Preflop Two Part Question

[Earthy Tones]

I'd be more inclined to push in a tournament, and less so in a ring game.

If it's an early stage of the tournament you need to double right then and there, as you can't realistically sustain another round of blinds. Another reason to move in is that you are wasting time in a futile situation. time is money to a winning poker player. we could be 8 tabling online..

Also, if I am sitting at a cash game, obviously having a rough night if have 4 bb in front of me, I pick up my chips and go home if don't see a very playable hand utg. no need to throw away money, right?

[Bytestream]

Cash game = less likely. The tournament chips have less value then their cash game counterpart that short stacked that early in a tournament, especially against tough players.

Also, being short stacked in a tourney, you are more likely to be called by a weaker hand, I do not understand why you would want us to assume that "the other players will call you with the exact same hands whether it is a cash game or a tournament". I think this is an irrational assumption considering you are against "tough" opponents.

[binions]

For example, is there a juicy side game if you bust out of the tourney? If so, it may be more worth your while to bust or double up quick short stacked in the tournament.

Many variables at play.

[PokrLikeItsProse]

In a tournament, I would be inclined to move in pretty much all the time. I would expect a small chance to at least triple up here or better because I create additional money that players will be more willing to contest for on this hand. If I win, I am at least nine to twelve times the big blind, which moves me out of the immediate danger area for an orbit. On the next hand, when I am in the big blind, I might just end up with six to eight times the big blind, since at a tough table, the play might involve one pre-flop raiser and everyone else folding. I would also rather be in a hand with two other players after I raised all-in UTG than if I called all-in after two players acted before me in the big blind. The only possible reason I might consider folding is if my hand is in the bottom 2% of hands.

In a cash game, I still play the hand according to its value and my position if I plan on pulling out money. I may just be waiting to get more chips and I am keeping my seat occupied so no one else can take it. No sense in wasting bets unnecessarily.

If I had no more access to money in a cash game, this is my last hand unless I get a hand that I would play anyways and I win enough to make continued play worthwhile. Otherwise, I just have too little money to play this game and I walk away with perhaps enough for a sandwich, depending on what stakes I am playing. I just play this last hand because I "paid" for it by seeing the blinds and I may catch aces. I either play this hand for its value. Given the option of finishing with zero big blinds or three big blinds, I choose three.

[fnurt]

You absolutely, positively would be more inclined to push in if you are in a tournament.

In a cash game, you want to push only if it is +EV. End of story.

In a tournament, you may have to push a slightly -EV situation, if waiting will be even more -EV. Just how -EV a bet you would be willing to make is not important for purposes of this question.

The difference is that in a tournament, your only possible outcomes are busting out or cashing. If you are close to being blinded out, or to having a stack too small to work with, you may not rate to get a +EV situation ever again. So you may need to choose the lesser of two evils.

In a cash game, if hypothetically you didn't rate to get a +EV situation ever again, you have the option to simply get up from the table. For this reason, you never have to make a -EV bet in a cash game if you don't want to.

[Moovyz]

Not enough info to make a justifiable decision. Give me a hand or range of hands, then ask. Is the guy on the button likely to raise, call or fold based on past rounds? What level of the tourney? Are we in the money yet?

Sorry David, at this point...dumb question. Please give us more to go on. My answer is yes and no. Maybe, yes and no.
Give me AA and it doesn't matter.

Please don't go into a 1,000 word essay on why the mathematics say we should or shouldn't until we have more info. This is situational poker. You haven't given us a real situation yet.

[fnurt]

As to the second part of the question, if you can put more money on the table, obviously you would want to.

If for some reason, you are stuck with a stack of 3-4 BB and cannot buy back in unless you bust, then it is completely irrelevant whether you have more money in your pocket to reload. Whether you buy back into the game immediately after busting, or leave and don't come back until tomorrow or next week or next year, simply makes no difference as to what you should do on this hand.

Cash games are different from tournaments, but the idea that cash games are different because "you can reload if you bust" is one of the biggest fallacies out there.

[slickpoppa]

[ QUOTE ]
In a cash game, you want to push only if it is +EV. End of story.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree completely

[ QUOTE ]
In a tournament, you may have to push a slightly -EV situation, if waiting will be even more -EV. Just how -EV a bet you would be willing to make is not important for purposes of this question.

The difference is that in a tournament, your only possible outcomes are busting out or cashing. If you are close to being blinded out, or to having a stack too small to work with, you may not rate to get a +EV situation ever again. So you may need to choose the lesser of two evils.


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with most of what you say here too, but I don't think it necessarily leads to the conclusion that you would be more likely to push in a tournament. You seem to base your conclusion on the assumption that waiting will likely lead to a more -EV situation, but I don't think you have to assume that. In DS's hypo, you are UTG. By waiting another hand, you'd forced to put up a BB, but you would also get to see how everyone behind you acts and you'd know exactly what your odds are. I think it is possible that the value of seeing how everyone else acts before you push might be worth more than that BB.

[slickpoppa]

[ QUOTE ]
If for some reason, you are stuck with a stack of 3-4 BB and cannot buy back in unless you bust, then it is completely irrelevant whether you have more money in your pocket to reload. Whether you buy back into the game immediately after busting, or leave and don't come back until tomorrow or next week or next year, simply makes no difference as to what you should do on this hand.

Cash games are different from tournaments, but the idea that cash games are different because "you can reload if you bust" is one of the biggest fallacies out there.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are wrong here. If you can easily buy into another game that is equally as proftiable, then you are right. But in general, the fact that you are not allowed to rebuy is not irrelevant. In this hypo, all of your poker money is on the table and you cannot buy into another game. Thus, if this game is profitable for you, then one variable that you have to keep in mind is your risk of ruin. Even if a play is +EV for you in the short term, it might be -EV for you in the long term if the play gives you a high probability of busting out, thereby preventing you from potentially profitting on the game for several more hours.

[kmvenne]

In the cash game I am more likely to move my chips to the center, playing any hand I feel has expected value, whether I have more money or not. I'll get my money in with 56s if I somehow knew everyone would call and I would be 6:1 to make 10x my money. My short stack in a tournament is too powerful a force to squander it in a situation where I woudln't normally be playing UTG against good players, unless it was marginal and solid sidegames were open for me to play. I'll continue to fight with a chip and a chair in the tourney under normal circumstances as long as I felt I still had an chance to recover and cash.