HOH II Hand 9-8- call, DON'T push!

[Easy E]

Page 184, you're UTG with $500, big stack "very aggressive" UTG+1, second-smallest stack $610 "very aggressive" in BB, 5 other players alive. Blinds are $100/200. Dan/Bill say push.

Holding A8s here, I say calling $200 is betting than pushing $500. You have almost zero fold equity here- anyone who would call at all will call your $200 raise (with Player E at $960 as a small candidate, but knowing she has implied odds with the BB coming in behind, that may override her concern)
Your raise also is unlikely to narrow the field any more than limping would- if big stack Player B calls, few if any will overcall. With B out, the BB doesn't have enough chips to cripple any one but Player E, so any hand that would call here isn't going to hold back fearing a small reraise.

Even more importantly, you need to gamble here. Getting incredibly lucky and winning the blinds by pushing doesn't leave you in any better position on the next few hands and you're unlikely to see a better hand than Ace-middle suited.
You need to get to 1st, maybe 2nd to win anything, so you need a lot more chips than one call's worth. I would gamble on getting lucky if everyone limped behind you and then called the BB's possible raise.

Besides, if you do want to get it heads-up, you're much more likely to accomplish that by letting Player B raise over the top of your limp, clearing out the field, than you will by pushing your measly raise all-in here.

[Beavis68]

If I wanted your advice, I would buy your book.

[Easy E]

You conveniently forgot that I rejected your credit application- you can't afford my book

[betgo]

The only reason to limp is that it is a very strange play that represents a big pair. You might get heads up with the blinds and take the flop.

Pushing does have some FE. Atleast you may only be called by the BB. Limping for 30% of your stack is a bizarre play. although it is sometimes made by total fish.

[Easy E]

I disagree with the "only" part of limping. I still say anyone who would call $200 behind my limp, for FOURTY percent of my stack by the way, will not/should not change their call if I'm all-in for $500.
The reverse is not true for early position players.

Given the situation described in the problem, whether I'm all-in or not doesn't change whether I'll go up against the blinds alone.

[betgo]

How many WSOP ME final 4s have you made with your limping strategy?

[ChipLeader]

You have little FE overall, but your goal is to thin the field. You say anyone who would limp would also call 500... i couldn't disagree more.

If you raise to 500 and the aggressive player wants to play, he will likely reraise, eliminating the entire field unless someone holds a monster. Mission accomplished.

If you limp, the aggressive player may still raise but now players are looking at an aggressive player's bet, not a raise and reraise and they are more likely to call behind.

If you limp, the aggressive player may also limp and now many players who wouldnt play the hand to begin with are now getting odds to call. For example, a 79s from the button had all the reason in the world to play this hand behind 2-3 limpers because he has great position and great odds. I guarentee hes folding it for 500 though.
[ QUOTE ]
if big stack Player B calls, few if any will overcall

[/ QUOTE ]
Once again, i couldnt disagree more. B calling increases the pot odds AND implied odds since he can double ANYONE's stack. Why on Earth wouldn't they overcall?! Unless they had a premium holding, AK-QQ and maybe JJ where theyd be raising, i say theyre far more likely to overcall with the pot offering 3.5:1 odds.

[Easy E]

using that argument, I guess you'll be the personal shill for Phil H's books, eh?

[Easy E]

First, have you read the book for all of the details, or are you going just off of what I've written?

[ QUOTE ]
You have little FE overall, but your goal is to thin the field. You say anyone who would limp would also call 500... i couldn't disagree more.

If you raise to 500 and the aggressive player wants to play, he will likely reraise, eliminating the entire field unless someone holds a monster. Mission accomplished.

If you limp, the aggressive player may still raise but now players are looking at an aggressive player's bet, not a raise and reraise and they are more likely to call behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

I personally don't consider an small all-in from a desperate stack about to hit the blinds a true raise, but tomato tomahto.
And let's think about this- the shortest stack limps, and the biggest stack (who barely doubles the second-place stack, has an M of 10 AND is known as an aggressive player) raises... how much more likely are you to call than if the big stack had reraised the puny all-in?
Are you giving the aggressive big stack credit for that much stronger of a hand in the reraise situation?

[ QUOTE ]
If you limp, the aggressive player may also limp and now many players who wouldnt play the hand to begin with are now getting odds to call. For example, a 79s from the button had all the reason in the world to play this hand behind 2-3 limpers because he has great position and great odds. I guarentee hes folding it for 500 though.


