Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

So, super thursday last night. 71 people remaining. 70 Pay. Blinds 400/800. I just had AA in the BB and got all in with someone to double up to about 10.5K. There are 2 players at the table who have about 100 (not a typo) chips left; the closest to the blinds still has about 5 hands to go before he has to take them.

So, 10.5K, blinds 400/800. I'm dealt AQo in the SB. Folded to the button, who barely covers me (a couple hundred chips or so). Button raises to 2500. What do I do?

Fwiw, 70th place pays ~$300. 10th is ~1K, 1st is ~22.5K.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

I can't imagine not pushing here. good to see you're alive.

What I did/results
 

I thought for a little bit, just to make sure (one thing I learned from Harrington's book: even if you are pretty sure you have an easy decision, it never hurts to stop and think for a minute before pushing or calling all-in), then I pushed. He called with AK and won.

There was, of course, plenty of rail-bird squawking about what a mistake it was, but I don't think it was a hard decision at all. *Maybe* an EP raise from a player I think is very tight can get me to lay this down.

Frankly, in the button's position I would have raised just about any 2 cards here with 2 extremely small stacks ready to bust out (BB had about 5K, fwiw). Even if he was a little tighter than that, he's raising all sorts of hands I am creaming here.

Anyway, I'm just curious to see if any self-respecting 2+2er is going to recommend folding (or calling, which I suppose I like better than folding, but I still think it is inferior to pushing).

Fwiw, a stop-n-go would have done no good: K on the flop (and another on the turn, just for good measure)...

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]
I can't imagine not pushing here. good to see you're alive.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe there is math behind this that can make me understand this answer, but...

I cannot see how with 1 to til the bubble bursts, pushing is the best option here. Guaranteeing a double of your money by folding is certainly worth something here, isn't it?

Figure there are probably four hands that call here and have you in big trouble (AK, AA, KK, and QQ). Also possible someone on party poker calls you with JJ and 10 10. I can't see how pushing and busting (you tell me the odds of this) can be a better option than not risking your tournament life and folding for 400 chips.

Then, throw in the table dynamic (two people with 100 CHIPS), and to me, this has got to be an easy fold.

We can go into "what's your goal - moneying or winning," but I don't think that's relevant here. Will the 3300 chips help down the road? Of course. But, and perhaps this is where the math is relevant, what about working for 3 hours to come in 71st and have nothing to show without any kind of read on the button raise? You will have better spots to get your money in. That's a virtual guarantee. Even a random blind steal can net you 1200 chips.

I have not had as much success as MLG (though I don't play nearly as many tournaments), but to me, this is frighteningly easy to throw away).

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]
We can go into "what's your goal - moneying or winning," but I don't think that's relevant here.

[/ QUOTE ]

of course this is extremely relevant. you are giving up some equity now (i dont think you are denying that generally pushing in this situation is generally +EV) in order to ensure you make the money. Thats an example if playing to increase your ITM% instead of to maximize your return. Making plays like that will make it very tough to get to the final table which is what you need to do to be a profitable MTT player.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]


We can go into "what's your goal - moneying or winning," but I don't think that's relevant here. Will the 3300 chips help down the road? Of course. But, and perhaps this is where the math is relevant, what about working for 3 hours to come in 71st and have nothing to show without any kind of read on the button raise? You will have better spots to get your money in. That's a virtual guarantee. Even a random blind steal can net you 1200 chips.

I have not had as much success as MLG (though I don't play nearly as many tournaments), but to me, this is frighteningly easy to throw away).

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes you will still have 3100 chips, but will you ever be in the position of having AQ against a button raise again? unlikely.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


We can go into "what's your goal - moneying or winning," but I don't think that's relevant here. Will the 3300 chips help down the road? Of course. But, and perhaps this is where the math is relevant, what about working for 3 hours to come in 71st and have nothing to show without any kind of read on the button raise? You will have better spots to get your money in. That's a virtual guarantee. Even a random blind steal can net you 1200 chips.

I have not had as much success as MLG (though I don't play nearly as many tournaments), but to me, this is frighteningly easy to throw away).

