17 The Newbie Chronicles: Going All-in

[mdlm]

I appear to be permanently stuck at 80% in my PokerPages ratings. My main problem seems to be that I don’t know when to go all-in. I have skimmed through Sklansky’s Tournament book and Ciaffone’s Pot Limit/No Limit book and have found little advice on this subject so I thought that I would discuss it a bit and get your advice.

First let me explain that PokerPages calculates its rating by taking into account how many players are in the tournament so finishing #50 in a tournament of 70 people is much worse than finishing #50 in a tournament of 165 people.

To illustrate the problem of going all-in, let’s say that I’m in a tournament of 100 people and 9 have been knocked out. I have AA in LP and before me one player goes all-in. Should I go all-in? The answer is probably not. Against a lower pair I’m a 4-1 favorite but finished #90 out of 100 20% of the time would kill my rating (unless I finished in the top 10% the rest of the time). So even in this very favorable situation I think that going all-in is incorrect.

Here’s another slightly more complicated example. Let’s say that there are 100 people in the tournament and 50 have been knocked out.

I’m in LP with KK. An MP limps in. Should I go all-in?

One reason to go all-in is that if I get called I’m a favorite to win so this is a positive expectation bet. Since it is positive EV I want to have all of my money in the pot so that I maximize the amount I earn.

Now here are three reasons not to go all-in:
1. My opponent may have AA.
2. My opponent may suck out.
3. Raising and then going all-in on the flop may be a better play.

Of these three, #2 seems to be the most serious problem. Before the flop there are, in some sense, no “great” hands. Virtually nothing is better than 4-1.

I have seen interviews with no-limit players that discuss the importance of not having to go all-in. In one interview Phil H. bragged about not having to go all-in until the final tables. Figuring out how to avoid going all-in but still staying ahead of the blinds/antes appears to be one of the critical skills that must be mastered to do well at no limit.

In fact, this reason (the aversion to going all-in) is one of the reasons, maybe the main reason, that Sklansky’s all-in System is good. Opponents are so freaked out about going all-in preflop that they fold great hands.

Until I figure out something more intelligent to do than what I’m doing now in these all-in type situations, I doubt that I will be able to get to my 85% goal in PokerPages tournaments.

Your help is appreciated.

==>
Comments on Comments

On the issue of betting with second pair, Pudley4 (Pud) pointed out that other 2+2 posters recommended check-calling and not betting which is what I had said. This is right. The point is, of course, that the majority of 2+2 posters feel that it is correct to put a bet into the pot in this situation while Jones suggests check-folding. I find this surprising since the odds will often be there and, if you play Jones’ starting hands, there will often be a backdoor flush or straight opportunity.

Pud’s main reason for check-folding is that it leads to other errors. He writes, “It’s too easy to call one bet on the flop, then call another on the turn, then another on the river…” That might be true, but Jones is still mistaken in saying that check-folding is the correct play.

Regarding betting flush draws on the flop Pud wrote: “Sometimes I’ll raise when it’s heads-up, sometimes I won’t raise with 6 people in.” I’m amazed by the second half of this statement. If this is a value bet, why don’t you want to put as many bets into the pot as possible?

On the issue of river bets, Pud repeats that the situation that Jones is discussing is specifically not dealing with bluffs. Whether the bet is a bluff or not is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is that the opponent may fold better hands. If your bet is a bluff, you need to include it in the EV calculation. If your bet is not a bluff (as it is in the section that Pud and I are discussing), you need to include it in the EV calculation. Since Jones does not he is making a mistake.

Homer J. Simpson provided additional information on his excellent performance in LL hold ‘em. I hope to equal half of his success when and if I start playing.

==>
Goal Update

This past week, I spent approximately 23.5 hours on poker: 4 hours reading 2+2, 10.25 hours playing PokerPages tournaments, 8.25 hours playing ring games, and 1 hour watching Poker on TV.

I did not spend any extra money this week. I have spent a total of $438.46 out of my $1000 budget.

An update on each of the four goals (which are to be accomplished by 3/30/03):

1. Read and study Jones’ “Winning Low Limit Hold ’Em”
I have confirmed two out of the three points I need to achieve this goal. A third point (river bets) is pending a discussion with Pud. A fourth point (flush draw value bet) is pending an analysis of 10,000 hands.

2. Beat Acespade
Goal Completed on 11/5/02.
Over a period of 100 hours (3600 hands) I beat Acespade’s best lineup at the rate of over 4 BB/hr.

3. Beat Masque World Series of Poker
Goal Completed on 11/17/02

4. PokerPages 85% rating in one calendar month playing 20 tournaments
My PokerPages rating is now 77.98%. I played 6 tournaments in the past week and finished #32 out of 127, #16 out of 30, #51 out of 95, #4 out of 133, #67 out of 176, and #46 out of 97.

