if I was lucky a dominated Ace. Perhaps even just paint cards, where I could be a roughly 60/40 favorite.

The pot contained my 75 plus the BB's 150, for 225, plus the Villians raise to 375, so there was 600 chips in the pot and I had 820 left after posting my blind.

Villian has 380 after his raise, so he's committed half his stack, I know he isn't going to fold. There is 980 in the pot and he has to call 380 for a shot at it.

I wound up going out shortly thereafter when my A/2 didn't hold up against the chip leaders A/A.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tough spot. I be more inclined to fold though b/c of the miniraise, b/c if the villain had a mediocre hand, he owuld be more inclined to push to have more FE. That, and A9 is still at best a coinflip hand against opponents range of hands, unless you put him on a pure steal, which, b/c of the size of his raise, you cant.

I always fold this, but it may be wrong in general.

[grandgnu]

I think my mistake was not really taking into account that his bet was made in a way that screamed it wanted action. It was obvious he wasn't going anywhere.

One of my friends in a MTT at the final table fell into a similar trap. Folded to him on the button with A/Q offsuit. He raises and gets min-raised by the chip leader in the blind. He had already committed 1/3 of his stack to his initial raise, so to call this would put 2/3 of his stack into the pot. It was obvious (to me, an outsider not involved in the game) that the chip leader wanted action (he had K/K)

Here it was obvious that the short-stack wanted action on his Queens, not to just steal the blinds, and I was too blind to see it. (although it's still possible he could be making that move with K/Q, K/J, etc. although he'd probably be more inclined to just push, like you said)

[bennies]

I am trying to teach my dumb skull that raises like villains should be considered pushes. It's a push. It's a push.

Ok, now the question is, do we want to call the push with A9o here? Normally, never, on the bubble - but since we are both short stacked we would like it if villain didn't pick up the blinds.

I have two reasons why I would still fold this. 1) there is a 3rd shortish stack, 2) the blinds are not big enough to make me desperate and want to gamble with A9. AQ? - sure...

[bennies]

its the old, "what's more dangerous a raise or a push?" discussion. I don't believe there is an answer...

[grandgnu]

[ QUOTE ]
I am trying to teach my dumb skull that raises like villains should be considered pushes. It's a push. It's a push.

Ok, now the question is, do we want to call the push with A9o here? Normally, never, on the bubble - but since we are both short stacked we would like it if villain didn't pick up the blinds.

I have two reasons why I would still fold this. 1) there is a 3rd shortish stack, 2) the blinds are not big enough to make me desperate and want to gamble with A9. AQ? - sure...

[/ QUOTE ]

I think if Villian had pushed, my call would be perfectly fine. We're four-handed and he's on the button in steal position, short-stacked. He could be pushing with ANY ace, or ANY paint card, suited connectors, etc. In most situations, my A/9 figures to be a favorite in that spot.

Yes, I could fold and take the button position on the next hand and hope for the best, but the blinds aren't that far away from hitting me.

His raise screamed that it wanted action, and I fell for it.

[bennies]

so you think if villain shows 32o, your call is good?

(I rest my case...)

[grandgnu]

[ QUOTE ]
so you think if villain shows 32o, your call is good?

(I rest my case...)

[/ QUOTE ]

I think my problem was that I was too focused on the strength of my hand in that situation, and not the betting pattern of my opponent.

I failed to take the whole picture into account, and had tunnel vision, thinking "my Ace/9 figures to be ahead most of the time in this spot". And while that's certainly true, it didn't take into account that my opponents raise screamed that he wanted action.

[ QUOTE ]
so you think if villain shows 32o, your call is good?

(I rest my case...)

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a really important point here.

[grandgnu]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
so you think if villain shows 32o, your call is good?

(I rest my case...)

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a really important point here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please elaborate as to why this point is important? If my opponent has 2/3 offsuit then I'm almost a 2:1 favorite in the hand.

I'm not afraid of making a play and finishing on the bubble. I learned that lesson quite hard playing multi-table tournaments. Had a lot of difficulty on the bubble until I read Harrington on Hold 'Em, then I started playing to win (better to finish 1st once and out of the money 9 times, than to finish just in the money all 10 times)

[bennies]

[ QUOTE ]
(better to finish 1st once and out of the money 9 times, than to finish just in the money all 10 times)

[/ QUOTE ]
eeeeh, this is not a mtt, 3 times in the money is better than 1 win here.


Ok, Maybe it's a call against 32o. But against 55, it's horrible, and I don't even like it against Q4o or whatever that only makes you a small favourite.

A9o is only a 60/40 favourite against a random hand, this is not a huge advantage and I will look for better ways to get through the bubble before I take this. (Also, it's possible that villain has something better than "random")

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
so you think if villain shows 32o, your call is good?

(I rest my case...)

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a really important point here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please elaborate as to why this point is important? If my opponent has 2/3 offsuit then I'm almost a 2:1 favorite in the hand.

I'm not afraid of making a play and finishing on the bubble. I learned that lesson quite hard playing multi-table tournaments. Had a lot of difficulty on the bubble until I read Harrington on Hold 'Em, then I started playing to win (better to finish 1st once and out of the money 9 times, than to finish just in the money all 10 times)

[/ QUOTE ]

Download SnG power tools; this is not an MTT.

