The "If Betting Is 35% Of Your Stack, Go All In" Theory

[Hood]

One of the most useful ideas I've learnt from my 2+2 reading is the idea that if you are betting 35% or more of your stack, you should go all-in. I've seen quite a few hand history threads where people have 'ignored' this theory, and people replying by explaining it. So I thought it might be worth writing it in it's own thread to be linked to. I've added a few ideas of my own that, although rather obvious, might be useful to some. Feel free to point out errors.

Theory
It occurs when you make a bet at a pot that, if you are raised all-in, you would be pot-committed and have to call. If this is the case, then you should go all-in initially. This increases the chance that your opponent will fold (increasing fold equity). It is considered that 35% of your stack is a good marker. If you are betting 35% or more of your stack, then you are committing yourself. If this is the case, push all-in.

When You Want To Get All-In
This doesn't apply when you are looking to get all-in - i.e. you're sitting on a monster, and if you get re-raised you still think you have the best hand. If this is the case, bet what you think will extract the most money from your opponent(s), or what will induce an all-in.

Applies To Opponent's Stack
If you are heads-up, then this also applies to your opponent's stack. If your bet is less 35% of your stack, but more than 35% of his stack, then you should also push. This is because obviously all he can do is raise what he's got in front of him, so calling his all in would still be correct.

[BradleyT]

Pre-flop only? Up to flop only? Up to turn only? On river too?

[Sam T.]

To my knowledge it's on any bet.

You're a good man Hood.

[Hood]

I think it should apply to any situation where you are going to be betting out.

[Cptkernow]

I assume on the bubble with a small stack about to be blinded out is the exception to this rule.

[Jason Strasser]

[ QUOTE ]
When You Want To Get All-In
This doesn't apply when you are looking to get all-in - i.e. you're sitting on a monster, and if you get re-raised you still think you have the best hand. If this is the case, bet what you think will extract the most money from your opponent(s), or what will induce an all-in.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like this idea, and I think it is good. I just wanted to add that I really don't use it. I'm probably on the more aggressive end of the SNG spectrum, and because I push with so many hands to steal blinds, I will also push with the premium hands. Especially late in a sng, I don't play much 'finesse' poker--inducing bluffs, etc. The most deception I can bring is by pushing all the hands I intend to steal blinds with, and let my opponents wonder if I have AA or KK this time...

[Hood]

[ QUOTE ]
I assume on the bubble with a small stack about to be blinded out is the exception to this rule.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I was just thinking that. I guess you may raise say 40% of your stack, but if you are re-raised you may fold if the 60% you've got left is less than short-stack (who's coming up to the blinds before you).

Although if that's the case, perhaps raising 40% of your stack is a bad move anyway with anything but premium hands (and if they're premium, I'd rather push).

[Hood]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When You Want To Get All-In
This doesn't apply when you are looking to get all-in - i.e. you're sitting on a monster, and if you get re-raised you still think you have the best hand. If this is the case, bet what you think will extract the most money from your opponent(s), or what will induce an all-in.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like this idea, and I think it is good. I just wanted to add that I really don't use it. I'm probably on the more aggressive end of the SNG spectrum, and because I push with so many hands to steal blinds, I will also push with the premium hands. Especially late in a sng, I don't play much 'finesse' poker--inducing bluffs, etc. The most deception I can bring is by pushing all the hands I intend to steal blinds with, and let my opponents wonder if I have AA or KK this time...

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess the rule still holds - you're doing what you think will win you the most money (because you push so frequently, there's a good chance you'll get called).

Although you don't play much finesse poker.. if you had AA and AA3 came on the flop, you saying you wouldn't slowplay that? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I assume on the bubble with a small stack about to be blinded out is the exception to this rule.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I was just thinking that. I guess you may raise say 40% of your stack, but if you are re-raised you may fold if the 60% you've got left is less than short-stack (who's coming up to the blinds before you).

Although if that's the case, perhaps raising 40% of your stack is a bad move anyway with anything but premium hands (and if they're premium, I'd rather push).

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with the last part. Putting that much of your stack in the pot, with the intention of laying it down to a re-raise, is just asking for it. If someone is about to blinded out, and you are that eager to move up a spot, then don't get involved at all.

[Jason Strasser]

My chips would likely already be in the middle before I could slowplay that flop.

But I never flop quads, so this is all hypothetical [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img].