[Homer]

"To illustrate the problem of going all-in, let's say that I'm in a tournament of 100 people and 9 have been knocked out. I have AA in LP and before me one player goes all-in. Should I go all-in? The answer is probably not. Against a lower pair I'm a 4-1 favorite but finished #90 out of 100 20% of the time would kill my rating (unless I finished in the top 10% the rest of the time). So even in this very favorable situation I think that going all-in is incorrect."

That doesn't mean you shouldn't go all-in here. It means that pokerpages rating system is flawed. They shouldn't give you a percentage rank for each tournament you play in, they should assign point values to each of the top x (10 or 20) places. For any finish lower than x you get zero points. The percentage ranking system promotes weak-tight play. It is kind of like having a tournament with 100 participants and a $50.50 entry fee, in which first place gets $100 and 100th place gets $1, and every position in between gets a dollar more or less. In other words, the payout is linear. In real tournaments, very few positions get paid, and the ones that do get payouts don't get paid linearly, as the payouts are top-heavy. So in a real tournament you must take a chance with a hand in which you are a 4-1 favorite, because only the top few positions get paid. You must put yourself in a position to reach one of these places. In the pokerpages tournament you can play weak-tight and finish in the 80th percentile, which seems good, but really wouldn't cut it in a real tournament.

-- Homer

[pudley4]

Jones' advice is geared towards beginning Low Limit players. For most of these people, check-folding is the best play. When they are up against 6 opponents with only a middle pair, it is far more likely they will make a mistake than not. It is much safer for them to just fold. This is usually only a marginally +EV play anyway, so they aren't costing themselves much (if anything) by folding. More importantly, folding will prevent them from getting into a much worse (read: more expensive) situation later in the hand.

So, while the "correct" play might be to call, Jones' advice to fold is probably the best.

[pudley4]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
Regarding betting flush draws on the flop Pud wrote: “Sometimes I’ll raise when it’s heads-up, sometimes I won’t raise with 6 people in.” I’m amazed by the second half of this statement. If this is a value bet, why don’t you want to put as many bets into the pot as possible?


[/ QUOTE ]

It's a value bet only if enough people call. If everyone but the original bettor folds then I'm only getting 1-1 on my bets. So if the flop gets checked around to the person to my right and he bets, I might call if I think raising will cause everyone to fold, where calling might keep them in.

[Ulysses]

I thought that I would discuss it a bit and get your advice.

My advice is to not spend any more time developing the optimal play money tourney strategy.

Since it is positive EV I want to have all of my money in the pot so that I maximize the amount I earn.

Once again, this is play money, right?


In one interview Phil H. bragged about not having to go all-in until the final tables.

I'm not a tourney player, so I don't know if his point was he didn't want to go all-in or just that he is so good that he has everyone covered most of the way. In any case, though, I'm pretty sure he wasn't talking about play money tourney strategy.

Opponents are so freaked out about going all-in preflop that they fold great hands.

Does anyone really get all that "freaked out" about anything in play money tourneys?


Thanks for an entertaining read.

[Munga30]

I think it's ironic that of all your chosen goals for this phase, the one that is the least indicative of your potential for acheiving the overall goal (semi-professional poker player earning $1000 per month, if memory serves) will likely keep you from moving to the next phase. Why scrap this project and move on to something else over this poor initial choice? Haven't you changed some of your goals in the past (from Sklansky to Jones, from TTH to Masque/AceSpades)? Why not change this one?

There is probably too much variance involved for it to be indicative of anything.

[pudley4]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
On the issue of river bets, Pud repeats that the situation that Jones is discussing is specifically not dealing with bluffs. Whether the bet is a bluff or not is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is that the opponent may fold better hands. If your bet is a bluff, you need to include it in the EV calculation. If your bet is not a bluff (as it is in the section that Pud and I are discussing), you need to include it in the EV calculation. Since Jones does not he is making a mistake

[/ QUOTE ]

We're going around in circles. In the section we're talking about, Jones is NOT talking about the river as a whole.

If you make a bet that you know will be called, you don't have to include the "bluff" EV - it is $0.

When you're playing LL and you bet a good hand, your average opponent will not fold a better hand. LL players are by and large "calling stations". They'll call with the nuts, they'll call will good hands, they'll call with poor hands. They'll call on the river - period.

Jones is trying to make the point that betting is not always the right play.

