betgo
10-28-2005, 09:24 AM
We usually analyze hands in terms of whether a play is chip EV+. Some people make the argument that you shouldn't take an EV+ play, because you are risking all your chips. This is rightly perceived by the consensus of good players here as a scared weak/tight approach. However, there is an underlying issue of when it is good to gamble for all your chips.
Gigabet presented a theory here that it is sometimes good to take a slightly EV- gamble to become a big stack, because of the advantages later on of the big stack. This may be particularly true for Gigabet.
Sklansky in TPFAP players implied that gambling to double up is unfavorable, because additional chips are worth less.
Brunson in SS2 cites approvingly Hellmuth's laydown of an open ended straight flush draw to a big overbet reraise allin early in a tournament. Brunson says that as one of the best players, Hellmuth realized that it was more important to survive than double up. Hellmuth's play was not as crazy as it may seem, because Hellmuth had reason to believe he was behind a set or a higher flush draw, since what would someone push with on a coordinated board. In fact, he was even versus 2 pair.
It seems there are some situations where it is favorable to gamble to double up. If you have an average to large stack from the point where half the players are eliminated to just vefore the final table, then doubling up will give you a big stack you can play aggressively and also give you a better shot at the big prizes.
Early in the tournament and when you are a short stack, doubling up seems more marginal, as survival may be more important than doubling up, particularly if you are one of the better players.
If you are a big stack at the final table, it is probably not a good idea to go allin against another big stack, since you don't need to double up to finish in the top three stacks.
With 30 players remaining, going allin against another big stack is probably worth the risk to try to build a monster
stack and try to win the tournament.
Gigabet presented a theory here that it is sometimes good to take a slightly EV- gamble to become a big stack, because of the advantages later on of the big stack. This may be particularly true for Gigabet.
Sklansky in TPFAP players implied that gambling to double up is unfavorable, because additional chips are worth less.
Brunson in SS2 cites approvingly Hellmuth's laydown of an open ended straight flush draw to a big overbet reraise allin early in a tournament. Brunson says that as one of the best players, Hellmuth realized that it was more important to survive than double up. Hellmuth's play was not as crazy as it may seem, because Hellmuth had reason to believe he was behind a set or a higher flush draw, since what would someone push with on a coordinated board. In fact, he was even versus 2 pair.
It seems there are some situations where it is favorable to gamble to double up. If you have an average to large stack from the point where half the players are eliminated to just vefore the final table, then doubling up will give you a big stack you can play aggressively and also give you a better shot at the big prizes.
Early in the tournament and when you are a short stack, doubling up seems more marginal, as survival may be more important than doubling up, particularly if you are one of the better players.
If you are a big stack at the final table, it is probably not a good idea to go allin against another big stack, since you don't need to double up to finish in the top three stacks.
With 30 players remaining, going allin against another big stack is probably worth the risk to try to build a monster
stack and try to win the tournament.