[/ QUOTE ]
And I'm saying I don't mind the call from the 79s here, as opposed to having more chips- yes, it's a gamble, but I'm going to have to do that anyway.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if big stack Player B calls, few if any will overcall

[/ QUOTE ]
Once again, i couldnt disagree more. B calling increases the pot odds AND implied odds since he can double ANYONE's stack. Why on Earth wouldn't they overcall?! Unless they had a premium holding, AK-QQ and maybe JJ where theyd be raising, i say theyre far more likely to overcall with the pot offering 3.5:1 odds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, an aggressive player with the biggest stack and bad position only calls a small all-in, with the entire field behind him. Are you more or less scared of his hand, sitting in late position?


To restate my original intended point- I believe that the FE of this hand/stack is so low that going all-in doesn't accomplish as much as limping might and I'm willing to gamble on either a bigger pot chance against a greater number of players, or someone thinning the field for me in a way that my stack can not do.
That may be a bad strategy decision, as I may be assuming too much about the risks of limping behind the big stack's call.

I also believe that any raise I make doesn't have enough chips behind it to change any folds to calls, unless everyone just limps and there are too many scenarios where a middle position hand could limp and then not be happy with the results.

The way that I thought of this is, if I would limp with a big pair, Ace-face and possibly some medium pairs, then I would also gamble with the Ace-middle suited since I can't control my fate anyway.

Any more thoughts? Since I haven't been to 2 WSOP final tables, I may not have the standing to question this at all...

[ChipLeader]

[ QUOTE ]
First, have you read the book for all of the details, or are you going just off of what I've written?

[/ QUOTE ]
I've only read to problem 10-7, i take a lot of notes when reading so i absorb more of it the first time through, but it takes longer.

[ QUOTE ]
I personally don't consider an small all-in from a desperate stack about to hit the blinds a true raise, but tomato tomahto.

[/ QUOTE ]
Me neither, but i play online tournaments assuming i understand much more conceptually than the average opponent. If they knew as much as I did I probably wouldnt play them as often as they'd be less profitable.

[ QUOTE ]
And let's think about this- the shortest stack limps, and the biggest stack (who barely doubles the second-place stack, has an M of 10 AND is known as an aggressive player) raises... how much more likely are you to call than if the big stack had reraised the puny all-in?

[/ QUOTE ]
(assuming the bigstack plans on raising)
You are forcing the bigstacks raise to be higher than if youd limped, thus making it more bets to all those who want to come in after. If i limp for 200, the BB will likely raise to 600-800 (3x-4x the BB). If you disagree with this then we probably cannot debate any further as we have different ideas of how "an aggressive player" plays. If you agree he would usually bet 600-800 here, then he would have to raise to 800 MINIMUM with our all in, and likely will raise higher if he plays at all.

[ QUOTE ]
And I'm saying I don't mind the call from the 79s here, as opposed to having more chips- yes, it's a gamble, but I'm going to have to do that anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]
You are far more likely to double if its HU, you shouldnt be happy to get additional callers when youre only getting +200 from each and are significantly reducing your chances of winning. If each call were worth your stack (500) then i agree, the more the merrier. And you must be severly lacking in your tournament confidence to think a 1300 stack is too small to come back with.

[ QUOTE ]
Again, an aggressive player with the biggest stack and bad position only calls a small all-in, with the entire field behind him. Are you more or less scared of his hand, sitting in late position?

[/ QUOTE ]

Im more scared to put 500 chips in with a marginal holding with any of those players' stacks, as it is 1/3 of all of them except the bigstack. Do you put 1/3 of your stack in with 97s? I dont, most dont, but for 200 and great odds i will. And if he raises im even less inclined to gamble here since i know i have to beat 2 other hands, not just the aggressive bigstack.


[ QUOTE ]
To restate my original intended point- I believe that the FE of this hand/stack is so low that going all-in doesn't accomplish as much as limping might and I'm willing to gamble on either a bigger pot chance against a greater number of players, or someone thinning the field for me in a way that my stack can not do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well i guess this is where most of the respondants, myself, Dan Harrington, and Bill Robertie disagree with you.

[ QUOTE ]
That may be a bad strategy decision, as I may be assuming too much about the risks of limping behind the big stack's call.

[/ QUOTE ]
You seem too focused on what the big stack does. 500 chips is a signifcant portion of all players' stacks, and a call only further decreases an individual player's chance of winning. 500 should discourage them, and a call should scare them further unless they hold a monster where they can safely push no matter whos calling.

[ QUOTE ]
I also believe that any raise I make doesn't have enough chips behind it to change any folds to calls

[/ QUOTE ]

I suggest you go through and compare everyones stack to your all in and if you STILL dont think you might limp a hand for 200 that you wouldnt call off 500 with then i suggest you reevaluate your game.

[ QUOTE ]
Any more thoughts? Since I haven't been to 2 WSOP final tables, I may not have the standing to question this at all...

[/ QUOTE ]
Questioning is even better as a player who hasnt been to 2 WSOP final tables, but insisting is not.