Re: Call with garbage?
 

Thank you for taking the time to post such an extensive reply. I hadn't run the numbers myself and actually thought 94o was a bigger dog than that.

Again I was not advocating calling with 94o in that spot when I replied to mts. I did fold it.

What upset me about his reply was the black and white mentality that if you don't have an immediate equity edge the hand should be turbo mucked. Given your numbers it is apparent, according to mts's advice, that I should muck every concievable hand I could be dealt except the other AA.

I am already in Harrington's "red zone". After posting SB next hand I have 3.3 times the blinds. There is no monetary incentive to stick around for a few more hands. Pretty much everyone at the table is going to have me more than adequately covered. I laid out all this info not just to make my original post as long as possible.

Maybe more people need to read Harrington's chapter from Vol. 1 titled "What is a Hand?"

My opinion on this situation is that any hand with 20% is an autocall and anything with 15% should be given serious consideration. 64o is 15%. I am pretty certain I would have called with a one gapper without even knowing the numbers.

cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
As Ah 566242 52.14 516544 47.56 3222 0.30 0.522
Ks Kc 186906 17.21 895880 82.49 3222 0.30 0.173
Qc Qd 162997 15.01 919789 84.69 3222 0.30 0.151
4d 6h 166641 15.34 916145 84.36 3222 0.30 0.154

94o at 10% is at least worth thinking about getting 3.6:1 and an opportunity to go from red zone to yellow zone. Dismissing all hands except AA is downright stupid.

Re: Call with garbage?
 

You are being overly sensitive and defensive. mts is not advocating mucking everything besides AA. I believe he is advocating calling with hands where you have at least a 1 in
4 chance of winning. You have too many chips to dump them in trying to quadruple up with a rag.

Bruce

Re: Call with garbage?
 

[ QUOTE ]
mts is not advocating mucking everything besides AA. I believe he is advocating calling with hands where you have at least a 1 in
4 chance of winning.

[/ QUOTE ]

What hands would those be?

I guess I shouldn't have given my hand in the op. I should have just asked what hands anyone would call with here. Does anyone have any?

Re: Call with garbage?
 

Definitely fold. Go all in from late position when there's no raise before you, hopefully with A, K or two face cards. Calling now makes no sense I think because its an almost certain death with 94o.

Re: Call with garbage?
 

I'm not trying to be an ass when i say this but you should really be beyond this. You need to understand simple math. You need to put in ~22% of the pot when you go allin. Come up with hand ranges for the other 3 players and run some hands across those ranges. when you find a hand that is greater than 22%, you should call. A rough guess would be AA, KK, QQ, AK as the only hands without knowing your opponents.

Re: Call with garbage?
 

[ QUOTE ]
94o at 10% is at least worth thinking about getting 3.6:1 and an opportunity to go from red zone to yellow zone.

[/ QUOTE ]

That makes no sense.

10%= 9-1.

Re: Call with garbage?
 

You don't need 22%; you're desperate enough and the pot is big enough to go with a -cEV call. For example, here I would at least think about calling with most suited connectors, although you're only around 16-18% with those.

94o is nowhere near there, however.

Re: Call with garbage?
 

so you would call with any pocket pair too?

I'm much more comfortable pushing from late position with fold equity. If called your at worst 20% but most likely very much better. I cannot say that 40% against 1 opponent to double up is better than 20% against 3 to triple up, though, the added variable of FE does make it better.

Re: Call with garbage?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not trying to be an ass when i say this but you should really be beyond this. You need to understand simple math. You need to put in ~22% of the pot when you go allin. Come up with hand ranges for the other 3 players and run some hands across those ranges. when you find a hand that is greater than 22%, you should call. A rough guess would be AA, KK, QQ, AK as the only hands without knowing your opponents.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you’re folding TT, JTs and 89s here, then?

--greg

Re: Call with garbage?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
94o at 10% is at least worth thinking about getting 3.6:1 and an opportunity to go from red zone to yellow zone.

[/ QUOTE ]

That makes no sense.

10%= 9-1.

[/ QUOTE ]

First I would like to apologize to everyone for my attitude. I'm sorry I'm coming off like a dick here. It's probably because I have been posting like one.

Still, I think there is way more to the math here than you people are admitting to. I understand that in most situations if I am putting in 22% of the money I should want to have at least a 22% chance of winning the pot. I understand that getting 3.6:1 as a 9:1 dog is not normally a good idea.

What I have been attempting to get at is that if I fold I have T5530 left and have to post another T500 next hand. This is less than half the avg stack and only enough for 3 more rounds. What are my chances of making any significant amount of money in this tournament with a stack this small? I don't think it's great. I think I will be gone shortly the vast majority of the time. Call that Situation A.

If I call (and again I did NOT think 94o was worth calling here) and win I have T25,380 which is about dbl the avg stack and even after posting the sb next hand still leaves me with 16.6 rounds worth of blinds. This gives me a way better shot at real money. Call that Situation B.

I'm saying forget about what the actual amount of money in the pot is compared to what I have to put in. What kind of odds do you want to take a shot at Situation B?

Sit. A = alive but likely broke soon
Sit. B = broke now or a x% chance of getting ahold of a decent stack.

I think 20% is a no brainer, 15% is enough for me and 10% (ie 94o) is not that far wrong. Everyone else seems to think a 20% chance is not enough.

I find it hard to believe everyone else is so much more conservative in style than me. I never thought of myself as a wildman.

*** any attitude in this particular post is NOT intended. ***