Look at the example he gives:

You hold: A &lt;img src="/forums/images/icons/heart.gif" alt="" /&gt; 4 &lt;img src="/forums/images/icons/heart.gif" alt="" /&gt;
The board: A &lt;img src="/forums/images/icons/club.gif" alt="" /&gt; T &lt;img src="/forums/images/icons/diamond.gif" alt="" /&gt; J &lt;img src="/forums/images/icons/diamond.gif" alt="" /&gt; 6 &lt;img src="/forums/images/icons/club.gif" alt="" /&gt; 3 &lt;img src="/forums/images/icons/spade.gif" alt="" /&gt;

You've been betting the whole way and one opponent is still in the hand. If you bet, what better hand could your opponent have that he will fold? N-O-N-E.

He's not folding an ace. He's definitely not folding 2 pair or a set or a straight (he might even raise). He will fold a flush draw or straight draw that missed. He'll probably call with J's, T's, or a middle pocket pair. He might call with bottom pair.

So you have 4 scenarios:

1 - He folds a worse hand (you get nothing)
2 - He calls with a worse hand (you win 1 BB)
3 - He calls with a better hand (you lose 1 BB)
4 - He raises with a better hand (you lose 2 BB)

Notice that "folding with a better hand" is not an option.

To figure out the EV of betting, figure out the probabilities and EV's of each of the 3 scenarios where he puts money into the pot, then add them together.

There is no EV calculation for him folding a better hand because it will not happen. This is the point Jones is trying to make in this section.

[pudley4]

You'd have much better results if you posted your all-in question in the tournament forum.

I also agree with the poster above who stated this goal (85% tourney rating) is not relevant at all to becoming a winning ring-game limit-holdem player. The concepts in no-limit tourney play are vastly different than in limit ring play.

In no-limit tournies, there are times where you'll fold AA preflop - in a limit ring game I'd probably only fold them if they were suited [img]/forums/images/icons/smile.gif[/img] As you've pointed out in previous posts, you pass up marginally +EV situations all the time in no-limit tournies. In limit ring games you should usually play as many +EV situations as possible (assuming you have a sufficient bankroll).

[Easy E]

"To illustrate the problem of going all-in, let’s say that I’m in a tournament of 100 people and 9 have been knocked out. I have AA in LP and before me one player goes all-in. Should I go all-in? The answer is probably not. Against a lower pair I’m a 4-1 favorite but finished #90 out of 100 20% of the time would kill my rating (unless I finished in the top 10% the rest of the time). So even in this very favorable situation I think that going all-in is incorrect."

If ALL you are concerned about is your rating in a tournament, then play however the heck you want. If you want to learn how to WIN tournaments (or at least get paid), then NOT going all-in with AA here is a crime. Trying to maximize your free tourney ranking is counter-productive towards your real goal (making $1K a month), ESPECIALLY if it's teaching you lessons such as worrying about going all in with Aces.

"Here’s another slightly more complicated example. Let’s say that there are 100 people in the tournament and 50 have been knocked out. I’m in LP with KK. An MP limps in. Should I go all-in?"

Ready? (wait for it.....)


aaaDUHHHHHHHH!!!!

C'mon, if you are NOT willing to risk all of your chips preflop with AA or KK, then you should NOT be playing no-limit (tournament or otherwise).

The ONLY exceptions that I can see to going all-in are:
a) You KNOW for SURE that you can outplay the people already in, later on (if they are all-in) or now, post-flop and beyond... by a BIG margin
b) The rest of the table won't come in without obvious hands
c) Others that would come in cheaply won't be tricky to figure out post-flop.
d) More than one person, whose play I respect, has gone all-in.
e) I can outplay most, if not all, of the people behind me post-flop, if I limp the limper with the two big guns... meaning primarily that I can trap them for mucho dinero post-flop.

Unless most or preferably ALL of the above are true, in which case you can more safely profit (and hopefully increase your profit potential post-flop) with less initial risk.... shove in the chips with a probable large advantage and try to get a leg up on winning the tournament!

If you have to tie yourself in knots, thinking about whether to go all-in with AA and KK pre-flop at ANY stage of the tournament except:
i) near the bubble or
ii) advancing a significant money place
.... then IMO you are in BIG trouble having to think about difficult tourney situations that will occur later on AND which will matter more, long-term, to your tournament success.

IN SUMMARY- If I have AA or KK, all my chips are going in WITH ALMOST NO EXCEPTIONS! If I get knocked out, so be it- the gods weren't with me today. I'll worry about maximizing my return later- i'm doubling through RIGHT NOW.

(I was actually surprised that no one else said to go all-in....)

[Easy E]

"In no-limit tournies, there are times where you'll fold AA preflop .... As you've pointed out in previous posts, you pass up marginally +EV situations all the time in no-limit tournies"

Pudley,
If you have suggestions, other than what I listed in my other posted reply, I'd be interested....

and how marginal can AA and KK be? (yes, a rare exception, but not enough to worry about IMO)