Re-Raise w/ an AI on the table?

Example situation

blinds 25/50

sb: 1500
bb: 2300
3: 800
4: 2200
5: 115
6: 1800
7: 2000

3: folds
4: calls
5: raises all-in
6: calls all-in (115)
7: folds
sb: folds
bb: folds

4: re-raises to 250
5: still all-in
6: wonders why raise 1x with an AI on the board after you simply called before? Your hand probably isn't that strong, at least see the flop and see if 4 or 6 can take 5 out.


If you had a hand that was only worth a min. raise after you originally simply called, would you raise at all, or let 2 of you see the flop?

What kind of game was this in? Was it a SnG, cash game, freeroll?

It looks like a weak attempt at a squeeze play. Because position 6 only called position 4 reraises in the attempt to get position 6 to fold and leave dead chips in the pot. In this case he is leaving himself open to squeeze becausse the reraise was weak. It could also be an attempt to see if position 4 has a real hand or not.

Coaster - I ususally play smaller $3 - $6 9/10 player SNG's.

I always thought it was kind of an unspoken rule of don't raise with an AI on a tourney unless you are for sure to win. Why push someone out that may beat the AI when you may not? I could see if you had a real strong hand, but you're probably going to raise 2-3 times before it even gets to player 5.

Ok. I agree with you, in that situation, I don't think I would have done that. I am still a beginner poker player, but I agree with you and understand what you are saying.

I think you'll find that's more of a post-flop thing, and even then they're not so much rules as... guidelines. Kinda like the pirate's code or something, me hearties!

There's a couple of reasons why I wouldn't put too much stock in these unspoken guidelines for this situation too:

First, I'm assuming this is a single-table SnG? With seven players still in, we're still a long way from the bubble, so making sure you eliminate this player isn't as pressing.

Second, they've got bugger-all money anyway. Tripling them up still won't make them much of a threat, and the side pot has the potential to be a lot bigger than the main pot.

Anywho - on the surface it seems like an odd play, but I'd figure it for someone who was planning from the start to limp-raise. The all-in player probably wasn't part of the plan, but it's not an amount that's going to worry any of the other stacks.

If I were in Seat 6, I wouldn't worry too much about the all-in player, and just play your hand as normal against the raiser. Incidentally, though, if I were the player in Seat 6 I probably would've either raised myself to isolate or just gotten out of the way. Flat calling the all-in (especially such a small one) makes this messier than it needs to be.

I very rarely see the cooperative call of the all in, I think because I play the micro levels where very few people understand the value of it. Also, like Oz said it is early in the S&G and chips are more important than putting them out.

i think the re-raise is 1st...his original plan
2nd..to see where the "caller" is.

the caller should get out , unless holding good pkt pr.


how did the hand end ?

4 was holding unsuited, non-paint cards and doubled 5 up, while 6 would've caught a pair and knocked 5 out.

4 eventually gave the rest of his stack away, 5 came back and placed 2nd, and 6 (me) won.