Am I missing something???
 

My form in NLHE comps on Stars is currently abysmal, and as such Im starting to wonder if I can tell my arse from my elbow! What would you do...

You are in the $75 small blind with a $4900 stack. Everyone passes to a semi-aggressive player in the cutoff who moves $3650 allin into a $450 pot. The button passes.

You clearly think he may be stealing, to over bet the pot so much, but what range of hands do you call him with?

Results later.

cheers

Dave

Re: Am I missing something???
 

I would only call with a premium hand: AA-TT + AK, AQs, AJs, KQs-JTs. Otherwise, to me at least, I don't think it's worth taking the risk for a 450 pot.

Re: Am I missing something???
 

He may be stealing, but the pot is offering barely 1-1 and its risking a lot of your stack, so unless I look down at AA or KK I doubt I'm calling. This of course assumes its a one-off. If he's doing this frequently (like any time its folded to him in LP) then I'll probably add a few more hands. If he's only semi-agressive and he's moving all in, it doesn't sound like a total steal though.

Re: Am I missing something???
 

"I would only call with a premium hand: AA-TT + AK, AQs, AJs, KQs-JTs. Otherwise, to me at least, I don't think it's worth taking the risk for a 450 pot."

I'm not even sure I would call with that many hands against a stack nearly as big as mine unless he was going all-in every 4 or 5 hands. For a stack that big, I'd probably stick to QQ-AA. If he was routinely going in, then fine. I always try to avoid 50/50 propositions (i.e. overcards vs. pocket pair) against stacks close to or larger than mine, especially when I will be calling a raise (rather than raising all-in myself).

Re: Am I missing something???
 

if he hasn't done this before, I think AA-QQ/AK. I think there's a type of opponent out there who doesn't do this too often, but still does it with AA-TT, AK-AQ, and feasibly AJ or just AJs, maybe 99 too.

If he's doing this at least once per orbit or something, I add JJ and AQ. If he's nuts, TT and AJ. No sense going worse than that, he'll keep doing it and you'll have other chaces to get your money in better (yes someone else will probably bust him first, but there's still a good shot he'll run into you at the wrong time).

I *would* rather avoid conflips, but frankly, if avoid playing a hand because you don't like coinflips, you may be sitting on two hands (AA/KK) that you'll pick up less than one time in 100, and he's getting odds to steal from you with any two cards, given he still has at least 20% shot when you do catch him. (assuming you're the only one in the way... oversimplification of course)

2ndGoat

Re: Am I missing something???
 

"I *would* rather avoid conflips, but frankly, if avoid playing a hand because you don't like coinflips, you may be sitting on two hands (AA/KK) that you'll pick up less than one time in 100, and he's getting odds to steal from you with any two cards, given he still has at least 20% shot when you do catch him. (assuming you're the only one in the way... oversimplification of course)"

Let me amend/clarify my former statement about coinflips by saying that I am *much* more willing to get into a perceived coinflip situation when I am the one going all-in, since then I have ~50% + (whatever chance he will fold to an all in raise)% to win.

Obviously, when you are short-stacked its a different story, and you're lucky to get a hand that you feel like is a 50% chance to win. Obviously, you'd still rather be the one to move in your chips first, but at that point you gotta take what you can get.

Also, I was assuming (perhaps wrongly) that the table was full or close to it, given that the blinds were still relatively low. If this is a 3 or 4 handed table, what I would call with would loosen considerably (still not AQ or AJ though unless this guy was going all-in constantly).

Re: Am I missing something???
 

"Let me amend/clarify my former statement about coinflips by saying that I am *much* more willing to get into a perceived coinflip situation when I am the one going all-in, since then I have ~50% + (whatever chance he will fold to an all in raise)% to win."

I don't think I had ever considered the all-in raise/call in this light. Thanks for the insight - it actually slightly validates my kamikaze style. Very good stuff....

Re: Am I missing something???
 

Kamikaze style... I like that, might use that to refer to my style of play sometimes [img]/forums/images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

Good to see you here Big Dave D, what happened in the hand in question then? You know the real answer to this story as well - stick to Omaha mate [img]/forums/images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

Simon

RESULTS - Am I still missing something???
 

I actually twisted things round a little to see what people's views would be. All the data is correct, but I was the semi-aggressive all-in-er, and I wanted to get a view as to what others would call in that spot, as I was so surprised when I was actually called. My actual hand was 44. The player in the small blind who actually called is Alex1, the 3rd highest ranking tourney player on PokerStars this year.
First, I should explain the all-in...as I am not a big fan of moving in so much in a fairly small pot if I can help it, as it can be a "bet of death" when called, i.e. you are a massive underdog. However Alex1 is very aggressive and I knew he would reraise with a very wide range of hands, making me release the small pocket pair. I felt that the allin would force him to drop nearly all his weaker hands.

When he thought for a few seconds, then called, I assumed he had a monster. In actual fact he had called with A8 suited (needless to say he won.)

I simply couldnt get over the call. My play is borderline questionable but I think that the overcall is simply terrible - he can only be a favourite over a tiny % of hands that I would make this move with, i.e. A baby or KQ. I couldn't ever think of a circumstance, in B&M play, where I would have made a similar call. And yet this is one of the "best" players on Stars.

