Reluctant fold with JJ (rivered straight) facing overbet

SlackerInc · Jul 31, 2010

https://www.cardschat.com/hand/12264

I was new to the table, only had maybe half an orbit with villain. Villain had not announced themself as a certifiable loony-toon ultradonk maniac type, but beyond that it was too little info to have much of a read.

So was it an overly tight fold against a generic villain in a $22 deepstacker? Still not sure. Could be that villain turned the flush and was going for a check-raise on the turn; or could be a wild player trying to buy the pot on the river with a huge overbet after I showed weakness on the turn (and of course villain can't know I rivered the straight). Could also be that villain had an overpair or flopped a set and this was a kind of a frustration bet when the river made a four-card straight on the board, or even a somewhat smart bluff hoping s/he could get me to fold a big pair or overset or even a straight, as I did. Still can't decide if I did the right thing.

The_Pup · Aug 1, 2010

You sum up the dilemma rather well, SlackerInc. The overbet reeks of not wanting a call and representing, say, 2 pair; the villain knows this and so reckons you are likely to call your straight to their flush; they know you know this, so they could do this with sod all.......

I think it was Sklansky I heard on this situation. He says that while this seems like a very difficult decision it is in fact a very easy one. The villain will either have the flush (or the less likely QJ) or they won't and we have no way of telling which, so whether we call or fold makes no difference, in the long run. We should call here half the time and fold half the time. We can spin a coin to make our decision.

SlackerInc · Aug 1, 2010

Thanks, Pup. I liked your summation of the situation as well (villain knows that you know...etc.).

Given that this is a tourney and not a cash game (thus doubling up is not twice as good as busting out, unless you believe the contrarian advice of Arnold Snyder in PTF), wouldn't a fold be preferable to a coin flip when early in a deepstack MTT, when a call and loss of the hand would be crippling? I feel like I should only call here if I'm >60% to win.

The_Pup · Aug 2, 2010

Yes, you are right that chips won are not as valuable as chips lost but there are already chips in the pot that swing it a bit and there is extra value in letting the whole table know you are not going to be bullied.

All that said, in the heat of battle I am probably folding here too with such a deep stack.

I am not aware of the advice of Arnold Snyder, what does he say?

SlackerInc · Aug 2, 2010

Snyder essentially believes that doubling your chips in a tournament puts you in a position that is more than twice as good as where you started, rather than the conventional wisdom of diminishing returns. This obviously doesn't hold up in ICM bubble situations, or in single table tournaments; but he's talking about MTTs and his logic can't be entirely dismissed. Here are a couple links:

http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/implied_discount.htm

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/3...er-tournament-formula-ii-intro-posted-193508/

The_Pup · Aug 3, 2010

Thanks for the info and links, Slacker. I'll have a proper read and think about them later and no doubt have something to say about the matter.

The_Pup · Aug 3, 2010

Hmmm, not very impressed with Mr, Snyder. His argument seems to be an Aunt Sally attack on comparing the value of each chip in my stack to each chip in yours, and variations thereon. What people really care about is the sort of question raised in this thread, 'Are the 3340 chips I win half the time worth more than the 2800 I lose the other half?'

He is correct to talk about chips in terms of amunition and of course having a large stack gives us more options. But despite his mathematical gymnastics he doesn't really deal with the question of the law of diminishing returns and why it does/doesn't apply to tournament poker. Here's one reason why a bigger stack isn't proportionately better: in every tourney the chip are spread unevenly. A few people have big stacks, a few more have about average and most have below average (mean). If we have an average stack we can easily be outstacking 2/3 of our particular table. A loss of say 1/5 our stack may put us in the bottom half, but an increase of the same number of chips will often make little difference to the number of people we outstack or how intimidating we look from their point of view.

OnyxPanther · Aug 17, 2010

This hand could have went in any way you have stated and the 50/50 call fold ratio is somewhat agreeable but I think you made a critical error in your play this hand that could have swayed the outcome of this pot.

You bet after the flop and get called. Meaning a.) you have something and b.) your oppenent has something or something worth looking at more cards for.

*This is where I think the mistake was made. Why the check for the turn? your hand strength is already demenishing and your going to allow a free river to possibly strengthen against your more? I think there should have been at least a 2xbb bet here to display you still have good strength with your hand and or are stronger and trying to milk him. or may entice him to reraise thus giving away his hand strength if he made and allows you to get a better estimate of his strength. I think it is very plausible that villain got a read on you by your check and saw it as weakness and then took advantage of the fact that there was a flush draw on the board and easy str8 (side note to this: if you did bet on the turn he could have also taken advantage of the proposed flush on the board and reraised you where then you would have had a decision to make as to where his raise proves he is holding that flush.)

I dont see folding here at the river with the check and then catching the str8

I do see folding here if the bet is made on the turn and gets promptly reraised minimally. If villain reraises to allin I would be suspicious as to why he isnt trying to mil me and is willing to risk not making a few more chips on a made hand.