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes you will still have 3100 chips, but will you ever be in the position of having AQ against a button raise again? unlikely.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait a second....OP had 10.5K in chips, a pretty good-sized stack in relation to the blinds. He was in no danger. He was definitely not in push mode, nor did he have to steal, nor did he have to take advantage of this opportunity.

My thinking in this: there are WAY too many variables here to make pushing in this situation +EV.

1. Two people with 100 chips left. > 95% that one of them busts in the next 5-7 hands.
2. No real read on the button. Could have a wide range of hands.
3. Because this is party poker and not a table of professional players, button is likely to call with a slightly wider range than we might expect (i.e. KJs, middle pocket pair).

I'm not math-savvy enough to figure out the odds of him folding, the odds of us doubling when he calls, or the odds of us folding and being successful down the road, but...

I've got to believe that with 1 player til the bubble bursts and opportunties left to gobble up small stacks (the field goes nuts when the bubble bursts), pushing here, under these circumstances is not +EV.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

freekobe-

I would like to point out a few flaws in your reasoning to help you better evaluate these situations. Do not take this as a personal attack because that is not my intent.

I would be happy to elaborate on any of my comments if needed. I would be ecstatic if someone could point out an error that I have made so that I can eliminate that error and improve myself. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
Guaranteeing a double of your money by folding is certainly worth something here, isn't it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but that's the wrong question. The question is: is it worth more than the other alternatives?

[ QUOTE ]
I can't see how pushing and busting (you tell me the odds of this) can be a better option than not risking your tournament life and folding for 400 chips.


[/ QUOTE ]

Pushing and busting is obviously a terrible option. However, pushing does not guarantee busting. You have to value the weighted average value of pushing versus the value of folding. And, you'll have to calculate the odds yourself according to your read on the button.

[ QUOTE ]
what about working for 3 hours to come in 71st and have nothing to show

[/ QUOTE ]

The time already invested is sunk cost. It is irrelevant to your current (and future) decisions.

[ QUOTE ]
You will have better spots to get your money in. That's a virtual guarantee.

[/ QUOTE ]

Situations better than AQ against a basically random hand with bubble folding equity are pretty rare IMHO.

[ QUOTE ]
Even a random blind steal can net you 1200 chips.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but it can also cost you ~2000 when you get reraised off your steal. Like your "pushing and busting" comment earlier, you're not comparing apples to apples.

The bottom line: Your conclusion (i.e. fold) may be correct, but your arguments for folding have serious flaws IMHO.

Later,
Che

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]
what about working for 3 hours to come in 71st and have nothing to show without any kind of read on the button raise?

[/ QUOTE ]

Two things wrong with this statement:
(1) 3 hours is a sunk cost. See Econ 101.
(2) He does have a read on the button raise, but it just so happens that the raiser's hand was at the top end of the range.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
what about working for 3 hours to come in 71st and have nothing to show without any kind of read on the button raise?

[/ QUOTE ]

Two things wrong with this statement:
(1) 3 hours is a sunk cost. See Econ 101.
(2) He does have a read on the button raise, but it just so happens that the raiser's hand was at the top end of the range.

[/ QUOTE ]

(1) Man, I hate people who are *ssholes, particularly when they're an *sshole for no reason. Good lord.

(2) Fine, you want to argue semantics...he has no "real" read on the button. You always have a "read" on someone's hand - 2/7 through AA.

If you're a math genius, do the math for me on pushing v. folding here as far as EV goes. I'm willing to be convinced (unlike most people on these boards), but I want to see some evidence. I am not good enough at this stuff to do it, or else I would. I'm eyeballing this situation and it doesn't seem to me to be a clear decision as others suggest. In fact, it seems to be quite the opposite. Some math would go a long way toward convincing me.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

No offense taken. But, if you have 5 minutes, seeing the math behind a decision like this would be helpful.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

Yeah, what you said. Serves me right for posting slowly. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

Although I don't have the math, think about the range that calls. AA, KK, QQ, and AK, maybe AQ. How often are you dealt these hands? Plus the OP has an A and Q in his hand lowering the chance of three of those four hands.