[grandgnu]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(better to finish 1st once and out of the money 9 times, than to finish just in the money all 10 times)

[/ QUOTE ]
eeeeh, this is not a mtt, 3 times in the money is better than 1 win here.


Ok, Maybe it's a call against 32o. But against 55, it's horrible, and I don't even like it against Q4o or whatever that only makes you a small favourite.

A9o is only a 60/40 favourite against a random hand, this is not a huge advantage and I will look for better ways to get through the bubble before I take this. (Also, it's possible that villain has something better than "random")

[/ QUOTE ]

My opponents betting pattern should have led me to deduce he had something better than a "random" hand. But short-stacked on the bubble, with the possibility of eliminating another player and moving into the money, I will push all-in every time if I can be a 60/40 favorite to win the hand.

And if he has 5/5 (giving him opposite suits for the benefit of the doubt) then he's only about 55/45 to win the hand, so I might be willing to take that risk most everytime also.

[bennies]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(better to finish 1st once and out of the money 9 times, than to finish just in the money all 10 times)

[/ QUOTE ]
eeeeh, this is not a mtt, 3 times in the money is better than 1 win here.


Ok, Maybe it's a call against 32o. But against 55, it's horrible, and I don't even like it against Q4o or whatever that only makes you a small favourite.

A9o is only a 60/40 favourite against a random hand, this is not a huge advantage and I will look for better ways to get through the bubble before I take this. (Also, it's possible that villain has something better than "random")

[/ QUOTE ]

My opponents betting pattern should have led me to deduce he had something better than a "random" hand. But short-stacked on the bubble, with the possibility of eliminating another player and moving into the money, I will push all-in every time if I can be a 60/40 favorite to win the hand.

And if he has 5/5 (giving him opposite suits for the benefit of the doubt) then he's only about 55/45 to win the hand, so I might be willing to take that risk most everytime also.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry, but this is horrible logic. If you hang around this forum for a while you will see...

anyways, good luck to you /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[grandgnu]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(better to finish 1st once and out of the money 9 times, than to finish just in the money all 10 times)

[/ QUOTE ]
eeeeh, this is not a mtt, 3 times in the money is better than 1 win here.


Ok, Maybe it's a call against 32o. But against 55, it's horrible, and I don't even like it against Q4o or whatever that only makes you a small favourite.

A9o is only a 60/40 favourite against a random hand, this is not a huge advantage and I will look for better ways to get through the bubble before I take this. (Also, it's possible that villain has something better than "random")

[/ QUOTE ]

My opponents betting pattern should have led me to deduce he had something better than a "random" hand. But short-stacked on the bubble, with the possibility of eliminating another player and moving into the money, I will push all-in every time if I can be a 60/40 favorite to win the hand.

And if he has 5/5 (giving him opposite suits for the benefit of the doubt) then he's only about 55/45 to win the hand, so I might be willing to take that risk most everytime also.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry, but this is horrible logic. If you hang around this forum for a while you will see...

anyways, good luck to you /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not about luck, but thank you for wishing me well.

If I wasn't short-stacked, but medium-stacked (and this push and loss would make me short-stacked) I might give up the hand.

But since I was short-stacked as well, and had an opportunity to eliminate the other short-stack and get us into the money (and have a playable stack when reaching the money) I figured it was worth a shot.

If taking a 60/40 favorite each time in this spot is wrong, I don't want to be right! w00t!

[grandgnu]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
so you think if villain shows 32o, your call is good?

(I rest my case...)

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a really important point here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please elaborate as to why this point is important? If my opponent has 2/3 offsuit then I'm almost a 2:1 favorite in the hand.

I'm not afraid of making a play and finishing on the bubble. I learned that lesson quite hard playing multi-table tournaments. Had a lot of difficulty on the bubble until I read Harrington on Hold 'Em, then I started playing to win (better to finish 1st once and out of the money 9 times, than to finish just in the money all 10 times)

[/ QUOTE ]

Download SnG power tools; this is not an MTT.

[/ QUOTE ]

True, it's not a MTT. But I'm short-stacked, and blinds will soon move up to 200/400 and I have 895 chips left, I need to accumulate chips and maybe even eliminate the other short-stack. I can't allow my chip stack to shrink any further and become so weak that I can't push anyone off their blinds.

[ QUOTE ]
download SnG power tools

[/ QUOTE ]

This will actually answer your question numerically, and give you a better idea of why STTs and MTTs are very different. The gap concept is huge in STTs.

[grandgnu]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
download SnG power tools

[/ QUOTE ]

This will actually answer your question numerically, and give you a better idea of why STTs and MTTs are very different. The gap concept is huge in STTs.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm familiar with the gap concept. I guess I was just thinking that because I'm so short-stacked I need to make a stand here sooner or later.

If I'm ahead 60/40 the gap concept wouldn't be applicable, correct? Plus, my opponent could be dominated, raising on the button with a weaker ace. Four-handed, short-stacked and on the button, you don't need A/9 to push.

I think if I was a larger stack, and it was another large stack making the raise, and there is one or two other stacks that are so short I should be able to make the money no problem, then I can consider the laydown.