Well? ($25 stars turbo)

bawcerelli · #1 10-31-2005, 04:07 AM

PokerStars Game #2936978173: Tournament #14489948, Hold'em No Limit - Level X (400/800) - 2005/10/31 - 02:57:52 (ET)
Table '14489948 1' Seat #1 is the button
Seat 1: gentleman55 (12327 in chips)
Seat 6: chiefsfan73 (323 in chips)
Seat 8: Linderhead (850 in chips)
gentleman55: posts the ante 50
chiefsfan73: posts the ante 50
Linderhead: posts the ante 50
chiefsfan73: posts small blind 273 and is all-in
Linderhead: posts big blind 800 and is all-in
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to gentleman55 [4s 8d]
gentleman55:

call this? or fold?

results below:

i folded, bb won, knocking out sb with a pair of 7's. i woulda won with pair of 8's. guy came all the way back with about 10 AQo to win the tourney. wtf.

bluefeet · #2 10-31-2005, 04:15 AM

triple up shortie: no worries
double(+) up BB: still >5:1 HU

looks pretty close to "any two" - 84o would be close enough for me

ps. nice domination btw!!! (prior to the debacle of course [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img])

bennies · #3 10-31-2005, 05:20 AM

Fold. What would you defend, your ante?

Kirkrrr · #4 10-31-2005, 06:34 AM

This fold is absolutely atrocious. You have a chance to put this away for the price of 1 BB, with both players already all-in.
Downside: Risking t800/t12K
Upside: Winning 1st.
If you lose, the t800 will be inconsequential to your stack. I'm calling here even if the software somehow f'ed up so bad that I only got dealt 1 card.

Read this approximately 100 times until you begin to see what he's saying.

Kirk

tigerite · #5 10-31-2005, 06:36 AM

It's not even owt to do with the whole 'block concept' of Gigabet's though - this is a call without question.

bennies · #6 10-31-2005, 06:55 AM

Would you please explain this? I really don't understand why hero should choose to put in chips with sub zero cards when he is not pot committed.

Kirkrrr · #7 10-31-2005, 07:01 AM

I tried to figure out what "owt" means and finally failed. Enlighten me.

And I actually think it's got a lot to do with it. Given enough upside if you win on one hand, balanced by acceptable downside on the other, your cards matter only so much.

Will Hero be an underdog to two random hands? - Yes, of course.
Is the call "+EV" strictly speaking? - No.
But this is where cEV and $EV completely diverge, and you HAVE to be able to see this situations when they arise, and do the right thing.

I hope I'm making sense.

Kirk

tigerite · #8 10-31-2005, 07:15 AM

Owt = anything, English slang.

I'm pretty sure that risking 800 chips to win 800 + 273 + 150 = 1223 and the added +$EV of winning the tournament makes this a call. Of course I haven't done the ICM of it but I'd be amazed if it's a fold given all the added bonuses of winning the hand.

pzhon · #9 10-31-2005, 10:06 AM

This is an easy fold.

Some people seem to be confused about the odds you are getting. It is as though you posted a big blind of 50, and a short stack with 6.5 BB pushes blindly on the button, and the SB pushes for 17 BB. Are you getting good odds on the call of 16 BB? No. Should you call with 84o? No.

You will lose chips on average if you call. You will win 24.4% of the main pot and 39.6% of the side pot on average, getting a return of 654 chips on your 800 investment. That's not a good deal.

It's not your responsibility to try to knock people out.

#10 10-31-2005, 10:56 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Would you please explain this? I really don't understand why hero should choose to put in chips with sub zero cards when he is not pot committed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because he has 12,300 chips and the worst case scenario is he loses 850. He's still on the ridiculous big stack even if he loses... Basically the 850 chips is worth way less to him than it is to the villain, so he's getting a "good price" even at long odds.