Am I still missing something?
-----------------------------------

Re: RESULTS - Am I still missing something???
 

I would say both the raise and the call are awful.

With the raise it is very unlikely you will get called by worse hands. Depending on the price of the tourney, the likelyhood of getting called probably goes up as the price is cheaper.

The call is terrible unless the raiser has shown that he only does this with tiny pairs. The likelyhood that A8s is dominated is very high.

I have seen the monster overbet pre-flop from players with small pairs, AK and even KK/QQ/JJ. Obviously he had you pegged as a small pair type otherwiese the call is even worse. Is this your 1st time venturing into the massive overbet pre-flop? If you have done this a few times in a short period, you will also get called more often.

Ken Poklitar

Re: RESULTS - Am I still missing something???
 

So you pushed in with 3650 to win 225 (75/150 blinds)?
I would have only called with QQ-AA if I were him, and think his call was horrible as he had to fear AQ, AJ, etc.

But your play was very bad also. If he did wake up with a big pair, you are done. The 225 you add to your stack is of little value. I can understand worry about his reraise, and good you know he'd do that.
I'd either fold or limp and hope to flop a set or make a bet if he checks the flop.
If the big blind was around 10x your stack, what you did would be fine, otherwise the risk was just not worth it.

Re: RESULTS - Am I still missing something???
 

You're right--your play was (highly) questionable, and his call is beyond ridiculous. His wife must have had dinner on the table and a rolling pin hovering over his head.
On the other hand, what the hell were you thinking? If you know that his call is absurd, that would infer that you also know that the only times you are called, he has to be holding, oh, say an absolute minimum of oh, say, A8.
Why do you want to put all your chips into the pot with a hand that will lose a high percentage of the time the bet is called? Was it...the prospect of picking up the blinds?
I don't care how bad his call is here (and it IS bad). Your bet is awful. This is best illustrated by the fact that he made a "bad" call, and was granted the gift of being only a slight dog.
Do you EVER want a call here? No. You want the blinds.
Imagine how you'd feel if he'd made a "good" call.
Oh, yeah. "Unlucky." As opposed to "mad." Either way, you're on the rail.
You're just risking too much for too little.

The pot was actually 450...there were running antes
 

Thanks for the comments so far...keep em comin'. The reason my raise is not quite so bad (and I acknowldge that it is bad) is that I am picking up over 10% of my stack each time. And I know that a normal raise will simply not win the pot.

The bigger question this asks is how very different play online is...as I said, based on the rankings, Alex1 is a good player, yet he's prepared to cripple himself on at best a 50:50 shot...and it could/should be a lot worse. All-in moves seem much much more common and people really seem to struggle to lay any hand down. Basically all that GAP concept stuff from Sklansky's book becomes fairly useless. Its almost as if people are playing "The System", whether unwittingly or not and sucking a lot of the skill out of the game.

Cheers

Dave

Re: The pot was actually 450...there were running antes
 

Well, the point of the "Gap Concept" relies on the idea that people are extra protective of their stacks in a tournament environment since if they win, they are done. In an environment like PokerStars, where if you flame out early in a tournament, there's probably another one starting in 10 minutes (or a 2 table sit-n-go), perhaps it has less credence. Perhaps the players who play tournaments 40+ hours/week (as I imagine anyone who ranks highly must) figure that they are justified in taking 50-50 risks, since if they go out early now, they can just sign up for another one almost immediately.

This is probably even more tru if playing 2 tournaments at once. You take big risks to double up in both of them. If one pays off and the other doesn't, you're not too upset about it since you don't have to split your attention anymore.

All that said, his call was still horrible, since his *best* possible outcome is that he was a slightly less that 50% shot, since he could easily have been against a better ace or a pair better than 8's.

Re: The pot was actually 450...there were running antes
 

I think before we can answer why your opponent would call you, you need to answer the following questions:

1) Price of tourney
2) Have you been pushing it all-in and winning the blinds recently?
3) In past tournies with the same player have you done the same thing?
4) Has this opponent just received a bad beat of some type?
5) Is he playing multiple tournies or live tables at the same time?

I play the occasional tourney on Pokerstars and I can't say I have heard of Alex1. I might recognize his picture. He could be bad, good or great. Who knows. He may get his ranking based on pure number of tournies played with a few good hits. He may also have been tired this time and was ready to double up or go to sleep.

Ken Poklitar

Re: Am I missing something???
 

In no limit especially, I try to almost always be the one putting the chips in the pot first. Since most no limit hands don't get to a showdown, the aggressor obviously wins the majority of pots. Note that the aggressor isn't necessarilty the first bettor. The reason the 'system' works as well as it does (not to say it is perfect, of close to it, but it does have merits) is for exactly that reason.

Re: The pot was actually 450...there were running antes
 

Ken

Some more info about alex1 : Since February he has made several $100 event finals, winning two and has cashed in a couple of $200 events.

I haven't seen a great deal of his play, but from what I have seen he is a very aggressive player who likes to make plenty of moves. It seems he can amass chips quickly and just as quickly throw them away, but his results and his standing in the official table would suggest he is a decent player most of the time.

Simon

You\'re right--the antes make it less an error.NM