Who calls in this scenario?

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
IMO, this is a marginal call 6 handed and a clear fold 4 handed.

[/ QUOTE ]


(trying to be as polite as I can)

The reason why you have this completely backwards is simple. It appears that you'd be willing to take a chance on a coinflip when the outcome is less relevant. In the second example, why it's important to consider, and in fact accept this in a 4 way game is because the result of the coinflip is precisely measurable in real $$ terms. If you win the coinflip with 6 left, it doesn't guarantee you win any money. If you win the coinflip here with 4 people left, it guarantees that you win money. Other than ITM, their are only four times at which I am willing to take coinflips:
a. I have a significant chip lead
b. I am a chip dog, and I need to double up
c. I am on the bubble
d. My skill level is below the field, and doubling up will likely level the playing field for me. (And then return to a more desirable game afterwards, lol)

There are other important factors to consider in lieu of this example that make this a compelling poker proposition. But, I've spent a lot of time considering when to accept coinflips, and this is one of them.

The fact that you came to this conclusion on your own, represents the common growing fallacies that poker strategy is obvious. You have fallen into the amateur poker bubble trap, becoming too tight on the bubble. And conversely, playing potentially too loose before the bubble (I say potententially because the $EV analysis is a draw - and yet you were ready to 'bust my balls' because (in your opinion) I don't have the ability to comprehend such deep poker thoughts as you are able to do [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img] - and yet I see that you now say this is a marginal call)

The fact that I challenge the status quo seems to upset the rooster cage here a little. For me it's part of my learning process. "Prove me wrong" is my attitude. Hey, that's pretty much what you're trying to do in this thread, but belligerently, and in poor taste, IMO. The more I think about it, I feel sorry for you. The fact that it's your style to be an a$$hole (per your admission), is really a poor human characteristic.

[Misfire]

[ QUOTE ]
The reason why you have this completely backwards is simple. It appears that you'd be willing to take a chance on a coinflip when the outcome is less relevant. In the second example, why it's important to consider, and in fact accept this in a 4 way game is because the result of the coinflip is precisely measurable in real $$ terms. If you win the coinflip with 6 left, it doesn't guarantee you win any money. If you win the coinflip here with 4 people left, it guarantees that you win money.

...

You have fallen into the amateur poker bubble trap, becoming too tight on the bubble.

[/ QUOTE ]

This makes me feel better.

[bball904]

[ QUOTE ]
The reason why you have this completely backwards is simple. It appears that you'd be willing to take a chance on a coinflip when the outcome is less relevant.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that this outcome is much more relevant. That is the primary reason you don't gamble with the inferior holding. Why do you want to give chips to the short stack as a likely 2:1 dog. If you lose (as a 2:1 dog) you will have given your chip position away. Fold and you still have him down and you have 2 huge stacks with you all waiting for a hand to take him out.

Now, if you were a 2k+ healthy stack, you'd probably want to call here (unless of course you were the only huge stack). DYSW?

[ QUOTE ]
and yet I see that you now say this is a marginal call

[/ QUOTE ]

Chucky, please find and quote me where I said the original situation was something other than a marginal call. You have misunderstood this throughout your series of replies.

[ColdestCall]

Hey Scuba. Thanks for another interesting problem where the answer is real close....

I only had a second to glance at it yesterday, and do a quick and dirty analysis (similar to what I would do at the table) and voted for a call. At the time, I though it was REAL close.

I figured that argument in favor of a call were that button would push with any two, I was getting about 2 to 1 from the pot, winning would put me well ahead of the other short stacks, losing would not totally cripple me relative to the other short stacks, and that this call would make people think twice before trying to steal my blinds later.

I thought the arguments for a fold included the fact that raiser may have something significantly better than any two, and that the chips I would lose by calling and losing might hurt me more 2/3 of the time than the chips I would gain by calling and winning would help me 1/3 of the time.

I was far from "sure" that calling was right, but I was pretty sure that it was so close that it wouldn't make a tremendous difference, and I felt like I would likely call at the table, so that's how I cast my vote.

