Road Trip: Final Report—Foxwoods

[Mark Heide]

Easy E,

As always I did look at my cards before I put in my chips. I gave you a Sklanskyish reason why I did. Which means that it takes a much better hand to call in these situations.

Good Luck

Mark

[Greg (FossilMan)]

Mark played the hand perfectly. And his read of the players must have been correct if the guy in the small blind had to think a long time before calling with 99. The only issue if "I" had been the small blind with 99 would have been do I need to reraise to get rid of the big blind. Folding there would never even have crossed my mind.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[Easy E]

The main point of my post was based on the fallacy of Mark pushing blind, but evidently it didn't matter if he did or not (as long as he wasn't seen pushing blind)

However, you're telling me it makes sense to risk busting out over a dozen places from the money with ANY cards here? 72o, 35o, T3, etc.

I would assume that you might NOT make the move if you had face-trash, on the risk of being dominated if called? Then again, that doesn't seem to be a consideration in the decision... interesting.

[ohkanada]

I agree there is no reason not to look at your cards. Your opponent might see the non-look. I did the same thing a few years back. I decided if it is folded to me I am going all-in. I look and see 32o. I go all-in, and the BB thought a long time before folding. I went on to get 4th [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Ken

[Greg (FossilMan)]

I have been in spots where I estimated the chances of successfully stealing the blinds/antes was as high as 90%. With a fold coming that often, it becomes correct to do it with any two cards. If they're going to fold that often, the ONLY reason you wouldn't make the move is if an alternate play has even higher +EV.

Later, Greg

[Mark Heide]

Easy E,

I want to make a few points clear. I always look at my cards before making a play whether I'm stealing or have a legit hand, because I do not want to give my opponent a reason to call me. If you want to be a showoff and not look at your hand you are asking to be called.

Secondly, consider I only had $2200 which was a reasonable size raise for a blind of $600. There is already $1900 in the pot and that is what it is costing each player per round. I had been sitting at that table for a round and a half and had not made a move because I didn't get the opportunity, if I had won that hand I could have gone all in again, and maybe with a real hand, and I would be back in business. When I moved all-in, I was sure that they thought I had a legitimate all-in hand, and had estimated the probability of being called as 16%. Well, one of them did call because they were lucky enough to hit that 16% chance of having a hand. The small blind almost didn't play that hand. He thought about it for 30 seconds, before he called. So, right there I knew he had a legitimate hand but not a great hand.

When the blinds and antes are costing you $1900 a round, you have to play situations where you are the favorite. As a matter of fact the odds I was getting on that hand would have almost been just as good as if I had AA under the gun and got called by KK.

In tournaments, you need to estimate what percentage of hands your opponents will call with. I'm not passing up a situation where I have a 66-84% chance to win. Those situations are too good to pass up, and yes, I would have played any hand at this point, because I was such a favorite not to be called. Don't forget you can lose with AA too and be an 84% favorite. I hear that story the most.

Good Luck

Mark

[Mark Heide]

Greg,

I met Myrtle at Foxwoods on Saturday night, but where is John Cole?

Good Luck

Mark

[Easy E]

Mark, I did understand that I was mistaken in you pushing blind.

Here's the question that I still want to ask (that may have been answered and I missed it): Given the situation that you have two players immediately to your left that will fold most hands if you push, you would push with anything since you expect around a 75% chance or so of both folding.

Now, does adding a third person (the new BB, if you move to the cutoff on the next hand) cut down your chance of stealing so much that it's better to push on the button with 72 or 86 (granted, the hands have a fair spread between them in value) than it would be to wait one hand, give up $100 ante and hope for a better hand? I'm assumimg that there is no magic in the fact that the two survivalists are in the blinds currently, when you push on the button.

In Fossilman's words, is waiting a greater EV play than pushing now, or isn't it? You're more likely to get a hand in the cutoff that's higher than your current hand (I believe 86 and lower falls below the median point, am I wrong?) and Mark didn't say anything about the possibility of making a move then.

Sorry to belabour this, but this instinctively didn't seem like a +EV move, given the dozen or so players left to overcome even if you are successful (vs. busting out on the button and having no EV). But I'm not a tournament pro, so I may be playing way too tightly here.

Thanks for the insights.

[SpeakEasy]

[ QUOTE ]
I have been in spots where I estimated the chances of successfully stealing the blinds/antes was as high as 90%. With a fold coming that often, it becomes correct to do it with any two cards. If they're going to fold that often, the ONLY reason you wouldn't make the move is if an alternate play has even higher +EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Greg, are these high-probability steal opportunities primarily a function of (1) position (i.e. on the button vs other positions) or (2) the tendencies of the players in the SB and BB? Is your calculation generally 50% position and 50% player tendencies, or do you give one factor greater weight? How does this calculation change as your position changes? (I am asking about this calculation on the assumption that actual hand strength is irrelevant -- a "pure steal" play.)

Without regard to what the SB held here, I can't get away from the thought that this play has a higher probability of working when you are one or two off the button, because the button is the "obvious" steal position when it is folded to the button and the blinds will give you slightly more credit for a strong hand when you are not in the obvious steal position. I realize your evaluation of the small and big blinds' tendencies are a large component of your estimated chance of stealing (maybe this is half of the calculationfor the probability of stealing). But, setting that factor aside, this would seem to work better one or two before the button, rather than on the button.

I'm not trying second-guess Mark's play here -- I agree it was a good play. I just want additional thoughts on the "high-probability steal" calculation.

[Keats13]

[ QUOTE ]
In Fossilman's words, is waiting a greater EV play than pushing now, or isn't it? You're more likely to get a hand in the cutoff that's higher than your current hand (I believe 86 and lower falls below the median point, am I wrong?) and Mark didn't say anything about the possibility of making a move then.


[/ QUOTE ]

E, your analysis here seems to assume that it will be folded around to you again on the next hand, when you are in the CO. Having slightly better cards on the next hand won't do you much good if there's a raise in front of you.

There's a good chance that he won't see another +EV opportunity before it's too late, let alone a 75% chance to nearly double up uncontested.

If this is 1 or 2 outside the money line, it might be worth hanging tight, but a move is probably going to be needed at some point in order to cash.

Disclaimer: I am by no means a tournament expert, and if I am looking at this wrong, I would greatly appreciate a smackdown from those who are.