pot odds or tourney standing??

[valenzuela]

open push, I know that this has been probably been suggested like 10 times so far( i havent read any post except from yours)but really please push preflop or "!apuesta todo antes del flop!"

[ThrillFactor]

[ QUOTE ]
open push, I know that this has been probably been suggested like 10 times so far( i havent read any post except from yours)but really please push preflop or "!apuesta todo antes del flop!"

[/ QUOTE ]


Very good point. I didn't look at the seating 1st time thru, but obviously with the 3 shorties behind you an open push is in order.

Good catch.

[adanthar]

You shouldn't even worry about the second guy in because you know you're a big favorite vs. his range. If you would call the second all in on its own, the overcall simply sweetens the deal.

So the question is "would you call TT vs. the original push getting 2:1, plus an extra bonus?" Of course you call.

[Gramps]

Ugh, I wanted to puke at the indecision here (I get queasy more easily in my old age). TT may not seem too great here at first glance, that's why it pays to think it through/utilize software available to have a better understanding of these types of situations for when they come up in the future and you don't have much time to think and act.

[ QUOTE ]
Solid player with 1150 thinks a bit and goes all in. Complete idiot, who earlier called 2 large stack all ins w/Q9o thinks and goes all in for 1225

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Calling and winning all but guarantees me ITM, but odds are I'm not winning this one, probably up against 3-4 overs if not an overpair. I'm not denying the odds are sweet, but is it worth losing solid standing?

[/ QUOTE ]

Go to www.pokerstove.com and download the software (for free). Put in likely hand ranges for you two opponents (how wide the solid player's range is depends on how wide a ragne he thinks you steal raise with here, how often you call over the tops (it apppears you fold to much from your discussion here), and how aggressive he is at coming over the top - it sounds like the idiot has a wider range than he should). I don't think you realize how strong TT is in a 3-way pot here - you're probably 33% at worst given that the 2nd caller is a moron. Also, a lot of "solid" players will come over the top of a frequent/suspected big stack steal raiser with a wider range, so don't eliminate some underpairs from SP (and definitely don't eliminate them from Mr. Moron). Just because you call with TT and run into an overpair sometimes doesn't mean calling is incorrect - the question is what hand range would these players make their push/call with in this spot, how does TT match up, and what does the risk/reward analysis look like here?

You're calling 825 to win ~ 3000, that's like 7:2. You're probably 1 in 3 at worst to win the 3-way pot (and only need to be > 2 in 9 for it to be +CEV). The pot odds scream "call," that's always a good default to go on for siutations like this if you're unsure of the "meta-factors" present. Also, you have the collateral benefit that you don't get a rep as someone who will fold to a push too easily.

If you call and lose, 1200 really isn't that much worse off than 2,000. You still have 8 BB, a few hands before you're in the blinds, and looking at the relative stack sizes, you're just back in a pack that you would have had a little lead over with 2k. Something lost, but nothing too awful.

On the flip side, calling and winning gives you an absolutely dominating position at the table with 4800 and the ability to steal every other hand or so (or more frequently once you get to the bubble). The chips you win give you a "multilier" advantage (or whatever the f--- you want to call it), that gives you an additional edge to steal, increasing on average the CEV (and likely $EV) of future hands.

Etc., etc., yada-yada, don't think yourself out of making calls in spots like this. If you're unsure, calling and losing still leaves you with FE, and the pot odds look about right, your default should be to call (there's times you fold, but folding is very bad here).