If you are concerned on the bubble about busting you are probably playing over your head. If you have the bankroll to buy into a 100 tourney then winning 100 should be nothing to you.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

i push.
he has to be tighter also here due to the bubble. i don't see him calling with a bad pair for a coinflip.
depends if he has been agg or not also.
but i'm pushing here against the button.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]
Although I don't have the math, think about the range that calls. AA, KK, QQ, and AK, maybe AQ. How often are you dealt these hands? Plus the OP has an A and Q in his hand lowering the chance of three of those four hands.

If you are concerned on the bubble about busting you are probably playing over your head. If you have the bankroll to buy into a 100 tourney then winning 100 should be nothing to you.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think your underestimate the range that calls you.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

Just some food for thought. I was playing in a $30 multi at PP yesterday, one spot away from the bubble. shortstack who had about twice the BB pushed in MP with QQ. He couldve folded and posted his blinds and safely made it into the money but instead he decided to put his tourney on the line right there knowing he would get called. Long story short, he doubled up, ended up getting 3rd in the tourney, netting like $1000. If you play to win, you play to win.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]
Just some food for thought. I was playing in a $30 multi at PP yesterday, one spot away from the bubble. shortstack who had about twice the BB pushed in MP with QQ. He couldve folded and posted his blinds and safely made it into the money but instead he decided to put his tourney on the line right there knowing he would get called. Long story short, he doubled up, ended up getting 3rd in the tourney, netting like $1000. If you play to win, you play to win.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really don't think these situations are remotely close. Without taking advantage of that double-up opportunity with QQ, that player is likely doomed.

In THIS case, our player has an above average stack and can afford to wait (maybe not that long, but he can wait).

Again, I'm not saying folding is necessarily "correct," but I haven't seen the math to disprove that (and I know there is math that can say yes or no, if we have the correct payout structure).

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

Remember calling and pushing are two different things. If he wants to cripple himself by calling with a weaker holding I'm fine with that. I can't see that happening here.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

Don't be results oriented. Too easy to be an armchair quarterback.

Bruce

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Although I don't have the math, think about the range that calls. AA, KK, QQ, and AK, maybe AQ. How often are you dealt these hands? Plus the OP has an A and Q in his hand lowering the chance of three of those four hands.

If you are concerned on the bubble about busting you are probably playing over your head. If you have the bankroll to buy into a 100 tourney then winning 100 should be nothing to you.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think your underestimate the range that calls you.

[/ QUOTE ]

No way. This isn't some $10 tournament. Do you really think some guy with plenty of chips is going to call almost all of them off on the bubble of a fairly large tourney w/ 99 or TT. I doubt it. I think JJ is close.

FWIW I am surprised to see he called w/ the AK, considering many tournament players enormous and unfounded fear of the "almighty" bubble.

Cfer, obviously it's tough to not be results oriented, but that's all this is. NH sir.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

I agree that these two situations aren't similar. What i was getting at is that if you're playing to win, you shouldn't fold your way into the money when you're close to the bubble no matter what your chipstack is (low, average, above average, etc.) There's is Cardplayer article about this from a magazine published awhile ago. I'm gonna see if i can find and I'll post the link to it.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

I never claimed to be a math genius - I'm far from it. But you don't need to be a math genius to know that time you've already spent has no place in the decision at hand. Sunk cost is a common concept that is easier to understand than EV, so I expected that you knew this and just blanked on your reply. Thus the Econ 101 jab. Poor read and poor execution on my part I guess.

[ QUOTE ]
(2) Fine, you want to argue semantics...he has no "real" read on the button. You always have a "read" on someone's hand - 2/7 through AA.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you don't think an experienced MTT player like cferejohn is capable of having a decent read in this bubble situation with super short stacks at the table? You don't need a specific read on the button to know that most opponents would steal in this situation with a large range of hands. You actually need a specific read to put the raiser on a tight range of hands that make a AQ fold, not the other way around.

I won't attempt an EV calculation here because we don't have enough information to do so with any reasonable degree of accuracy. But my intuition tells me that a fold is clearly wrong with a standard payout structure.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]
You actually need a specific read to put the raiser on a tight range of hands that make a AQ fold, not the other way around.


