Getting your money in with the best of it...

[Fitz]

Is this what it's really all about? With the exception of times right on the bubble or other instances where you will fold all but the very best hands(AA, KK etc). It seems to me, especially in the larger events, it comes down to one or two decisions about all of your chips. Occasionally, you come down as a big favorite ie. JJ v. 77, but many times it is a crapshoot ie AK v. 99 or even the reverse where you hold the pair. This is still a slim edge. How many times can you expect to go all in even with the best hand before your opponent hits his 3 outter and you are on the rail.

I'm just beginning to learn the whole NL tourney world, so all advice is greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

[Nottom]

Now I'm not a tourney guru, but if you are talking about 3 outers (AK vs AQ or somethign to that effect) you are about a 3-1 favorite so you will lose 1 in 4. Even if you wait for AA to push all in you are probably gonna get beat 1 in 6 times or so.

This is of course is another reason why its nice to have the big stack. A small stack only gets one chance to screw up but the bigger stack has the chance to make that all-in mistake and still be alive.

[Greg (FossilMan)]

If you're always getting in your chips with the best of it, you will eventually come out ahead in tourney play.

The fact that you will be in these tough spots multiple times each event isn't the issue. If you're the favorite each time, in the long run you will come out ahead. Unless you're blinding yourself off too much while waiting for the perfect situation where you're 100% certain you're ahead.

Don't forget, if you get somebody to go all-in with 77 vs. your JJ the first hand, and you win, you can now lose the second matchup and still have chips. If you win the second time, you can now get unlucky twice and still be there. It's not like you absolutely must win every matchup. Sometimes you've got chips to survive the unlucky encounter.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[Copernicus]

While the key to successful tourney play could be looked at as "getting them all in with the best of it", there are two overriding prinicples:

First, Put the decision on the other guy...get in first and your odds go way up, because your opponents are going to fold some winners. Unless I'm slowplaying/bagging I almost never call an all-in for a large % of my stack until its heads up or maybe 3 left.

Second, (sorry this is repeat of my opinion in the next thread) if its early in the tourney and you are better than the field, it isn't about getting them in with SLIGHTLY the best of it. A small EV edge with a high risk of flying out of the tournament isn't worth it. I think MM/DS would say "don't make a good bet today if losing prevents you from making a better bet tomorrow".

[Greg (FossilMan)]

It is of course true that you don't want to put in all your money with a small edge if you are a solid favorite over the field. I don't think I've ever seen anybody disagree with this concept in any serious way.

However, what qualifies as a small edge does seem to be a HUGE bone of contention.

If the blinds are 25,50, I'm the big blind, first hand of the WSOP championship, and somebody goes all-in with AKs and shows it, I will fold my 88. However, I would not fold AQ when they showed KJ. Nor would I fold 88 to their AKs if I'd already put T2000 into the pot.

I really wish David would put some numbers out describing what he means when he says "small edge". I think I know what he means, but most readers will unsurprisingly take his word over mine.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)