To D.Sklansky - 88

[curtains]

I'm starting a new thread about the 88 hand with 1k - 2k blinds. I believe the question was "What should the stack sizes be relative to the blinds before it's incorrect to move allin with 88 preflop"

[David Sklansky]

It depends on how bad the other guy plays. The better he plays the bigger the stack. A flat call could be allright to induce a bluff even when stacks are smallish. A moderate raise generally can't be right unless the stacks are big enough that you can happily get away from the hand if he pushes all in on a reraise.

[ZeeJustin]

This question is much more complicated than it seems. It is relatively easy to figure out how big the blinds must be before shoving 88 becomes -ev. (This can either be done assuming your hand is face up, or putting your opponent on a range of hands. Both are relatively easy)

However, as the question is posed, you would also need to know the EV of all plays other than shoving. This of course depends greatly on how your opponent plays, and many other factors.

[TStoneMBD]

im glad you asked this question curtains. at least somebody is asking the right things.

that is all.

[kmvenne]

The more interesting question about this hand is the value of the check raise, more specifically calling it, since the move itself was cleary correct. Knowing Sklansky was waiting until these blinds to make his move for the win, surly the check raise is a lot more powerful then the normal large amount of strenght it shows. Should Phil lay this down getting 5-1? He'd have a lot of play left if he did, and knowing the chips he loses are worth a lot more then face value at these blinds, and assuming he had some play if he folds, which it sounds like he does, was calling a mistake here? I almost lean yes, perhaps not despite game theory considerations that might have made his choice moot assuming flops that kept 88 ahead were already decided upon for check raising.

[curtains]

I didn't originally ask it. I just copied it from someone else, whom David Sklansky asked to create a new thread on the subject.

[citanul]

For at least a partial answer, I think you should look up the karlson sklansky hand rankings. They may be called anything from "karlson sklansky" to "sklansky karlson" to "chubukov sklansky" to "sklansky chubukov." I honestly don't remember which got settled on in the end.

If searching becomes difficult, look through poster karlson's posts.

citanul

[That guy]

Phils stack was $25k and there was $3k in the pot ($1k/$2k) -- assuming no antes. So his stack/pot ratio is 8.33x. 88 is ahead of a random hand 97%+ of the time.

A moderate raise is problematic because of the implied odds you are laying.

(note: I don't know what Davids stack size was so I am just discussing this in theory)

If Ivey bets 1/2 his stack ($12,500), Sklanksy will have to call $12,500 - 2,000 or $10,500 to try to win $14,500. He has the odds if the cards are face up but should muck if he puts phil on 2 over cards -- based on pot odds. Based on implied odds, he could still call.

To me though, the real problem is what does Phil do when the board comes with over cards and 1/2 your stack is already in the pot? Now you have to push the rest in and hope your opponent missed the flop? That sucks.

But the conflicting problem for Phil is how to vary your pre-flop bets based on your opponents range of hands and still disguise what you have??

Phil probably raised to $5,500 so as not to give off any clues as to what he had... Still, Phil misplayed every street on this hand.

[maryfield48]

[ QUOTE ]
Phils stack was $25k and there was $3k in the pot ($1k/$2k) -- assuming no antes. So his stack/pot ratio is 8.33x. 88 is ahead of a random hand 97%+ of the time.

A moderate raise is problematic because of the implied odds you are laying.

(note: I don't know what Davids stack size was so I am just discussing this in theory)

[/ QUOTE ]

DS' stack had to be 12k - they started with 20k each, didn't they?

[WarDekar]

I don't think that's right because DS said Phil bet out 6k on the flop and DS check-raised him all-in. If DS only had 12k at the start of the hand, he wouldn't have been able to do that. Either way, it doesn't make much sense for Phil to raise 1/5 of his stack. Really the only way I see Phil laying down this hand post-flop is if DS moves in on the flop, but having position DS is at a huge advantage if he actually hits anything, especially hitting a board like this.

David - I have to ask, what would you have done if the flop had come different? Say you flopped top pair? Mid pair? JT8?