Two Plus Two Older Archives

Two Plus Two Older Archives (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/index.php)
-   One-table Tournaments (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/forumdisplay.php?f=34)
-   -   Sanity Check - Back in the saddle (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/showthread.php?t=339612)

09-18-2005 09:12 PM

Sanity Check - Back in the saddle
 
Party $10+1 NLHE, Blinds 250/500

UTG: 1200
SB: 3970
Hero(BB): 2830

Hero has 94o. UTG goes all in, SB folds. Your action?

lastchance 09-18-2005 09:15 PM

Re: Sanity Check - Back in the saddle
 
Very easy call.

Chaostracize 09-18-2005 09:15 PM

Re: Sanity Check - Back in the saddle
 
Easy call. What's the problem?

09-18-2005 09:18 PM

Re: Sanity Check - Back in the saddle
 
[ QUOTE ]
Easy call. What's the problem?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's what I thought, too. Got a lot of lip from a railbird, so just thought I'd check to see if there were some considerations I hadn't thought of.

chok1 09-18-2005 09:22 PM

Re: Sanity Check - Back in the saddle
 
i'd probably let it go. while you r getting almost 3-1 (2.79-1 to be exact) I don't see doubling someone up with 94o. Which isn't much better than 72o. Give up the 500 and pick a better place to knock out shortstack.

applejuicekid 09-18-2005 09:26 PM

Re: Sanity Check - Back in the saddle
 
[ QUOTE ]
i'd probably let it go. while you r getting almost 3-1 (2.79-1 to be exact) I don't see doubling someone up with 94o. Which isn't much better than 72o. Give up the 500 and pick a better place to knock out shortstack.

[/ QUOTE ]

Folding here is horrible. If you fold he virtually doubles up anyway.

chok1 09-18-2005 09:43 PM

Re: Sanity Check - Back in the saddle
 
The blinds are very large compared to your stack. you would be putting half of it at risk with 94o against a short stack move which is virtually almost any "Face Card". So you would more than likely be behind. not to mention if you lose you would only have 2 rounds worth of blinds and would have to resort to playing the weaker hands yourself. At least you still had a cushion. The utg would still be on an uphill battle and would have to continue to play the weaker than usual cards.

EnderFFX 09-18-2005 09:52 PM

Re: Sanity Check - Back in the saddle
 
I'd probably fold and then push the next time it is folded around to you. You are getting good odds, but for me it is player dependant. If they are tight, let it go and push next time.

Chaostracize 09-18-2005 10:04 PM

Re: Sanity Check - Back in the saddle
 
They're railbirds for a reason [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

applejuicekid 09-18-2005 10:36 PM

Re: Sanity Check - Back in the saddle
 
[ QUOTE ]
The blinds are very large compared to your stack. you would be putting half of it at risk with 94o against a short stack move which is virtually almost any "Face Card". So you would more than likely be behind. not to mention if you lose you would only have 2 rounds worth of blinds and would have to resort to playing the weaker hands yourself. At least you still had a cushion. The utg would still be on an uphill battle and would have to continue to play the weaker than usual cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

The blinds are too big and your odds are too good to fold here.

According to ICM...

Folding = .3221

Call and win = .407

Call and lose = .2889

.3221 = (.407)(x) + (.2889)(1-x)

x = .281

Do you think 94 is less than .281 against pushers range?

Even if you lose you still have a lot of FE.

I can't imagine folding here.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:21 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.