Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > General Poker Discussion > Poker Theory

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-29-2005, 02:54 PM
rmgustaf rmgustaf is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 3
Default Question on Behavior in Tournament Play

Not sure where to post this question, but it's about general behavior during online tournament play.

It's a small-stakes NLH SNG. There are four players left. One player built a sizeable stack, but left the game for some reason and has been blinding out. Player X asks if we could just blind the player off to guarantee money finishes (he also happened to be to the right of the player blinding out, and would get all the blinds...).

I kept playing my normal way and ignored the missing player completely. Was this a breach of internet gentlemanliness or something?

The other question stems from the same game. The short stack went all-in after I raised. I called, as well as Player X (the same one from earlier). After the flop, I raise, trying to push X out of the hand. He asks something along the lines of, "Isn't it common courtesy to check it down?"

Is it?

Thanks very much! I'm just wondering if I'm unintentionally acting like a complete jerk, or if I'm in the clear (as I believe I am), considering I haven't heard of either of those things before.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-29-2005, 03:07 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Question on Behavior in Tournament Play

I wouldn't let that other stack blind off to the other guy, no way. Money is money and you want all of it.

In most cases, yes it does get checked down UNLESS one of the remaining players improves their hand. So if you ended up making that 4th A on the river, then you can feel good about betting it.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-29-2005, 03:34 PM
Forbillz Forbillz is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1
Default Re: Question on Behavior in Tournament Play

For the second question, it's called "implied collusion". It is somewhat common courtesy to check it down when both players have a third guy all-in, you should check it through...the thought being, when you knock him out, you both move up in real money, which is more valuable than the chips at hand. Exception: If you have a hand that is not really at risk of losing to the all in guy, some sort of monster, you can then ignore this, and go for the jugular of the other guy.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-29-2005, 04:44 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Question on Behavior in Tournament Play

Checking it down is pretty common. You certainly can't ask for it to happen though, that's active collusion.

If you've got a killer hand, bet it. You see this on TV at times as well when someone makes a big hand. Not sure why they bother though, no one ever calls the bet because they know the other person has a huge hand [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img].
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-29-2005, 06:11 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Question on Behavior in Tournament Play

The reason for not betting when you have small guy all in is, that unless you have a good hand and you are betting for value, then it is of more value to you, if you lose the hand, but the small stack is eliminated, than if you push X of a hand, that would have improved and beaten the small guy .. but instead you pushed with nothing and the small stack triples up
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-29-2005, 06:53 PM
napawino napawino is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2
Default Re: Question on Behavior in Tournament Play

Regarding the 2nd question...

I think this is often over-used in situations where it really doesn't apply, but yes - it is a common occurance. If you're near the bubble or an increase in payout, the value of knocking out another player is tremendous. But, if you're still at 427 players, the value is much less. A hand that CAN'T win would be stupid to bet, but I think just playing for maximum tourney chip EV is the best play.

Example:
Small stack goes all-in. You call 1/10 your stack on the button with 88 and the BB comes along for the ride.
Flop: 237 rainbow, 54T, etc.
With these flops, I would always bet this if checked to. I may not be ahead, but I don't want to give free cards to the player who might still take the pot from me. (Obviously if you're going to lose to the all-in player there is nothing you can do.)

MHO FWIW
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-29-2005, 07:45 PM
rmgustaf rmgustaf is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 3
Default Re: Question on Behavior in Tournament Play

Thanks for the help!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-29-2005, 08:00 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Question on Behavior in Tournament Play

Don't know about #1...seems like other player would benefit too much. If the big stack was really gone or disconnected, just share his blinds.

The most extreme case of #2 I can think of happened to me a couple weeks ago. Six players left, top five got a seat in another tournament. One guy went all in for about 2.5x the blind. Everyone else called, everyone checked it down. No reason to bet since placing fifth is as good as first. Gang up on the short stack and bust him out. This happens most of the time I play SNG's, esp. with a bubble boy who goes all in for just a little bit.

ScottieK
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-29-2005, 08:29 PM
pzhon pzhon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 66
Default Re: Question on Behavior in Tournament Play

[ QUOTE ]
unless you have a good hand and you are betting for value, then it is of more value to you, if you lose the hand, but the small stack is eliminated, than if you push X of a hand,

[/ QUOTE ]
This is wrong. In the vast majority of situations, the value to you of eliminating the all-in player is negligible. The benefit is split among all of the players remaining in the tournament, and your share is rarely worth a sacrifice of equity.

It is silly to make a complete bluff into a dry sidepot. If you are sure you have no equity in the main pot, bluffing risks chips with no benefit. However, it is perfectly reasonable to make a protection bet into the sidepot without feeling you are a favorite over the player who is all-in, or a favorite when you are called.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-29-2005, 10:01 PM
AlanBostick AlanBostick is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: California
Posts: 127
Default Re: Question on Behavior in Tournament Play

[ QUOTE ]
For the second question, it's called "implied collusion". It is somewhat common courtesy to check it down when both players have a third guy all-in, you should check it through...the thought being, when you knock him out, you both move up in real money, which is more valuable than the chips at hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Implied [or implicit] collusion" is something else altogether: it's the term coined by Roy Hashimoto and popularized by Lee Jones for the manner in which the presence of several players with a similar playing style makes that style more correct. E.g., against loose players who play lots of pots and chase draws, they give each other the pot odds to chase those draws.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.