Risk Aversion and the Consequences to your game...Extreme Example....

#1 10-31-2005, 11:34 PM

At dinner tonight I was thinking about a scenario.

Lets say you're playing in a loose super aggressive game with ample PF raises and re-raises. The game is NL Hold'em, and the blinds are $10 and $20. You have been playing well and have a nice stack of $4000. You're dealt AA UTG, and you limp expecting to re-raise someone down the line. Only your plan is foiled when it folds around to the SB who mucks, and the BB checks his option. The flop comes 2 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]2 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]3 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]. Now remember, you hold two black aces and there is $25.00 in the pot. The BB leads at the pot for $4000, your entire stack. Do you call here?

Now, lets assume your bankroll was ten million dollars.
Do you make the same call/fold?

I dont know that this is a true test of one's risk aversion, but it was for me, because at present, I would fold my AA to this ginormous overbet, but if I had a tremendous BR, I would make the call. I see advantages/disadvantages to both.

Tex

Kaeser · #2 11-01-2005, 12:35 AM

Actually there would be 50 in the pot. Regardless I probably fold in both cases. Seems like a classic WA/WB situation and I don't see going broke for a nothing pot.

#3 11-01-2005, 01:18 AM

impossible to say. you'd have to know the player.... i'd probably throw it in, although obviously you have very few outs.... but i tend to agree with stuff i've seen written recently. you can't wait around for 70-30 and 80-20 spots in these tournaments...

don't remember the cards but he could have low pair with flush draw OR a flush/straight draw.

i am very curious about risk aversion... seems like negreanu, ivey and hanson took advantage for a few years from how risk averse other players are.

#4 11-01-2005, 02:01 AM

He never said this was a tournament... I think a cash game I would definitely fold either scenario. If it was a Tourny though - then you would definitely have more reason to consider calling IMO.

bobman0330 · #5 11-01-2005, 02:05 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Actually there would be 50 in the pot. Regardless I probably fold in both cases. Seems like a classic WA/WB situation and I don't see going broke for a nothing pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just egregious. It's a suited connected board. You could be way ahead, way behind, or he could have any of a number of draws.

Even if it were true, it makes absolutely no difference how likely a draw-out is. The only consideration is how likely you are to be winning by the river.

Please stop abusing this tired concept.

the machine · #6 11-01-2005, 02:06 AM

Fold, no matter how loose the game is. You risk your whole stack, getting 1.0125 from the pot (pot is 50 not 40, the SB folded his 10$ blind), and you most likely are in bad shape with the given bet I'd think.... You can argue that since it is so loose he is bound to have anything but the pot odds are not giving enough to make a call like this. There are 1081 possible hands in which there are 99 that have you beat at this point. Does this person make this bet with nothing and with something? Also you have no implied odds since you are all in. If you and your opponent have more on the table it may be worth a call since you have more money that can be made from the opponent. (For your second part of the question do you mean if 10 million is on the table or just 10 million and only 4000 on the table) Even with those conditions I personally think its an easy fold because of the size of the pot.

Do you consider this hypothetical loose agressive player to not slow play as well or is he a person who slow plays flopped trips? I think more about the given player would have to be stated to make an absolute decision about this question

Kaeser · #7 11-01-2005, 06:24 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Actually there would be 50 in the pot. Regardless I probably fold in both cases. Seems like a classic WA/WB situation and I don't see going broke for a nothing pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just egregious. It's a suited connected board. You could be way ahead, way behind, or he could have any of a number of draws.

Even if it were true, it makes absolutely no difference how likely a draw-out is. The only consideration is how likely you are to be winning by the river.

Please stop abusing this tired concept.

[/ QUOTE ]

I highly doubt are opponent has "any number of draws" most opponents aren't going to just shove 4K into a 50 dollar pot with 4-5 or A-x [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]. The only draw he might play like that is 4 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img],5 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] in which case he's the favorite.

Either way it's an unraised pot and we have no idea where we're at, let it go.

#8 11-01-2005, 12:48 PM

Well, the question wasn't designed to make you wonder if you were ahead or not. But consider this, you wanted to trap an opponent by limping UTG w/ AA. If you had raised it to 60, and he had called, how would it now affect your decision?

#9 11-01-2005, 01:14 PM

I would have to have a hell of a read to make this call. I don't think this is a great example of risk-aversion, as there is not very much at stake (a mere $50) relative to your stack and/or your entire bankroll.

What are you doing here if opponent leads $1500 into the pot? $1000? $600?

vexvelour · #10 11-01-2005, 02:14 PM

As much as I'd want to call this, in a tournament it's just not worth it to go out in a $50 pot so early on. Perhaps if villian had been in any other position than the blinds I would. Interesting post.