disappointing 45th place finish, hand in question here.

[freemont]

I think you were right to push and he was wrong to call. However, the play is typical of a party tournament, and it kind of sucks. On the bright side he's probably the same type of player that will call your all-in with 77 in that situation as well. I've seen tons of these plays on-line, and recently it seems I always have AK when they call with 77 and 99 when they call with AQ! It is really annoying, but the fact that there are people willing to make those plays is yet another reason why these tournaments are +EV situation...

[donkeyradish]

Well... let me put it another way.

If I go all-in with 99 and someone calls, I expect to be in trouble. Its either a higher pair or 2 overcards, I'm certainly not confident. If 2 people call I'm toast.

[Tosh]

I think its a good push, the AQ made a bad call IMO and I'd much rather he folded but still you made the right play.

[gergery]

I had a very similar post a couple weeks ago where I had 88 UTG. Consensus was that it’s a tough spot, but pushing probably best (that was Fossilmans POV too).

On the math, the chances that 1 player has a better hand than you are 2.25% (AA-TT at .45% each). Chances that you are ahead of all 9 of your opponents is 81% (.9775^9. So folding what is very likely best hand seems weak poker, particularly with the fold equity you should have. Obviously, its extremely likely that overcards are out there, but you cannot stop bad players from making marginal calls and sucking out on you.

So here’s where I’ve been thinking about the psychology. If the problem here is that a bad or average AQ will think that UTG likely has a weaker pair or a middle ace, so it’s either EV neutral (with blinds) or way ahead, and since shortstacked then should gamble. Bad average AQ think If UTG had a great hand, he’d limp or minraise, because that’s what he’d do.

So, I’ve been trying an experiment. Maybe one time in three I’ll play those 88 UTG for minraise. Only in right circumstances: just once per table, only if I’ve been at the same table for awhile, I think most are good players, and they’ve only seen me play very tight UTG and only open raise for 3xBB from other spots. Then they will often assume I have AA/KK and am playing fishy to suck them in. So far, it’s gotten 3 folds and 1 flat call then fold to my flop bet (I’ll at least minraise any flop to represent the fishy AA). If raised preflop, I’d fold and then not try this again this tourney.

Good players are unlikely to call me since my stack is small and they’re not getting enough implied odds. Bad/average players might call but will rarely raise me.

--Greg

[MLG]

However, after raising in this situation you will be severely crippled if you decide to check-fold. If this is your thinking just fold to begin with (in my opinion its too tight but its better than raising and folding).

[mikewvp]

Does anyone even consider limping here? Fold if overcards flop, push if unders flop, play with them if you spike it? Yeah you are vulnerable to a reraise, but depending on who does it you can determine (to some degree) if you are beat, and if you had just pushed you would have found out in a worse way. If you make a pot sized raise and get called, what does that really tell you a bout your opponents hand? And if you get reraised (after you initially raised) then you are in trouble and you have put a lot of chips in the pot. If you think my reasoning is completely flawed please let me know, I know it sounds a little passive though.

[MLG]

Its not flawed, but at this stage in the tournament the blind money is important, and you not only give the BB a free look at a flop that could cripple you, and give him the first chance to bluff at it if overs come. Limping here isn't an absolutely horrible play, but I'm just not comfortable hoping to hit good cards when im getting down this short.

[hockey1]

The conventional wisdom is that this is probably an all-in situation, since you're screwed if you get re-raised all-in. But that thinking -- if that's as far as it goes and for many around here it seems that it is -- seems much too facile.

It ignores the situations where you raise 2.5x to 3x BB and are just called. In my experience that's at least as likely as getting re-raised all-in.

But, you say, what about the hands that would've folded if you'd gone all-in? Fair enough, but that's not the end of the analysis. I think you still need to ask (and answer) the following questions:

1. OTHER THAN THE HANDS THAT WOULD'VE CALLED AN ALL-IN, HOW MANY HANDS WILL CALL YOUR 2.5x TO 3x BB RAISE?

2. Of those additional hands that call HOW MANY DO YOU WANT A CALL FROM?

3. For hands that would JUST call BOTH the all in raise and the smaller raise, how much of an advantage/disadvantage is it to you to see a flop? A prime example is a hand like AQ. If it's do-or-die late-ish in a multi, and I'm up against AQ, I'd sure like to see a flop before I commit all my chips (yes, I recognize 99 is a slight favorite over AQ, but relatively small +EV in the hand doesn't necessarily translate into +EV for the tourney).

As you can guess, my play here ordinarily would be, depending on player-specific reads, to raise about 2.5x to 3x BB. You're going to fold out almost all of the same hands, the few additional hands that might call (e.g., AJ, 88) you're ahead of anyway, and it doesn't put your whole stack at risk.

The call is close, but those are my $.02. Please let me know what you think.

[DonT77]

I don't have the stats with me, but 80-95% of the time holding 99 an overcard will flop. Then what will you do if the other player applies pressure to you? I don't want to be in this pot unless I have folding equity PF. After the flop, you might be folding the best hand - or you're be going all-in and hoping. Just move in PF with that sized stack - you'll get more hands to fold than if you just call or mini-raise.