99 level 1 SnG 30+3

[Schmed]

It's about the 5th hand of a 30 + 3 SnG on Stars. I'm in a EMP and get 99. I have 1440 or so in chips.

Action folds to me I raise 4xBB, player directly to me right reraises all in. He has around 1660 in chips. I call.
He turned over AJo. He doesn't get any help and I double up.

Was this a bad call??

He had been bullying a bit early and won a couple of pots. My read on him was he was one of those guys being ultra aggressive early and would probably tighten up later. When he pushed all in my thinking was he could have a wide range of hands, including pairs that were lower than mine. I figured him for some kind of ace. I thought maybe AQ. My read was accurate but even though was this the time to be risking all of my chips?

[CrisBrown]

Hiya Schmed,

You correctly read him for a Jackal and moved in as 13:10 favorite. Still, that early in the tournament, it was a gutsy call. I might have laid it down, or I might have called. I'd say it's about 50:50 on which I'd do, depending on my read, my mood, the phase of the moon, whether my dog is barking, and which movie is on TV in the background.

How's that for a definite answer? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Cris

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Schmed:

If you read him for any hand AJ or better (which can include two aces), notice that you will be either a small favorite or a big dog. When that's the case you made a bad call.

If he can also have pairs lower than your nines, you probably should call.

If you feel that he would try to trap you with the very best hands and not reraise, you made a good call.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Schmed]

When I was thinking about AA, or KK, the thought in my head at the time was with those hands he probably would have just called.

To me the all in screamed that he didn't really want to see the flop.

Would this call be better if it were a rebuy type of tournament, (essentially that's what these SnG's are). Say the cards are face up and you know that he has Ax, X is 10 or greater. If you can rebuy back in to the tournament doesn't it seem that you are better off calling with a small edge early so you can double up. Not to say you would continue to play like that but just given your edge and your ability to get back in this early would this be a smart strategy?

[Runner Runner]

You are right about the call being better in a rebuy tournament. I think in that format you can look to push little edges a bit more and try and build a stack. A good example of this is when I was playing in a rebuy tournament where the play was wild with lots of moving in preflop with as little as King high or small pairs. A smaller stack pushed all in in front of me and I pushed in my small stack with 77. There was third caller and when we opened up it was AK vs 77 vs 55 giving me a nice overlay. The 5's rivered a set and I was forced to rebuy. After the rebuy period I would never call an allin with such a weak holding, but when your tournament life is not on the line you can look for the small edges and try and get the best of them without worrying too much if you lose.

[muck_nutz]

[ QUOTE ]

If you read him for any hand AJ or better (which can include two aces), notice that you will be either a small favorite or a big dog. When that's the case you made a bad call.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not convinced that the short hand of thinking of big dogs vs small favorites is worth as much in NL all in situations as it is in limit situations because of the lack of future play.

What money in the pot wasn't made clear by the poster but assuming the blinds were 25-50 he made it 200 to go and the other poster jammed him all in (another 1220). That means he needs approximaly 1220/(475+2440) = 42% in pot equity to call. If his opponent as AK, AA-KK then he only has ~40.5% equity. But add in any other big ace combos (as long as you don't add in more then the same number of pair combos) and things start looking better. For A[K-J], AA-TT and you are up to ~42% equity (although the read of AJ or better seems overly precise and possible tainted by hope although the overraise does look strange). In any case I don't see this as quite the clear fold indicated by the quote above esp. if the read is correct.

[Mike Gallo]

I like the call for the reasons that you stated.

Good read.

[Al_Capone_Junior]

In level one I wouldn't raise with 99 BTF. Generally you'll only get action from hands that either beat you, or are only behind you by a small margin. Going all-in BTF with 99 is not for level one.

al

[Al Schoonmaker]

In their book on PL and NL poker, Reuben and Ciaffone list as one of their 12 commandments: Don't risk a lot of chips when you are either a small favorite or a large dog.

The chances that he RE-raised with a pair smaller than 99 are, I think, quite small. Since it is only the fifth hand of the tournament, you could not have a very accurate read on him.