[/ QUOTE ]

this is a point that should not be missed.

incidentally, if we say that the button's range of calling hands is AA-QQ and AK and maybe JJ, then do we need a hand here to do this? I might be pushing w/ any 2. In fact, it might even be one of the uncommon (much less common than is spewed on this board) times that it is better to do this with 89s.
If we were the BB, then I think that it is certainly better to be making this move w/ a middle suited connector than w/ AQ. Not that I'm not pushing with AQ. Just some food for thought.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

Good point about the suited connectors. Most people don't think about that, but it's right on the money.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

Both approaches below ignore the BB, whose presence is probably -EV, but not by much.

Shortcut:

If button will fold more than 77% of the time, the push is +CEV even if we lose 100% of the time when called. In the heat of battle, this calculation alone is enough to justify pushing in a situation this simple.

Long way:

What hands will he call your push with?

Assume AA-QQ, AK. That's 3+6+3+12=24

What hands will he open-raise/fold to push with?

JJ-22, any Ax (x not= K), KQ, KJ. Add them up 60 pairs + a bunch of Ax plus some more KQ/KJ. You can do all the math if you want, but this is an easy push if these are your ranges.

"But those aren't my ranges..."

Then count up the numbers on your ranges and figure the percentage.

What if FE alone isn't enough?

%fold*3300 + %call*pot(if called)*%win(if called)=x

If x is meaningfully* greater than zero, push.

Where do you get %win(if called)? If you want it exactly, PokerStove will give it to you in a second or two. Once you do this a while, you can estimate it within a few % instantly.

Later,
Che

*The party bubble is a prime example of the divergence of CEV and $EV so I wouldn't call if the CEV was +72 or something like that, but this situation isn't close.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW I am surprised to see he called w/ the AK, considering many tournament players enormous and unfounded fear of the "almighty" bubble.


[/ QUOTE ]

If Chris had had the button covered by a few hundred chips or if there had been no short stacks, some might fold AK. In this case, I think almost every party player calls AK.

Later,
Che

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW I am surprised to see he called w/ the AK, considering many tournament players enormous and unfounded fear of the "almighty" bubble.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope this is a joke. Obviously AK is an extremely easy call, I don't get why in the world you would question it?

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FWIW I am surprised to see he called w/ the AK, considering many tournament players enormous and unfounded fear of the "almighty" bubble.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope this is a joke. Obviously AK is an extremely easy call, I don't get why in the world you would question it?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think he was questioning it, per se, just saying that he wouldn't have been surprised to see AK fold here, given how survival-oriented players can get, especially near the bubble. Folding AK there would certainly be horrible.

In this situation, even if he lost, he was going to have a few hundred chips left, and there were two players at this table alone who were going to have to win in both the big and small blinds (since even if they doubled up they still couldn't cover the small blind) for him to miss the money.

Anyway, I stand by what most people said, and Che beat me to the punch on the math. Essentially, even if you assume that every time you are called you will lose (which obviously isn't true), this is a pretty obviously +EV push unless you put the button on an absurdly narrow range of hands he would raise with (like JJ-AA and AQ-AK only or something like that). Keep in mind that if he folds here, I'm increasing my stack by roughly 1/3. Also keep in mind that it's very worth it to miss out on a whole bunch of times eeking into the money to have just one place in the top 3.

Given the situation, the button could easily justify raising any 2, and certainly a range of hands which includes most aces, most pairs, and hands like KQ and KJ (in fact, raising any 2 makes more sense than a limited range, since you are not planning to call a push with anything other than the best hands anyway).

Interestingly, that very fact means that it is probably +EV for me to push any 2 here if you assume he's raising a reasonable number of hands and only calling with AK and JJ-AA. Of course, if he's going to call with more pairs, probably not so much. Of course, if he knows I know that and strongly suspects I might be doing that (for example if I had been coming over the top constantly since we made the bubble), he can loosen up his calling standards considerably (to whatever extent seems +EV to him), especially because he is nearly garanteed to at least cash even if he calls and loses.

