Looking for races?

[AkSJ]

I watched John Stolzman's performance at the Gold Strike's WPT event and a comment he made has been gnawing at me since I saw it. When facing one of his opponents in the middle of the broadcast, he looked at a potential hand (a middle pair, I think) and commented "I want to get into races with you, but I don't think this is a race." He folded.

At a RL tournament the other night I was at the final table with 10 others, a relatively low stack of $20K (high was around $60K, low about $5K). A player to my right who had gone from chip leader to survival mode through loose/aggressive play had about $22K. Shortly after a break and a couple of expensive laydowns by this person, he pushes all in (something he hadn't done previously). I find AQ off, contemplate and fold. I later came to believe this was a mistake, confirmed by his claim that he had 88. In other words, I avoided a race with him when perhaps I shouldn't have.

But it got me to thinking. I'm of the belief that to win tournaments you need to win races, but I have two questions:

1. Should you seek out race situations? (or "do you need to win races to win tournaments?") and

2. What criteria define the situation(s) in which you desire to compete in a race?

I have some thoughts on this, but I'd like to hear from others.

[dmk]

1. if you're a larger stack than someone else, yes, i like to race. for example, i have ak w/ 20k and someone pushes w/ qq w/ 9k. i want that situation.

2. i think the above is a good scenario. basically, if you have a lot of chips, thats a good time to get into races w/ short stacks that are a bit hurting

[A_PLUS]

When the blinds are high, and their are antes, most races are in fact profitable (from a chip EV point of view) for both parties.

If you know you are a 48/52 dog to win the hand, the dead money usually compensates for the 2% you are behind.

I think you are getting into dangerous teritory thinking about 'races' in the way that you may be. Instead, try thinking like this.

what hands would he make this play with?

AK? AQ? AJ? etc etc etc. Then calculate your equity vs. this range using www.pokerstove.com.

[luggyfugger]

Participation in "race situations" should primarily be determined by the relative size of your stack compared to your opponents (as another respondant stated).

To oversimplify it, if you're a short stack on the bubble, you don't want to race. If the tournament is heads-up and your stack is 20x your opponents, you wouldn't mind racing 3-4 times in a row.

Specifically regarding the WPT tournament you were watching... John had no where near the tournament experience as some of the other players. Before taking his seat at the final table, he deliberately established his strategy to seek race situations against his more skilled opponents. All-in preflop is the surest way to neutralize the fancy footwork of a seasoned pro (of course, it's also a much bigger gamble). He could have tried standard raises with hands like 88, or tried to get cute by smooth-calling monsters, but he would have been setting himself up to get outplayed after the flop.

Rather than face multiple decisions throughout the hand(s) -- situations his opponent(s) were more well-versed -- he boiled his playable hands down to one simple decision for both him and his opponent(s): all-in or fold.

I liked his strategy, and would recommend it to any amateur facing clearly superior (pro) opponents.

[pineapple888]

1. Should you seek out race situations?


A. When you are short stacked (<8-10 BB).

B. When you have a decent-sized stack, have a short stack well covered at/near the final table, and get significant additional placement equity by knocking him out (this is overrated, I think, until very near the end).

C. Hardly ever would I "seek out" races as a medium stack. I want to get my money in when I'm likely to have a big advantage, and settle for a race at worst.

D.) Rarely as a big stack, except in situation B above. I want to be bullying people by being the first one to raise, not calling just because I think it's a race. I'll take a race if it happens here, but I won't "seek it out".

"do you need to win races to win tournaments?"


Yep. Even if you don't seek them out, they will find you.

2. What criteria define the situation(s) in which you desire to compete in a race?

See above... but one extremely important additional note... *A RACE IS NOT 50-50*.

*I WANT THE POCKET PAIR IN A RACE.* In this case, my advantage runs as high as 57% (QQ vs. AK).

At the final table, if not sooner, this is often the best odds you are going to get on your money. I recently busted out sixth in a multi because I put the villain on two high cards, based on the betting, and I had 88. I'd do it again in a heartbeat.

[Pat Southern]

A big part of looking for races is that if you win the race, you'll have much more options than just push/fold. If you continue to wait for opportunities where you're a 65/35 favorite you're very likely to be in push/fold mode, whereas if you get lucky enough to win a race or two, you will be able to steal blinds with less risk to your stack by making standard raises, along with being able to mix in a variety of other plays.

[luggyfugger]

Agreed. This is a key differentiator between tourney players who just "cash" regularly and those who win. The options available to you when you play --and win-- race situations is much greater, and puts you in a much healthier position to actually WIN the tournament, not just get paid.