The odds were that he had either two overcards, making you a small favorite or a higher pair, making you a juge dog.

In this case you had a 54-46 edge, which is NOT enough to risk all your chips so early in a tournament. If he had TT or higher, you would have been a huge dog.

If you read David's TPFAP, you will see that he would never recommend CALLING an all-in RR with 99. If you haven't read it, you should.


Regards,

Al

[CrisBrown]

Hi Al,

<The chances that he RE-raised with a pair smaller than 99 are, I think, quite small.>

You must not play many $33 SNGs on PokerStars.... *laughs*

Seriously, I would guess that 99 is a favorite vs. a reraise 3/4th of the time early in a low-stakes SNG, simply because most early all-ins are fish who were pot-committed from the moment they saw their cards.

That having been said, I will still probably fold more often than I'll call here. But if I've read a player as a Jackal, I'm moving in behind him. He's as likely to be on a suited connector or Ace-baby as he is on overcards....

Cris

[PlayerA]

If our hero is one of the better players, then he should avoid a close all in situation. Let's put it this way, suppose he goes in with 2 hands as a 55% favorite, then there is a 70% chance our hero is busted. This has nothing to do with future action. A better player will be able to use those saved chips more effectively in a situation where the edge is greater.

[Schmed]

Thanks to all that responded.

I thought this was an interesting hand. The guy who I beat whined, "bad call", and honestly it got me to thinking if it was or wasn't. (personally I was thinking bad all in)

On the one hand I do feel as if I am one of the better players at the table and in thinking about it I did think it was a bad call. I did double up and did go on to win my table so it was a call that helped make the difference.

One of the reasons I made the call, besides the fact that I knew the guy was being an idiot and reraising all in with garbage.....(personally I fold AJo to raises a lot of the time).....I also was thinking if I double up great, I'm in the money no doubt, if I get beat I buy in to another one and play it a little more tight. I have read DS's tournament book. While the concepts apply to SnG's I have always thought there is some merit to jumping on a small edge early and doubling up. I wouldn't do that for the entire time, (ala "The System"), but I think there is merit early if you haven't already been busted out early in a SnG.

[muck_nutz]

I always wince when I see this said (and with such aplomb). Can you quantify when and how much edge you should give up? "If our hero is one of the better players"... You talk about giving up edge but then imply he would play without any (when he isn't one of the better players). Can you take just this situation and tell us at what specific point (edge) he should fold vs. calling all in?

[JohnG]

[ QUOTE ]
If our hero is one of the better players, then he should avoid a close all in situation. Let's put it this way, suppose he goes in with 2 hands as a 55% favorite, then there is a 70% chance our hero is busted.

[/ QUOTE ]

If our hero wins the first all-in, the 2nd all-in will not bust him if he loses. He will just be back to his starting chip level.

With regards calling the all-in with the 99: If the opponent is just as likely to have an underpair as an overpair, then it's a call. And if for some reason we know for sure it's 2 overcards, it's a call. If it's either against overcards or an overpair, it's a fold unless the price is right, which it wouldn't be here. So basically, I agree with Mason.

[PlayerA]

I don't have quantification and I'm as interested as you are. The point is to balance EV with variance. In a side game, variance is not so much of an issue provided that your BR is sufficiently large. In tourneys, your bankroll is severely limited. I imagine that something akin to whatever is used in calculating gambler's ruin can be used to come up with some guidelines about which you inquire.

I think that I go all-in too much and that is hurting me in NL tourneys. Last night, I go in with AKs against a slightly covered EP raiser (1/6 of his stack) with ATo. He calls and cripples me down to an SB+5. In my SB, I get AQs which wins. I get several other winning hands and eventually get 10x my short stack (still a short stack). My point here is that if I had not crippled myself (even as a 3:1 favorite), I would have had opportunities to keep building my stack. If I had to over again, I'd move in. Why? Because I know I'm not yet one of the better players. Oh yeah, I eventually bust out on a coin-flip: my pp vs AK.

