Where's the logic (SNG's)

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
I often make plays similar to this, though probably in situations more correct than the ones you're complaining about. And yeah, I try to do it with more than high card 6 or so. And yeah, preferably I get the pot heads up preflop, but that doesn't really matter.

It's often not a mistake to do this, and I often have to restrain myself from having to explain to the idiots why it would be stupid for me to check down.

PS: thinking that a hand like a small pair has very little chance to win because it's "nothing" is stupid. Not like that has much to do with the overall point.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah...I get berated all of the time for betting at a dry side pot when i have say, 77 on a 6, 5 T board...the villain folds and his K comes on the turn or river and I lose the hand, I get lambasted...but they dont understand that I wasnt "bluffing" at a dry side pot, I was instead, giving myself a MUCH better chance at winning the hand and pushing out his overcard draws or what have you...anything else is stupid.

You think you are always schooling the fish for "bluffing" a dry side pot, when many times, you are the fish in this situation...(not per se in your example, but there are many times when it could be "right" to play like this). Getting the player out is not ALWAYS the right move...thinking so is a just bad dogma.

[jackaaron]

What reason would you have for not wanting to get a player out? To me, if a short stack is all in, and me and another player call, the chips I win are not near as substantial as getting a player out because I know that I can win against people with more chips. The extra chips are nice, but going from 4 people to 3 makes much more of a difference. Hand values increase, and you're in the money. In fact, going from 8 people to seven makes a difference. And, if I were to freaking bluff what would have been the winning hand off, and lose to the all in player, I gain absolutely nothing.

[jon462]

[ QUOTE ]
Yay for bluffing the dry side. It has shafted/helped me numerous times.

[/ QUOTE ]
I can remeber one instance where i had 2.5x or so the BB and had to push with Q9s.. i got 4 calls.. haha. some idiot with J high flush draw pushed everyone out and my Queen high won the pot - giving me a very healthy stack. Ah good times.

[jackaaron]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yay for bluffing the dry side. It has shafted/helped me numerous times.

[/ QUOTE ]
I can remeber one instance where i had 2.5x or so the BB and had to push with Q9s.. i got 4 calls.. haha. some idiot with J high flush draw pushed everyone out and my Queen high won the pot - giving me a very healthy stack. Ah good times.

[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe I shouldn't have said anything. I don't want to deter the idiots from making these moronic moves.

[KJ o]

Chances are if you listen more and reiterate your own arguments less, you would learn something along the way.

One obvious example of where getting someone out is bad: Four players remaining, the other three have tightened up too much for fear of finishing OOTM. If you know you will be able to steal a lot more if the small stack stays in, keeping him alive is definitely in order.

There are other examples of cases where this play could be good.

As others have stated repeatedly, in any number of the cases you have seen, it may be because your opponents are morons. That's good for you - if they were all better than you your BR would vanish in no time. Why educated the fish?

To summarize: either the play is good or the player is bad. Why complain in either case?

[45suited]

Like Citanul said, there are times when the play that you describe is good for strategic reasons.

But really, when you complain about stuff like this, it really just makes you look like a whiner who's going to play scared to ITM. If I'm the bigstack and see the numbers 2 or 3 stacks whining like this, I'm going to be all the more likely to hammer them every pot.

I basically never play to keep the bubble alive, but you really are setting yourself up for this if you complain in the chat when this happens, IMO.

[Michael C.]

I really don't have near enough information to comment on this. Were there four players left, five, or six? I'd be much more likely to do this move with 5,6, where with 4 I almost always check it down. Was the small stack crippled, or did he hardly have any chips anyway? What is my chip position relative to the others? How passive is the other big stack? If we're at a table with six players left and a passive player has a flop that was unlikely to hit him and I'm a middle stack and there's 600 in the pot and I flop middle pair (or maybe even low pair), I'd push here for sure, and I don't see how that's wrong. So like others have said, I think this could be an idiotic play or it can be reasonable, depending on circumstances. I do agree that some players bet into a dry sidepot on the bubble with nothing to gain, saving the short stack, and that pisses me off.

[ QUOTE ]
I see this so often on the different sites I play that I stopped trying to figure why people do it, but it is starting to get on my nerves....lol....
Let's take player A, B, and C.
Player A goes all in. B and C have him more than covered. B calls, C calls.
The flop comes, and B bets huge representing that he has player A beat. C folds, and B shows absolutely nothing. Maybe he has a low pair or something.
Player A most definitely wins, and Player B gets nothing.
In a SNG, you want players out, and B just kept a player in.
Why are people this stupid? When I say something, the amateur says that he is playing to win. When I point out that he had little chance to win with nothing, and that we are trying to get people out, he doesn't understand.

[/ QUOTE ]

[jackaaron]

I agree that whining serves no purpose. I've said one thing once in chat, and that was the last time.
As I said earlier, as well, since my first post on this only a few days ago, I've benefitted from people making this rediculous move about four times. So, no complaining from me!

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
What reason would you have for not wanting to get a player out? To me, if a short stack is all in, and me and another player call, the chips I win are not near as substantial as getting a player out because I know that I can win against people with more chips. The extra chips are nice, but going from 4 people to 3 makes much more of a difference. Hand values increase, and you're in the money. In fact, going from 8 people to seven makes a difference. And, if I were to freaking bluff what would have been the winning hand off, and lose to the all in player, I gain absolutely nothing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have chosen silence at the tables on this issue because so many players who are better than the average joe hear this reasoning and take it as absolute instead of thinking how different situations call for different actions to boost one's own standing in the tournament.

Like I said, a complete bluff at a dry side pot is usually wrong...usually. (unless like poster above stated when you are big stack and keeping ss alive might be right given their postures). But, in the example I gave, you are most likely best NOW...but giving free cards to the other live player lessens your chances at the pot. Why do you think it is still better to collaborate?

In the hand as it stands, you are a 60% 3 way:

HERO: 60%
Live VILLAIN: 25%
ALL-IN VILLAIN: 15%

Bet and Live villain folds and your % increases probably 15% or greater. (dont quote me on that)

Why let live-villain draw for free? To knock a player out? Again, its not bluffing, its straight-up value betting your better hand.

A complete drypot bluff is usually wrong however. My problem with most players on this subject is that they feel anything short of betting the nuts is a "bluff" in this instance...that is just a plain misapplication the anti-drysidepotbluff theory.

[Lucid1]

Yup.

When I bet in a "dry sidepot" it's not because I'm bluffing - it's because I want to protect my hand (not give away free cards) because I think it's good enough to win against the small stack...

When some dude tells me I'm an idiot for doing that, I tend to think that there's a good chance the guy is at best a slightly-above-break-even weak-tight whiner who I have an edge against [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]