In any case, in terms of chip EV, you have to make some pretty incredible assumptions for this push to be -EV (pretty much: the button will only be raising AA-QQ and AK). This was a pretty new player to the table (had been in for about an orbit. While he hadn't seemed inordinately aggressive (I think he stole the blinds once in that time), even if he had folded all 10 hands, that's not going to give me that specific of a read (really I'd have had to see this player a *lot* to have that specific of a read).

Against an essentially random player (who I usually think of as slightly too loose and slightly too passive), I think if you aren't making this push, you pretty much shouldn't be playing MTTs.

Do I do this in a similar situation in the WSOP, where I probably had to win a sattelite to get in and I've been playing for 4 days. Well, I honestly don't know. I know I *should*, but I'll just have to wait until I get there (knock knock).

The fact that it took me 3 hours to get this far, as has been pointed out by others, is really not important. If you are letting that kind of thing creep into your thinking it is probably costing you significant money.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

This is a very very easy push, for you information, I think I would push any 2 cards here.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think he was questioning it, per se, just saying that he wouldn't have been surprised to see AK fold here, given how survival-oriented players can get, especially near the bubble. Folding AK there would certainly be horrible.

In this situation, even if he lost, he was going to have a few hundred chips left, and there were two players at this table alone who were going to have to win in both the big and small blinds (since even if they doubled up they still couldn't cover the small blind) for him to miss the money.

Anyway, I stand by what most people said, and Che beat me to the punch on the math. Essentially, even if you assume that every time you are called you will lose (which obviously isn't true), this is a pretty obviously +EV push unless you put the button on an absurdly narrow range of hands he would raise with (like JJ-AA and AQ-AK only or something like that). Keep in mind that if he folds here, I'm increasing my stack by roughly 1/3. Also keep in mind that it's very worth it to miss out on a whole bunch of times eeking into the money to have just one place in the top 3.

Given the situation, the button could easily justify raising any 2, and certainly a range of hands which includes most aces, most pairs, and hands like KQ and KJ (in fact, raising any 2 makes more sense than a limited range, since you are not planning to call a push with anything other than the best hands anyway).

Interestingly, that very fact means that it is probably +EV for me to push any 2 here if you assume he's raising a reasonable number of hands and only calling with AK and JJ-AA. Of course, if he's going to call with more pairs, probably not so much. Of course, if he knows I know that and strongly suspects I might be doing that (for example if I had been coming over the top constantly since we made the bubble), he can loosen up his calling standards considerably (to whatever extent seems +EV to him), especially because he is nearly garanteed to at least cash even if he calls and loses.

In any case, in terms of chip EV, you have to make some pretty incredible assumptions for this push to be -EV (pretty much: the button will only be raising AA-QQ and AK). This was a pretty new player to the table (had been in for about an orbit. While he hadn't seemed inordinately aggressive (I think he stole the blinds once in that time), even if he had folded all 10 hands, that's not going to give me that specific of a read (really I'd have had to see this player a *lot* to have that specific of a read).

Against an essentially random player (who I usually think of as slightly too loose and slightly too passive), I think if you aren't making this push, you pretty much shouldn't be playing MTTs.

Do I do this in a similar situation in the WSOP, where I probably had to win a sattelite to get in and I've been playing for 4 days. Well, I honestly don't know. I know I *should*, but I'll just have to wait until I get there (knock knock).

The fact that it took me 3 hours to get this far, as has been pointed out by others, is really not important. If you are letting that kind of thing creep into your thinking it is probably costing you significant money.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is why I learned so bloody much from you fnurt, soss and others when I was new.

That is also why I keep learning from you.....suprised you posted this hand given that its kind of a no brainer, but it is very nice to see you post again Chris.