Anyway, I was a little surprised to see this thread still raging today, and even more surprised to see people flaming and just generally bugging out that their point of view was absolutely right. I mean, this is just not that clear cut, IMO. I'd probably call, but I don't think a fold is all that bad either. I've seen a similar trend (people getting real worked up over their point of view) developing in other threads, and in general on this forum lately.

Which brings me to today's haiku....

Many poker hands
have more than one way to play.
People need to chill.

[citanul]

much better. the world is beginning to spin properly again, i think.

citanul

[citanul]

i don't understand how you are still arguing about whether or not this would be a call on the bubble. scuba, could you run a icm of this assuming 2 even tall stacks, and a couple ranges of hands?

bball, there is absolutely no way that you can assume that the pusher has a 2-1 favorite over you. the range of hands AA-22, AKs-AJs, KQs-KJs, QJs, AKo-AJo, KQo-KJo, QJo is a 2-1 favorite over this hand, and if you assume that that's all he's pushing with, well, you're assuming badly.

see, the whole reason you should become more aggressive as the short stack in a situation just like this, is that people make bad folds and give you free chips.

stop using the dysw thing. it's totally stupid. especially when there is a very very very good chance you are wrong, it just makes you seem like an idiot. not an [censored], see, an idiot, and i think you wanted to appear to be one, not the other.

your comment about play if you had 2k chips is absolutely horrific.

until proven wrong, i'm going to go with continuing to believe that your comment about play of htis hand if it were 4 handed is horrific too.

scuba: you also left out a key time when you are willing to gamble, i think you left it out anyway. that being exactly this situation. you are getting 3-1 on a call for a smallish chunk of your stack, with the chance to knock out a player (on the bubble). edit: i guess that's kinda covered in your list, but in the 6 handed example, where i think you should call, i think, you're not on the bubble and won't double up, so i thought that was a new case.

citanul

[Scuba Chuck]

Coldcall, the only reason this thread is still raging is because how fired up I was yesterday.

Ultimately my point in this thread is this:

It was right for me to fold in this case. It was very close, and I took quite a while to make that decision during the hand. I have been arguing with others who tell me I'm wrong. I have primarily been arguing for why it was was right for me to fold this hand.

Irieguy said it best:
[ QUOTE ]
Fold and get ready to make better decisions than everybody else for the next 20 hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

see my response to Valenzuela:
[ QUOTE ]
And yes, ICM does have it's flaws. For example, it assumes all players are of equal ability. Due to the fact that I believe I am better than the field, I don't think playing for an additonal 20 or 30 chips on average here makes sense. IMO, I can make it to ITM most of the time with my current stack in this situation. But, if I lost 250 chips here, I think it definately reduces my ITM % (and thus ROI %). In the end, I came to the conclusion that it was better for my ROI to fold this marginal hand.


[/ QUOTE ]
In essence, I believe the answer to this question is a fold is correct for me. Furthermore, I continue to believe that for all those who believe that their skill is better than the field, that there's a slight weight towards folding here more than calling. Without a doubt, no one can say that one way is an absolute right or wrong for anybody else. That's what has made this such an interesting post. The decision comes down to factors that are pertinent to either your style or skill ability, IMO.

Furthermore, I learned from this post, that this decision was even closer than I orginally thought. (ICM range was between 0-0.3% call, depending on your Hand Range). At the table, I had guessed it was marginally -$EV.

Finally, this post spilled over into today because of my ire with bball904's comments:
[ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't expect someone who preaches folding 88 in an unraised pot to understand that level of thinking. DYSW?


[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
in terms of very active posters giving frequent advice on this forum, yours is all too often off the mark. It would do you some good to post less and read more.

[/ QUOTE ]

[microbet]

The vote is 3 to 1 in favor of folding. The argument just makes it seem like you have the minority opinion.

I voted for fold right away, but felt that it was very close.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
The vote is 3 to 1 in favor of folding. The argument just makes it seem like you have the minority opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

This response came off of my post.
Are you talking to me? I favor folding.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Depends. When do the blinds go up?

If this is the 1st or 2nd hand of 50/100 I might fold. If not, I call.