Short-stack question
 

Well, in the theory section, I've been thinking a lot about what hands are good enough for a short-stack all-in, and I'm fairly happy with the results on that.

But I am still very much undecided as to when "all-in or fold" mode needs to begin. So, I'd like to post a hypothetical example which is pretty typical for me in these situations:

I have KJo on the button, and a stack of 2,200. Blinds are at 100/200 with no antes. Full table with 9 players, and let's say we're somewhere in the middle of the tournament (roughly half the field is gone).

My current thinking in this situation is to give myself one more limp before going to "all-in or fold." Particularly if an MP player (or 2) had limped before me, I'd just limp myself. But I'd also be somewhat inclined to limp with that hand if it were folded around to me.

What do others think about this? The hand is imo reasonably strong in that position, but even if it's folded to me, I really hate to risk my whole tournament quite yet on that hand. So, what's the best move here--with and without a limper before you?

Also, how much does this situation change if there are antes involved? Let's assume the same stack-sizes and blinds but antes of 25 (I believe that's what they start at on Stars, although subsequently, the relationship of antes to blinds is smaller) over and above that. So the pot before cards are seen is now 525 rather than 300.

I'm still tempted to limp if it's folded to me in that situation, but I can also see a case both for folding and for moving in...

I'd love to hear how others handle this kind of scenario! Thanks!

Re: Short-stack question
 

Why not steal with that hand with a 2.5xBB bet? 8 times out of 10 you'll take down the blinds, but if you do see a flop, you have a decent hand to play with, and have position.

Nick

Re: Short-stack question
 

I've been reading Tom McEvoy's new book on NLHE tourney's. I'm not a big fan, but its not bad.
Going by memory, he suggests that you are "in trouble" when you get down to 10BB's (11 when there is an ante) and you are in "all in mode" at 4BB's (5 w/ ante)
FWIW, Based on my own experience this is not bad advice.
In trouble mode you start stealing from all positions with a 4-5xBB raise, if called push on the flop (not sure if I agree totally with him).
In your particular example you have 10BB's so I wouldn't push, but I would put in a 5xBB raise (4 if no limpers), if you want to play this hand, or try for the semi-bluff steal.
This also may change depending on your read on the limpers. Often big hands will limp early looking for a chance to re-raise.
regards,
woodguy

Re: Short-stack question
 

Not bad with no limpers. Actually, in that case, I think I like the smaller raise, as you suggest (maybe 3 BB with antes?). A bet of 500 still leaves you with 1,700 and gives you a second and possibly even third chance to get going again.

Maybe this is even good with limpers. It definitely becomes riskier, but the pot is also bigger. And if you see a flop, either you have top pair or you don't...

Re: Short-stack question
 

This is very interesting. Introducing "trouble mode" over and above "all-in" mode definitely makes it harder for them to knock you out and also makes for a pot that will actually put you in good shape again if you can take it.

The "10 BB" point is indeed seeming to me to be a kind of magic number here. I had myself been putting that point as "all-in" mode, but I think McEvoy's idea provides a few more attractive options.

That's also the reason, though, that I chose exactly 2,200 as stack-size, which is 11 BB, hence not quite even trouble mode yet (becomes trouble mode in the case of antes).

Do you guys still think the limp is not a particularly attractive option with limpers before you?

Basically, by the standards you suggest, one is in "pre-trouble mode" here. I think without limpers or antes, all things considered, I'm liking the 2.5 BB raise as blind steal attempt, but with limpers, I'm still not completely convinced that limping is out of the question.

But with antes follow your suggestion of the bigger raise and playing it in trouble mode.

If I'm understanding you correctly, if you make the big raise and get called by one of the limpers, you're going to bet the flop here if it's checked to you whether or not you hit (read-based departures notwithstanding).

Re: Short-stack question
 

[ QUOTE ]
Do you guys still think the limp is not a particularly attractive option with limpers before you?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't like giving anyone a free or cheap look at the fllop. Personally, I believe in the motto "If the hand cannot be raised, then it shouldn't be played" (small pp's excepted). There are times when limping works, but I play an aggressive style so I generally don't limp, unless I'm trying to trap from EP or just mixing it up if I've played alot of hands.
I would save the bet with KJo (fold) or raise at least 4-5bb's to steal (I don't think 3bb's is enough to steal when there are 2 limpers)

[ QUOTE ]
If I'm understanding you correctly, if you make the big raise and get called by one of the limpers, you're going to bet the flop here if it's checked to you whether or not you hit (read-based departures notwithstanding).

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. You have commited 1/2 your stack to the pot, and unless your opponent leads into you, I push. Most of the time the flop misses everyone, and you want to put the other player to a big chip decision on the flop. Of course an A could flop and a push would be scary, but the A might scare your opponent too.
Not everyone will agree with me on this, but this can be an effective strategy.
regards,
woodguy