I'm Coining a New Poker Term

It's late, and I've been playing too long, but hear me out on this one.

I was put in the following position the other night, in an MTT. We're close to the money when a very short stack shoved all-in. It folded around to the BB, and it was a no-brainer call. He had tons of chips, and was getting odds to call with any two cards... but folded instead. With antes, the short stack more than doubled up without going to a flop and was back in the game. Several hands later, thanks to the large blinds and antes, I'm forced to go all-in with QQ. The still-alive short stack calls me with A3o, and hits an ace to eliminate me. If that BB had just done his job, I might still be alive in this particular tournament. It's not worth crying over, and I'm sure most of us have been in that situation.

Now, harken back to the origin of comic-book legend Spider-Man. When he first gains his powers and tries to make it in show business, he fails to stop a petty thief when he could have done so easily. This thief then goes on to murder his uncle Ben, teaching him a very valuable lesson. If Spidey had just done his job, Uncle Ben might still be alive.

See where I'm going with this?

So, getting eliminated by a player who is only still in a game due to someone taking their responsibility lightly is now known as being Uncle Benned.

Remember: "With great power comes great responsibility." Call those short stacks, and don't Uncle Ben the other players at your table.

dude, I bet you got some spidey underoos dontcha?

I like it. Bet you can't guess why

because u iz be spidaman?

Nope, no Spidey underoos or bedsheets. I haven't even watched the movie lately, so I have no idea why I put these two things together.

Oh, this term also counts if you get eliminated by someone who is only still in because some <expletive deleted> bluffed into an empty side pot, knocking the winning hand out.

LMFAO ...i could see that spreading..... thats great... i dont know how many times ive screamed at the screen "do your effin job!!"

thats classic...

im in...

How about this, BB calls the guy with any two cards (might be 84os or worse, who knows) shortstack has a good hand and it holds up. You would have still faced him and he'd have even more chips now since the BB called him. Odds are pretty strong that this is how things would have worked out but no one will ever know for sure.

LOL classic - I'm going to try and spread that. I'll give you yer credit

I thought getting Uncle Benned involved having rice thrown at you after a wedding or when your creepy Uncle ....... ahhh.....nevermind.

lmfao ahhh thats classic.... too funny...


well worded ...well worded...

I love it when the small stack comes back to knock out the big stack (who should have called earlier) on the bubble. Karma for math ignorance.

It seems to happen quite a lot. Many times when you decide to pass on a hand that you would get odds to call, but fold you see the perfect cards.

Also I have noticed that in SNGs many ppl get uncle benned because they didn't call at the right times (when villain should be pushing any two) or played total rubbish in hopes to drop the short stack players (just cause you have a big stack doesn't mean you should be playing 46os against someone who will go all-in with almost any two).

lol @ ^^^^^

Not so sure it will fly, but when/if I run into the situation I'll use your term.

I'm not a big fan of the 'automatic' call by the big stack in those situations. If we ignore cards for a moment, and deal purely with the suckout % and consider it to be a 50/50 thing. This makes it a neutral EV for the caller and the shover alike.

If the call is automatic, (ATC) half the time shorty will double up, half the time he dies. If however he gets not action he has to repeat that process, and everyone at that table knows he is short stack shoving with his brand of ATC. If the call is based on ATC, then any notion of +EV is flawed. The only positive outcome is eliminating a competitor, and those odds are 50/50. For the caller (big stack), the down side when things go wrong can be (it depends) worse than upside gain.

The more times he has to do this, the less his percentage of success becomes.

Lets say he has to do this 3 times to get healthy.

.50x.50x.50 =12.5% of the time he will succeed in shove fest.

Now lets assume the call is not automatic, and that the big stack or any larger stack will call with much better cards (Ax, suited connectors, even small pairs), which will tilt the coinflips away from even for shorty, and lets say for sake of easiness 60/40 against shorty. Don't get hung up on that 60/40 figure, it is for example purposes only, it may only be 51-49. The point being that if the caller has better cards his pf odds will be better for any EV.

Lets also add in here that the first of these went uncontested, so shorty is even a bit bigger. It still works out

.40x.40x.40 = 6.4 % success rate.

So which is the better math?

I understand that along the lines during a tourney it falls on each participant to do their 'duty' and eliminate their fair share of opponents, but in a tourney situation this must be balanced (IMO) by a healthy survival instinct.