[JohnG]

[ QUOTE ]
I think that I go all-in too much and that is hurting me in NL tourneys. Last night, I go in with AKs against a slightly covered EP raiser (1/6 of his stack) with ATo. He calls and cripples me down to an SB+5...... My point here is that if I had not crippled myself (even as a 3:1 favorite), I would have had opportunities to keep building my stack. If I had to over again, I'd move in. Why? Because I know I'm not yet one of the better players.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't matter whether you were one of the better players or not, no one is good enough to pass up gambling for all their chips as a 3-1 favourite. Our opponents would have to be the biggest donkeys in the universe for passing this up to be correct. I apologise if I'm mistaken about what you meant.

Some people seem to take this 'close gamble for all their chips' too far, or maybe they don't correctly understand it. I'm no expert on this matter, but I'm sure being a 2-1 favourite is not a close gamble. Being a 3-2 favourite is not a close gamble. Being even money getting 2-1 for all your chips is not a close gamble. Being a 2-1 dog getting 3-1 on all your chips is not a close gamble. In my mind, a close gamble is getting even money on an even money shot.

Even if I was the best player in the field, I may well still take a close gamble anyway, for psychological reasons.

[PlayerA]

Like I say, I'm interested in understanding this some more. I'm not implying my play was wrong. Anyhow, my point was really to illustrate the concept that choosing a higher variance high EV play now may deny the opportunity to make a better play later. I admit it's a stretch to use a 3:1 shot as my example.

Note that if you go against big or equal stacks 3 times on 3:1 shots, chances are that you are out.

Moreover, there is a chance I could have made my opponent fold on the flop since it was all bricks (no a, no 10). On the flop, I was almost a 9:1 favorite.

BTW, this was in the Stars $20 rebuy event after the rebuy period had ended.

[allenciox]

Actually, the reason for your difficult call is your decision to raise with this hand in early middle position. Sklansky says in his book never to bet without knowing what you will do if raised. In this case, it is clearly a difficult problem. If they raise, they might have me beat (the probability that one of the remaining players does is NOT insignificant). The correct play is to call the minimum with 99s at the first level. Your goal here is to double up. Say your raise causes everybody else to fold. What have you gained? $25. Big deal. If somebody calls you they may or may not have a better hand, but they are likely to have better position than you are, and a middle pair is not a fun hand to play out of position.

On the other hand, if you call the minimum, your downside is small, and your upside is to double your chips (maybe about 10% chance).

I don't raise in this situation unless my pocket pair is at least JJs and probably QQs unless in late position. Then you have set up an overpair possibility, as well as the set possibility. Anybody with a pair of tens or higher is likely to raise you all-in in this situation. What is the probability that at least one player will have tens or higher in the last seven positions to bet? About 16%. One time out of six, somebody will take you to the cleaners.

[Nottom]

If you are a big fan of the "I'd rather finish 10th than 4th" theory on SnGs then I guess you can call and either double-up or sign up for another.

You likely are a slight favorite, but its generally not the best idea to put in all your chips on a coin flip so early in the tourney.

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not convinced that the short hand of thinking of big dogs vs small favorites is worth as much in NL all in situations as it is in limit situations because of the lack of future play.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with this completely. Its much more relevant when you are all-in than when you can make up for your preflop disadvantage post flop.

[Schmed]

I would never limp with everyone folding to me and I have 99. That has got to be a mistake. Now I'm not saying I should have called his all in but I don't think that my raise was the issue.

I'm not a big believer in limping, first one in, ever. I sure don't believe in limping with a hand that needs to be protected. The normal situation with this kind of hand is, folded to me I raise 3-4xbb, I get one caller, maybe 2. The flop hits and there is usually an overcard. As long as there is only 1 overcard I bet the pot. They fold. That's pretty much the normal play. If I am reraised the pot I fold. There are all kinds of caveats but that is pretty much the ABC play.

Now if I have like say pocket 3's, probably any pocket up to 6's, I may limp if the table is passive or if I just snapped someone of pretty good but typically in an EP, EMP, or with any raises to me, I fold it without a second thought.