Regards,
Woodguy

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

Without any read on Button, I think folding AQ is fine because he has the same stack as you. He knows he can fold to the money easily with the two short stacks going bust soon enough. I honestly think he will only raise with strong hands here because he doesn't have a big stack and he knows about the bubble as well.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

knowing about the bubble is reason to raise, and will make the button raise more hands, not less. you are making the classic mistake of assuming that everybody plays the same way you do. you are interested in simply folding into the money, so you assume that the button is. that is a bad assumption. folding AQ, as is shown numerous times in this thread is a bad play, and its not ok to fold here if you are trying to make as much money as possible. cferejohn said it best when he said that if you (edit: not specifically you, but you in the general anybody who is reading this sense) can't consistently bring yourself to make this play you probably don't have the make-up to do well in big MTTs.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

This made me remember a hand I questioned how to play a while back in a PP 100$ MTT.

Level 1: I am SB, same situation, folded to button,only Button made it 75, I had AQ suited.

Now, I was never going to fold the hand, just wondering what the best play is here, obviously no read yet. reraise the pot, stop and go, etc?

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

I'm actually surprised no one has pointed this out yet; Party has a very steep cashing payout structure. In other words the payout from 71st to 70th is a pay increase about the same as from 70th all the way up into the 30s. Actually I'm surprised Che wasn't the one who mentioned this because he was the person who first pointed it out to me [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

However, I still think that pushing is still probably right, but the payout structure makes it a lot closer than most everyone here is saying.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

its an interesting spot with lots of options, but obviously a very different situation. A thread talking about how to play pretty good hands out of the blinds when the blinds are small might be interesting (although there are certainly no definitive answers). On stars I generally raise, on party the shorter stacks make it trickier and I'm more inclined to call.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm actually surprised no one has pointed this out yet; Party has a very steep cashing payout structure. In other words the payout from 71st to 70th is a pay increase about the same as from 70th all the way up into the 30s. Actually I'm surprised Che wasn't the one who mentioned this because he was the person who first pointed it out to me [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

However, I still think that pushing is still probably right, but the payout structure makes it a lot closer than most everyone here is saying.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not quite sure I agree. I think Party's payouts are pretty flat until you get to the last 6 places or so. 70th-61st was like $300, 60th-51st was like $360. You keep on having fairly small jumps all the way to 10th, when it's around 1K, and by first it's 22.5K. To me, that all adds up to "take risks to get to the final table, even if it means going out on the bubble a few times".

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]
Without any read on Button, I think folding AQ is fine because he has the same stack as you. He knows he can fold to the money easily with the two short stacks going bust soon enough. I honestly think he will only raise with strong hands here because he doesn't have a big stack and he knows about the bubble as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but he easily has enough chips to raise and fold to a reraise, and given that it is the bubble *and* there are two *really* small stacks at this table, I don't see why I should put him on a big hand at all.

Actually, that begs an interesting question, if you are the button and it is folded to you here, what do you do? I raise any two cards to ~2200 without hesitation unless there's a big stack in one of the blinds who had been constantly re-raising once close to the bubble.

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

[ QUOTE ]
This made me remember a hand I questioned how to play a while back in a PP 100$ MTT.

Level 1: I am SB, same situation, folded to button,only Button made it 75, I had AQ suited.

Now, I was never going to fold the hand, just wondering what the best play is here, obviously no read yet. reraise the pot, stop and go, etc?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, this is obviously different because the stacks are much larger (relative to the blinds) and you are not anywhere near the bubble. I agree you can't really fold here.

I'd call and bet out ~2/3 of the pot on any board that seems unthreatening (or that hits you). On a ten high raggy board, I'm betting out. On KJ4, I'm probably check-folding if he makes a real bet (obviously he could make a bet small enough to get me to call for the gutshot broadway draw).

Re: Super Thursday Bubble Decision
 

durron-

[ QUOTE ]
*The party bubble is a prime example of the divergence of CEV and $EV so I wouldn't call if the CEV was +72 or something like that, but this situation isn't close.

[/ QUOTE ]

This statement was my attempt at what you're saying I neglected to mention. To be more specific, the nature of the Party bubble is such that folding in to the bubble *occasionally* makes sense since the jump from one out to one in is much bigger than at most sites. However, this hand is not close so the bubble factor isn't relevant - even at Party.

At Stars, I will take a slightly +EV play on the bubble (or even a flip at times), but at Party I want a little more since such a large part of my $EV is captured by just getting across the bubble.

Later,
Che