True. But, even if Spidey had stopped the thief, Uncle Ben might have still been run over by a bus on the way back from buying bread. It's about what might have been.

Where are you getting these numbers? You are just making them up as far as I can tell.

It doesn't matter what he has or what you have: if you stack ratios are 10:1 or greater you call w (almost) ATC, and you certainly should be pushing w any two if you are first in HU vs his bb.

1. Often times in these situations you are essentially giving the short stack a FREE double (nearly) up, since the blinds and antes are a HUGE % of his stack, but a small one of yours. Why wouldn't you put him at [least some] risk instead of folding? The risk the short stack has to fade is greater (worse for him) than the added chip equity he gains from the call.

2. You are possibly neglecting to take into account that you get to see all FIVE cards (and therefore no holdem preflop hand is crushing another that much).

3. You are not accounting for the fact that you gain real $EV (for risking chip EV) when someone is eliminated. Obviously this is more of a factor the closer you are to the end of the tournament.

I'm not sure I have the guts to ever use the phrase "I got Uncle Benned last night while playing poker".

But now I'm going to have this in my head and whenever this situation comes up I'm going to just start laughing out of the blue because my spidey sense will be ringing.

that does sound a little dirty

FYP

lmao this thread really cracked me up, ok lets say what if the big stack doubled up that short stack what happens then?

Mary Jane Watson is hot.

The other day I had Q 2 off in the BB. An out of position raise to 2xBB - 4 players plus me, I figure 9:1 - go for it. flop comes 2 2 2 - Cracked raisers pkt AA and got ragged by him and another guy who had pkt JJ and his buddy. Preflop they were way ahead but after the turn they were drawing dead, based on the pot odds I was getting was I right to call preflop ?

I don't know about the math, but since the big stack is almost always getting odds with almost any two he should call assuming shot stack will have a wide range. I think even worse is some players folding when they are clearly pot comitted. I see this in SNGs where players will fold to their last 800 chips at the 100/200 level wehn the pot is over 3k!?!

Yah, I once eliminated two players with something like 68o by not Uncle Benning (lol) from the BB. I like this new term, though it makes me hungry for rice.

the big stack has NO responsiblity for knocking out players so you can make the money or to just move up in money.

Sure, he's got no responsibility to help me in any way. Poker is every man for himself, after all. But, by eliminating a shortstack when close to (or in) the money, he's helping himself. He's increasing his own equity in the tournament, and he should be looking to do that any time the odds warrant. The responsibility is to himself, and his own performance.

And don't forget, it could be the big stack that ends up getting Uncle Benned. So, what goes around comes around.

so what's it to you whether he calls or not? he's looking out for himself for not calling in HIS opinion.

Spidey fans understand the concept, but I just can't see "Uncle Benned" joining the ranks of "rivered" and "sucked out".......... tough break with the QQ, but in my opinion, the BB big stack is not obligated to call the shortstack all inner with atc..... how many chips would you risk in that position holding, let's say, 7,2 off? I'm not calling any all in bet with weak holdings (you didn't specify the amount of the push) to try to eliminate someone, especially if I have a big stack..... I guess I'd rather be Uncle Benned after I was ITM.

"Uncle Benned" can certainly work on two levels.

On the other hand.

There is a big stack strategy in this situation that folds even with pot odds to preserve the very small stack at the bubble.

The theory being that the presence of the little guy has frozen the table/field and the big guy can keep stealing from the "Uncle Bens" who are waiting and he can make more money. Even though it would be +EV to eliminate someone, it's more +EV for the other small stacks. So you are helping others more than yourself. Oh, and 1 other thing, it pisses off uncle Ben

There is actually some good logic to it and I could see using it at some tables. I have seen it used effectivly.

I was also involved in 1 sattelite where it was horribly mis-applyed by a jerk who cost himself a seat. I had called a small all-in and he reraised all my chips forcing me to fold a med pair or something. He had 56 and tripled the guy up. The jerk ended up going from "megastack gauranteed a seat" to out 1 short after a couple more of those.

goldog

Tweak it up and call it being Benned. That way no more rice references.

good 1 sure would be 1 long explanation in a poker room though

I got Benned over at the game last night. That about says it

just ask Greg Raymer.