[lgas]

Thanks for the reply -- I didn't mean to imply that I had come up with the concept on my own -- but rather that I was unable to recall any of specific places that I had read about it.

But further more... your response addressed pot control in relation to being committed whereas I'm just interested in the notion of committedness in and of itself.

E.g. is there a specific definition of what it means to be pot committed? Is it when a certain portion of your stack is already in the pot? Or maybe more accurately, when the pot size exceeds your stack size by some amount? Or is it a matter of the ratio of your remaining stack to the pot vs. your assumed odds?

What other factors affect whether you are committed or not?

For example could you find yourself in identical situations in terms of blind sizes vs. stack size and hands and boards in a cash game and in a tournament, but be committed in the tournament but not in the cash game (because you can refill in the cash game, but if you fold in the tournament you won't have a reasonable chance to win).

Can you be committed due to meta game considerations only? e.g. you're playing limit hold 'em and you 4-bet the flop, so you can't get away from the hand now or it will incite your opponents to run over you in future hands? Can being committed in this way make it +EV over the long run to make a -EV (in the short run) play right now?

What other factors are relevant when trying to determine if you are committed or not?

Is this all really a lot more simple than I am making it, or is there some interesting ground that could be covered on this subject?