I don't like being pot committed

I don't like the whole concept of being "pot committed". Pot committed says that if you've put a lot of chips into a pot (say 80% of your chips) then you should call the remainder of your stack no matter what the situation is. I don't think I like it. You make a bad decision, someone re-raises you, and you're suppose to lose more chips just because you bet wrong? I dunno, it's hard to say. I'm leaning towards, it's better to lose 80% of your chips and keep playing then to lose 100% of your chips over some bad betting. To me, Pot Committed seems to go against the whole "chip and a chair" mentality.

I see what you're getting at and I totally agree. It just depends where in the tournament you are and how good or bad your hand really is. If you're putting 80% of your stack into a bluff then they raise you all in, it's safe to say folding is your best move.

If you put in 80% of your stack and fold, you made a mistake earlier in the hand. You should know well before 80% if you aren't going to the felt with your hand.

Technically, you should avoid putting in more than a third of your stack and then folding. There are rare exceptions, where you put in a third and plan to fold in very specific circumstances, but those should be considered carefully.

If you don't agree with pot commitment, it is probably because you don't understand it, and/or you are putting yourself in spots where you have committed too many chips with hand values that don't support it.

vinnie said:

If you put in 80% of your stack and fold, you made a mistake earlier in the hand. You should know well before 80% if you aren't going to the felt with your hand.

Click to expand...

^ this. Exactly this.


For example, if you made a bet that only left 20% of your stack behind, you were almost certainly better off either a: just shoving your whole stack (get paid more when a worse hand calls, maybe scare one or two more marginal better hands off) or b: not making the bet in the first place.

Sometimes, last 2 people at a table are big bluffers, like any two cards will work. Imagine folding an A5, because opponent raised on your checked river and you didn't bet the remaining 20 percent of your chips to win the tournament.
Seems to always be the opposite of what we bet, if we go in, opponent has the cards, if we fold, opponent did not have anything.

This article is exactly what I needed. Thanks for the info.

Brilliant article! Thanks for sharing. The AA vs 83o example is great and very clear.

You shouldn't be putting 80% of your stack preflop, on the flop or on the turn and then folding. If you are bluffing on the river for 80% of your stack of course you are going to fold to the shove.

You need to be sure in the card to give 80% of your chips, in such cases it's better not to bluff but be careful and play on a good card and then give 80% and 100% of your bank!

If you fold with enough to build yourself back up, at least you're are still in the game and can recover. If you feel the pressure of being pot-committed and bust, well that's it.

If you are sure you will lost, why will you spend more money? So, maybe not much money will remain, but while you have money,you are still in the game.

You never need to commit to any pot, you can always fold!

If you got to put 80% of your stack in hand fold it is not good because the opponent can have many lanterns that you will win

JonathanAReth said:

I don't like the whole concept of being "pot committed". Pot committed says that if you've put a lot of chips into a pot (say 80% of your chips) then you should call the remainder of your stack no matter what the situation is. I don't think I like it. You make a bad decision, someone re-raises you, and you're suppose to lose more chips just because you bet wrong? I dunno, it's hard to say. I'm leaning towards, it's better to lose 80% of your chips and keep playing then to lose 100% of your chips over some bad betting. To me, Pot Committed seems to go against the whole "chip and a chair" mentality.

Click to expand...

Poker rules are not written in stone, they are there to simply guide you and help you make decisions. Whenever I find myself pot committed, it's because I want to be there.

Poker is very subjective there are many different ways to play same hand.

But there some clear cut spots and decisions like if you put 80% of your stack into a hand you have to call rest off. You absolutely have to do it is a big mistake to do otherwise.


Once you gain more experience and understand the math side of poker you will come to this conclusion as well.


Most of the times if you are faced with this kind decision it means that you made a poor decision the street before and are not planning ahead while playing a hand. You must consider later streets when making any decision.

Sometimes I've literally come to life at a table with three big blinds. But this is an isolated case. However, I was always inclined to think that if I put about 80% of my chips in the bank, then simply because of the honor I can not throw away and stay with an insignificant 20%. I think you need to decide in the beginning, you are ready, in case of unforeseen circumstances, to go all-in or not. Knowing this can save a lot of chips.