Re: D\'Agostino\'s antics
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This was where I got that from. Maybe I'm misinterpreting it, but DN later discusses risking chips, moreso than keeping players at the table. Maybe neither of us (me and Daniel, that is) have our facts straight???

[/ QUOTE ]

Read it again. According to Daniel, Jack says "I shouldn't have called with those KK because I could have gone to the final table with even more chips than I did had I folded."

Remember, Jack *won* the hand. He says that even though he called the all-in and WON he would have ended up with more chips if he had folded. Obviously he is talking about folding to preserve the bubble, not folding because of the risk of losing a big pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it wasn't to preserve the bubble, so much as to preserve consolidating the tables.

Re: D\'Agostino\'s antics
 

I agree with you on this. It's poker. I suppose a somewhat more interesting question to pose may be what hands you would call with if faced with this same all-in raise by Hoyt... i.e., If D'ags had, for instance, AT suited, should he have made this call?

Re: D\'Agostino\'s antics
 

[ QUOTE ]
If D'ags had, for instance, AT suited, should he have made this call?

[/ QUOTE ]

Its kind of interesting, because it seems that Hoyt is moving in with any two cards, not any two decent cards. In the latter case AKo and TT are about the same if the push range is something like 55+,QTs+,JTs,A9o+,KTo+. But if Hoyt is pushing any two, TT is MUCH better than AK, because Hoyt will not have two overcards nearly as often.

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 75.0118 % 74.66% 00.35% { TT }
Hand 2: 24.9882 % 24.64% 00.35% {random }

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 65.3201 % 64.47% 00.85% { AKo }
Hand 2: 34.6799 % 33.83% 00.85% {random }