[allenciox]

Hey, Schmed, what is your id on Party? I love to play against people like you.

What you have yet to understand is implied odds. This is not limit --- it is no-limit. You have left yourself hanging on the line against a higher pair, which will love to raise you all-in. If nobody calls you, you have gained essentially nothing. If you limp in, you risk little for a potentially large gain. Here you are risking a lot --- you are increasing the percentage of hands you win --- but losing on expected gain. In your scenario, if some fish does call you (and there are plenty of fish online), they aren't going to pay you off on your set when you have already advertised a large hand! It is less likely they have hit a hand.

As the first one in on the cutoff or the button, I agree with you, you might as well raise, since there won't be anybody in to pay you off when you hit your set anyway. But in middle position... just keep doing what you are doing. Just let me know your id.

[Schmed]

I understand your point about the time you hit your set and not getting paid off for it. It's legit.

When you limp with something like a 99 do you call the inevitable raise from someone behind you? That can't be right. When a 10 hits do you auto fold??

My party ID is spacewranglr, do me the courtesy of giving me yours, I will be playing there tonight. Maybe the tourny at 5, and some SnG Omaha hilo and NL 20-30.......maybe the 50 Omaha tourny as well....let me know if you sit down at the table...it'll be fun..... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[muck_nutz]

[ QUOTE ]

I don't have quantification and I'm as interested as you are. The point is to balance EV with variance. In a side game, variance is not so much of an issue provided that your BR is sufficiently large. In tourneys, your bankroll is severely limited. I imagine that something akin to whatever is used in calculating gambler's ruin can be used to come up with some guidelines about which you inquire.


[/ QUOTE ]

As I remember David S. has some stuff in TPfAP which should help you get a handle on this. There are places to fold close hands. But if you are getting the right price early in a tournament that you can easily repeat in a few minutes I don't believe you should be folding (I'm assuming most playing SnG type of tournaments are worried about hourly rate and not win percentage or some other win metric).

That said I thought the original problem contained an all to convenient hand read which make it correct to call. That sort of bias makes analysis of the hand harder and less worthwhile.

[ QUOTE ]

I think that I go all-in too much and that is hurting me in NL tourneys. Last night, I go in with AKs against a slightly covered EP raiser (1/6 of his stack) with ATo. He calls and cripples me down to an SB+5. In my SB, I get AQs which wins. I get several other winning hands and eventually get 10x my short stack (still a short stack). My point here is that if I had not crippled myself (even as a 3:1 favorite), I would have had opportunities to keep building my stack. If I had to over again, I'd move in. Why? Because I know I'm not yet one of the better players. Oh yeah, I eventually bust out on a coin-flip: my pp vs AK.


[/ QUOTE ]

Several comments:
1) If you are against better playes then getting your money in an even situation or even as a slight underdog is correct (variance rules). Getting the money preflop is what you want.

2) Nobody is goign to turn down getting the chance to race AK vs AT in all but the most endgameish of situations, but in reality your analysis of the play should be based on the hand distribution your opponent could of had and not what he did have. Your play with AK could have been anywhere from excellent to moronic from what you've told us.

3) Often the bread falls jelly side down. That calls for some caution, but don't go into a shell. Aggressive play (esp. in NLHE) still pay dividends. I don't think turning down true 3:1 favorites a way out of the money can be close to correct.

[muck_nutz]

There were two thoughts going through my head when I wrote this. The first was that in limit big dogs/slim favorites tend to get jammed into tough decisions post flop. They have a harder time extracting money when they are good and they tend to pay when they are not. This issue doesn't exist when you are all in.

The second thought (not original for sure) is that I often see people write "big dog/small favorite" as if its a 50/50 split when in reality often you are a small favorite a lot more then you are a big dog due to it being harder to pick up big pairs then AK.

Put that all together and I don't think using the "big dog/small favorite" slogan is as useful here. The original author of the problem gave a hand read. Calculate the price he is getting and make a decision. Dump the slogan, do the arithmatic (and maybe more important to this thread, question the hand read).