Identical but different

[Toro]

Last night at FW I had two game situations which at first blush look identical but upon further examination were really totally different. I made the same play in both instances and despite being told by a few observers that I played them both correctly, I don't agree.

I was fortunate enough last night to make it to the final 2 players in two of FW's Act II single table satellites. The winner gets a free entry into an Act III, $1060 buy-in satellite which gives away seats for FW's big $10,000.00 buy-in no limit holdem tourney this fall that will also be a stop on the World Poker Tour.

In both hands we had what was an almost identical situation where I called an all-in bet with a small pocket pair, sixes in the 1st satellite, fives in the second satellite. But here are the factors that made calling one a bad call and the other a good call imho.

1st Satellite: Opponent: Not well known but seemed like a very straight-forward non tricky, non bluffing player who played the typical premium hands. Chip Stacks: Me 10,400T Opponent 9,800. Betting Sequence: With me on the SB/button and blinds 400/800 I raise to 2400T with 6,6. My opponent reraises all-in. I don't know exactly why but I put him on AK where I'd be a small favorite. Anyway I called and he turned over AK suited and made a flush on the river. Not just playing the results, I think I should have folded and waited for a better spot since this hand left me crippled and I ended up losing the satellite.

2nd Satellite: Loose, aggressive player very capable of bluffing. Chip Stacks: Me 13000T Opponent 7000T. Betting sequence: Blinds 1000/2000 but this time I'm in the BB and he pushes all-in. I call with my pocket fives. I think this one was a good call because a)This very well could have been a bluff and b) the size of the blind c) this was a raise and not a reraise and d)If I lost the hand I would still have enough chips to stage a comeback. He had a K,2 offsuit and the suspense was gone when I flopped a 5 for the set to win the seat.

So when in the magazine articles the columnists are asked how to play in certain situations and they say "well, it depends", I know what they mean. Comments welcome and appreciated.

[sam h]

Bull,

I think you're right. You have to call with 55 there because the blinds are so damn big that he could have a lot of hands that you're actually a significant favorite over, as he did.

On the first play, you're getting almost 2:1, with the prospect of being a slight favorite or a 4:1 dog. So its close. But for me the deciding factor is that this player seems kind of weak - he's not going to bluff very often and he's not going to correctly lower his playing standards for a headsup, high blind situation. Everybody needs a little luck in those circumstances, but chances are you eat this player up.

[MtSmalls]

Congrats on winning the seat. If you made the final two in two straight satellites, you have as good a shot as any.

I think you're right, I think they are two completely different situations. In the first you have a straight-forward player (as you described), not a big chip differential and the blinds are relatively small compared. Also as you pointed out, you were getting re-raised all in, not raised all in. Although the relative positions were about the same (i.e. small pair vs overcard(s)), I think the salient point is whether you think in both cases that you were a significantly better player than your opponent. At that level, luck is going to play a part, and a river flush is just about as lucky as its going to get. I think that you might have been able to lay down the first one against the straightforward player, with little chip differential and try and take the next one down.

In the second situation a call is clearly a better choice, as you have a dominant chip position, feel that the player is more likely a "any 2 cards) situation, so your pair is a relative monster.

Good Luck!

[Greg (FossilMan)]

Congrats. They are different. I agree that calling in the second situation is close to automatic. However, I don't think folding in the first situation is automatic. I think it is close, with folding probably being the better choice.

Here's something you should consider.

When the blinds get this high, it is often less necessary to raise as much to steal the blinds. That is, when everybody has 10-50x the big blind, a raise to less than 3x will often get one or more callers. Even a 5x raise will often get callers if there are still weak players in the event.

However, once the blinds get big, and people only have 4-10x the big blind, a raise to 2x or 2.5x will often get them all to fold practically as often as 3x. I usually like to test this out, and start making some less than 3x raises at this stage, to see how it works, and who it works against.

In your instance, I would try to raise to T2000 rather than T2400. If he still folds just as much, you are now stealing at a significantly reduced risk. Plus, anytime he calls or raises, it is probably just as likely that you will win or lose just as many chips as if you had made it T2400 preflop.

Basically, at this stage, anytime there is any action and you see a flop, it is highly likely that somebody is going to be all-in before the hand is over. As such, the vast majority of hands are either steals, resteals, or all-in showdowns. Might as well make your steals as cheap as possible.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)