i think this is a surprisingly complex foxwoods hand,,,

[-Oz-]

[ QUOTE ]
it's the same for big tourney pros who are investing hundreds of thousands a year into tourney entry fees. they are after the big score, not to sneak their way into a tiny return on their money.

[/ QUOTE ]

If $10K is "life changing" money for a supersatellite player, he probably should have sold his seat.

I can't speak for anyone else, but many of the "pros" I correspond with evaluate opportunities in terms of expected return. The best players return 1-2 buyins per tourney over the long run. Gaining 1.1 buyins with practically no risk is a pretty good argument for folding under the stated conditions.

This isn't to say that lots of "pros" wouldn't be playing hyper aggressively even with a stack that can be picked off rather easily. And conversely, the vast majority of players that super-sated in would play hyper conservatively here (anyone up for a "should I throw away AA preflop" discussion [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] ). But just because an opinion aligns with how a low bankroll player would approach the situation, it doesn't mean it's wrong. And just because the conclusions may align doesn't mean the rational was correct in both cases either.

-Oz-

[Enrique]

[ QUOTE ]
I can't speak for anyone else, but many of the "pros" I correspond with evaluate opportunities in terms of expected return. The best players return 1-2 buyins per tourney over the long run. Gaining 1.1 buyins with practically no risk is a pretty good argument for folding under the stated conditions.

[/ QUOTE ]

When you mention return 1-2 buyins, it means they get 1 or 2 buyins besides getting their money back. This case is getting 0.1 buyins not 1.1 .

Although I do think it is a fold, that argument does not work as you stated it.

[-Oz-]

[ QUOTE ]
When you mention return 1-2 buyins, it means they get 1 or 2 buyins besides getting their money back. This case is getting 0.1 buyins not 1.1 .

[/ QUOTE ]

I understood this fact when I wrote the post. Yes, the quoted 1-2 buyin return is profit, but that doesn't change my statement. I didn't offer this as an argument for folding, but as a data point to put things in perspective.

The hero still gains 1.1 buyins from folding the next few hands with virtually no risk. The -1 buyin for entering this tourney is a sunk cost and shouldn't be considered when finding the current best play.

-Oz-

[PFrese]

Here is a different line -- What about just calling preflop? I am not saying I love it, but if the table is tight, your call may induce a few other callers and everyone sees the flop cheap. If no overs, you can safely jam it. If overs, you can fold it. If a Jack hits the board, they you got yourself a doubleup.

Like I said, I don't love calling here. My first reaction was to push, but after reading all of the posts that say folding is the right play, I headed for the middle ground.

Is calling terrible?

[Toro]

Outcome?

[durron597]

[ QUOTE ]
Outcome?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure about the hand in question, except to say:

[ QUOTE ]
Date / Time: 2005-11-15 15:37:00
Title: Chip Jett Eliminated on the Money Bubble
Log: Chip all in for the ante ($300), two other players limp, and Alex Jacob raises to $8,500 to isolate him, and everyone else folds. Jett shows pocket jacks, and Jacob shows Q-5. Was Jacob offering Jett protection? Not necessarily -- his large raise bought him the side pot immediately (worth $7,000), and he still had a chance at the $3,000 main pot.


When the flop came Q-7-5 (giving Jacob two pair), perhaps he just knew what was coming? Jett needed to catch a jack to stay alive, but the last two cards were 3-4. Chip Jett is eliminated on the money bubble.


[/ QUOTE ]

[DarthIgnurnt]

[ QUOTE ]
Date / Time: 2005-11-15 15:37:00
Title: Chip Jett Eliminated on the Money Bubble
Jett shows pocket jacks, and Jacob shows Q-5.
When the flop came Q-7-5 ... Chip Jett is eliminated on the money bubble.


[/ QUOTE ]

There's your answer ... see Jacks no good. Easy fold.

I mean ... Using the information you have here, I think the EV of a push is negative, and not just slightly. While you will expect to gain chips, you are at such a chip disadvantage (avg chips = 67K, you = 10K or 12K or 22K or 0 based your decision), and the payout structure is such that the EV of your payout changes little (if at all) even if you double up.

And even if the decision to push was +EV (which it isn't), it's still not an easy decision for everyone.

I don't know who the player in question was. For me, 11K isn't life-changing, or even life-sweetening money, but it's not chicken sh*t either. Add in the confidence of cashing in a WPT event, and I fold even if it is slightly +EV.

Which it isn't.

Sklansky addresses this in one of his books (can't remember where).

If I offer you $1.02 for every time you correctly call a coin flip vs. $1.00 for me every time you incorrectly call it, and let you flip the coin as many times as you want forever, the slight amount in +EV makes this an easy decision.

How about if I offer you $102,000 vs. $100,000 for the same coin flip, but you can only flip it once.

A lot of people are in a position to take that bet instantly, including (apparently) a lot of posters here. Most people, including (apparently) me, aren't.