Is bubble play limited to 4 handed?

[splashpot]

Ahh, ok. This is the hand I was talking about. My memory was wrong. It has nothing to do with keeping the bubble alive. But I did get into an arguement about what is and what isn't bubble.

The OP in that thread makes an intersting point: even though there were five players left, if he won the pot he was in the money and if he lost he would have been out. That sounds like a bubble to me.

[FlyWf]

Of course I don't see the difference. Bubble play would appear to be "play while on the bubble".

Anyway, in a typical 9 or 10 man SNG, the payouts are as follows:
4th: $0
5th: $0

See the difference?

[tigerite]

Actually he would not, one of the blinds had him covered by about 200 chips.

[tigerite]

[ QUOTE ]
Of course I don't see the difference. Bubble play would appear to be "play while on the bubble".

Anyway, in a typical 9 or 10 man SNG, the payouts are as follows:
4th: $0
5th: $0

See the difference?

[/ QUOTE ]

They are for 6th-10th as well, so should a 10 handed play be 'bubble play' too? It just makes things confusing, because you're expecting to see a post whereby losing the hand means you're out of the money, and winning it means in the money. If you start having 5-handed and 6-handed included, it makes a mockery of the whole thing; you won't be able to tell from a topic title what the OP is on about! That is why I don't like it.

[TheNoodleMan]

I think you are missing the point.
The reason we all spend so much time on bubble play isn't because 4th place doesn't win any money. The reason we focus on bubble play is because other players tighten up and we can exploit them. Sometimes this shappens when there are more than 4 people left. If you don't take this into account because there are still 5 players, then you are making a mistake.
As for your sarcastic remark about making 10 handed bubble play, I contend that there is a theoretical situation in which it could happen. It is highly unlikely, but still possible.

[bluefeet]

[mediate]

I'm certain both sides are arguing semantics only. I doubt that those opposed to your definition are not accepting of the belief that the style of play put to use, in that-term-that-describes-the-one-from-the-money-situation would not also be found with 5, 6, possibly more remaining.

Short-handed/Big-blinds play? SHBB? EiPFM=Everyone in Push/fold Mode? Bubble? Meh...whatever

[/mediation]

[Mr_J]

Screw the technical definition, I'm fine about calling it bubble if it plays like the bubble. Bubble should be judged by the psychological influences nearing the money has on a players actions, and not if it's exactly 1 from the money.

[zaphod]

[ QUOTE ]
Screw the technical definition, I'm fine about calling it bubble if it plays like the bubble. Bubble should be judged by the psychological influences nearing the money has on a players actions, and not if it's exactly 1 from the money.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, two examples:

1) 4 players left:

A) 4000 chips
B) 2000 chips
C) 2000 chips
D) 2000 chips

blinds 15/30. Is this the bubble? No players are under big pressure to be blinded out.


2) 5 players left.

A) 5000 chips
B) 3000 chips
C) 1000 chips
D) 500 chips
E) 500 chips

Blinds: 150-300. Is this the bubble?

[BradleyT]

#1 yes it's a bubble, the blinds don't have to be high for a bubble situation to occur.

#2 no it's not a bubble. A person can be eliminated and the remaining players aren't ITM.