Poetic Justice

JimHammer · #1 11-10-2005, 11:35 AM

Playing at my usual Monday night bar tourney, we are down to the final three. BB - call him Bob - is short stacked and announces he's going to be all in blind (he's got 600, bb is 400). Dealer - call him Doofus - calls, and I call in the SB with J10. Flop comes out Q high and Doofus bets. I fold, Doofus and Bob show cards. Neither player has anything-dealer bluffed be out. Turn J, river 10. Bob wins with A high and triples up.

Now this is a pet peeve of mine and I politely tell Doofus what a bad play it is to bluff at a dry side pot. This is the ONLY thing I'll get on another player for. I don't care if you crack my aces with 72 os, but don't push other people out of a pot when someone has the opportunity to knock out an all-in player.

Next hand Bob's all-in again and Doofus doubles him up. The very next hand, Doofus doubles him up again.

To wrap this up, Doofus went from big stack with about 2/3 of all the chips in play, to even with Bob and myself in 3 hands. He ended up being knocked out by Bob about 5 hands after that.

Go figure.

J.Copperthite · #2 11-10-2005, 12:53 PM

After reading your story I was expecting halfway through to read you busting out in 3rd, but was glad to see "doofus" bust out in 3rd instead. It does make me mad when someone bluffs me out with another player all-in. The object is to eliminate! The only time he should bet is when he's got a monster hand that he's sure is a winner. Doofus exercised poor tournament strategy of course. Its too bad that poker etiquette doesn't allow you to agree to a checkdown when this happens, but you can understand the rule.

I hope you used your superior skills to win the thing as well [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

JimHammer · #3 11-10-2005, 01:24 PM

If the story ends with me going out in 3rd, then it's a just another bad beat story.

Yeah, I won it.

Twitch1977 · #4 11-10-2005, 01:48 PM

Maybe you should just let people play however the hell they want.

T

dachord · #5 11-10-2005, 03:08 PM

[ QUOTE ]
It does make me mad when someone bluffs me out with another player all-in. The object is to eliminate! The only time he should bet is when he's got a monster hand that he's sure is a winner. Doofus exercised poor tournament strategy of course.

[/ QUOTE ]
Poor tournament strategy? Sure. Poor play? Not necessarily. Think of it this way, the i.diot goes all-in blind (because only idiots go all-in blind, even if they're short stacked). You have a better chance of winning the pot if you bluff out any other potential players and go heads up with i.diot. While I totally agree that the object is to eliminate other players and two against one improves those chances of eliminating, Doofus had a chance to rake an easy pot.

FouTight · #6 11-10-2005, 03:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It does make me mad when someone bluffs me out with another player all-in. The object is to eliminate! The only time he should bet is when he's got a monster hand that he's sure is a winner. Doofus exercised poor tournament strategy of course.

[/ QUOTE ]
Poor tournament strategy? Sure. Poor play? Not necessarily. Think of it this way, the i.diot goes all-in blind (because only idiots go all-in blind, even if they're short stacked). You have a better chance of winning the pot if you bluff out any other potential players and go heads up with i.diot. While I totally agree that the object is to eliminate other players and two against one improves those chances of eliminating, Doofus had a chance to rake an easy pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

first, he's not an [censored] for going in blind, I don't see how he has any option but to go all in on this hand, even if he gets a great hand next time, he triples up 200 chips, with 600, at least a triple up isn't worthless. He wasn't short stacked, he was crippled.

also, the hand that the bluffer showed down was pretty easily beat by a lot, so a bluff doesn't take down an easy pot for him.

Thats how I'm reading it anyways. regardless, there will always be these people that make this move.

#7 11-10-2005, 03:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Playing at my usual Monday night bar tourney, we are down to the final three. BB - call him Bob - is short stacked and announces he's going to be all in blind (he's got 600, bb is 400). Dealer - call him Doofus - calls, and I call in the SB with J10. Flop comes out Q high and Doofus bets. I fold, Doofus and Bob show cards. Neither player has anything-dealer bluffed be out. Turn J, river 10. Bob wins with A high and triples up.

Now this is a pet peeve of mine and I politely tell Doofus what a bad play it is to bluff at a dry side pot. This is the ONLY thing I'll get on another player for. I don't care if you crack my aces with 72 os, but don't push other people out of a pot when someone has the opportunity to knock out an all-in player.

Next hand Bob's all-in again and Doofus doubles him up. The very next hand, Doofus doubles him up again.

To wrap this up, Doofus went from big stack with about 2/3 of all the chips in play, to even with Bob and myself in 3 hands. He ended up being knocked out by Bob about 5 hands after that.

Go figure.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually this isn't really a bad play on his part. He has two thirds of the chips in play. It is actually to his advantage for the small stack to remain in the game. Why? because the small stack gives him leverage to pick chips up from you. Everytime he makes a significant bet -- one that covers you or would signifcantly cover you, you are going to be hesitant to call with anything but a monster, because the small stack is behind you and you don't want to get knocked out in third when there is a short stack on the verge of elimination.

This stratgey can of course backfire, but it can be a very effective strategy to keep the small stack in when you have a dominating lead over both players relative to the blinds.

beekeeper · #8 11-10-2005, 04:11 PM

On a similar note, there is a guy in our regular game that's trying to introduce the concept of checking it down when 2 players are against a 3rd who's all-in. Some of the others kinda get it, but forget it; the others don't get it at all. The problem is that he only tries to educate others when he's one of the 2 up against the all-in. On the one hand, I'd like some of the players to pick up on this idea; on the other, part of what I like about our game is that, while it's fairly competitive, it's still low-key.

#9 11-10-2005, 04:30 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The problem is that he only tries to educate others when he's one of the 2 up against the all-in.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, if he wants to explain it them a before the tournament thats one thing, but it is inexcusbale to let him educate other players during play.

And of course checking it down isn't allways the smartest play. Some where along the way the idea that one should not bluff at a dry side pot (although I have alrady demonstrated one exception to this) has been misunderstood by many to mean you should not bet at a side pot. If you think your hand is good you very often should bet either for value or to eliminate the draw.

#10 11-11-2005, 05:23 PM

Your correct to suggest its a bad play as long as its done politely. Keep in mind he can play his cards as he wants. I would make the polite suugestion to point out that its not the best time to bluff as the all in player must have something and the bluff doesn't really serve any purpose.