Poker Orifice · Aug 17, 2010

SlackerInc said:
Snyder essentially believes that doubling your chips in a tournament puts you in a position that is more than twice as good as where you started, rather than the conventional wisdom of diminishing returns. This obviously doesn't hold up in ICM bubble situations, or in single table tournaments; but he's talking about MTTs and his logic can't be entirely dismissed. Here are a couple links:

http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/implied_discount.htm

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/3...er-tournament-formula-ii-intro-posted-193508/

Haven't checked out the hand... 'yet'. BUT, with Snyder's books, aren't most of his references towards 'fast structured' mtts? (ie. casino cheap(er) live buyin events).

Poker Orifice · Aug 17, 2010

WOW.. Ridiculous Overbet here. This is 'never' a call here.. ever.

Totally disagree w the call/fold 50/50 in this spot. We're over 200bb's deep.. why villain is over betting like 5x pot seems utterly ridiculous but I highly doubt they have anything but the flush here (if not.. no big deal,.. note.. 'villain retardedly unconventional play'). What's he figure you're on that will call here in this spot?

Poker Orifice · Aug 17, 2010

OnyxPanther said:
This hand could have went in any way you have stated and the 50/50 call fold ratio is somewhat agreeable but I think you made a critical error in your play this hand that could have swayed the outcome of this pot.

You bet after the flop and get called. Meaning a.) you have something and b.) your oppenent has something or something worth looking at more cards for.

*This is where I think the mistake was made. Why the check for the turn? your hand strength is already demenishing and your going to allow a free river to possibly strengthen against your more? I think there should have been at least a 2xbb < this is TERRIBLE imo, checking doesn't always = weaknessbet here to display you still have good strength with your hand and or are stronger and trying to milk him. or may entice him to reraise thus giving away his hand strength if he made and allows you to get a better estimate of his strength. I think it is very plausible that villain got a read on you by your check and saw it as weakness and then took advantage of the fact that there was a flush draw on the board and easy str8 (side note to this: if you did bet on the turn he could have also taken advantage of the proposed flush on the board and reraised you where then you would have had a decision to make as to where his raise proves he is holding that flush.)

I dont see folding here at the river with the check and then catching the str8

I do see folding here if the bet is made on the turn and gets promptly reraised minimally. If villain reraises to allin I would be suspicious as to why he isnt trying to mil me and is willing to risk not making a few more chips on a made hand.

Honestly this hand is a super easy fold. IT's not a cash game.. it's a tournament.

OnyxPanther · Aug 22, 2010

Poker Orifice said:
Honestly this hand is a super easy fold. IT's not a cash game.. it's a tournament.

you do make a valid point about staying alive in the tournament. thanx

SlackerInc · Aug 23, 2010

Poker Orifice said:
Haven't checked out the hand... 'yet'. BUT, with Snyder's books, aren't most of his references towards 'fast structured' mtts? (ie. casino cheap(er) live buyin events).

That was true of his first book. But his second gets into deep slow ones (which is what I was playing in the OP and what I prefer to play). I don't agree with Snyder about everything by a long shot, but I do think his metric "utility factor" (which takes a logarithmic "patience factor" and multiplies it by the number of big blinds you start with) is very useful at judging just how good a structure is. Using that factor, you get a number at about 30 or 40 for the pokerstars 3000 chip MTTs (regardless of whether they use the incremental blinds with ten minute levels or the bigger jumps with 15 min. levels); 190 for the Pokerstars deepstacks MTTs like the one I was playing here; 130 for the highest utility MTT (at least in the micros) at Full Tilt; and for reference, 250 for the wsop ME (the other bracelet tourneys are fairly low, like under 100).

He extensively quotes a post of mine in one of his appendices, btw.

Poker Orifice · Aug 24, 2010

Slacker, can you give us a # for the Fulltilt SuperStack tourney (5,000chip starting stack 19:00 each day). And, what about the typical $26 donkament on Fulltilt?
tks

SlackerInc · Aug 30, 2010

Poker Orifice said:
Slacker, can you give us a # for the Fulltilt SuperStack tourney (5,000chip starting stack 19:00 each day). And, what about the typical $26 donkament on Fulltilt?
tks

The one I mentioned that has a 130 score is that same one.

I can figure out another one if you can tell me what the blind-off time is (how long it would take to blind out if you folded every hand) and what the average number of hands per hour is (or if you don't know, we can assume 50 or 60).

Poker Orifice · Aug 30, 2010

SlackerInc said:
The one I mentioned that has a 130 score is that same one.

I can figure out another one if you can tell me what the blind-off time is (how long it would take to blind out if you folded every hand) and what the average number of hands per hour is (or if you don't know, we can assume 50 or 60).

How can we figure the blind off time when we don't know how many orbits we'll typically go through at each level?

Tourney I'm referring to is Fulltilt's 'SuperStack', ($5 & $10), they have 5,000 stating chipstacks, blinds go up every 12mins.
At the 1hr. mark we're only at 30/60,
At 2hr. mark we're 100/200 (antes start after 2hrs.)
" 3hr. mark " 250/500 (ante '50' for 2 of the levels, 25 for other 3)
" 4hr. mark " 600/1200 < only 4levels 3-4hr. as levels = 15min. now

Poker Orifice · Aug 30, 2010

Maybe a better idea if I post a screenshot?

Poker Orifice · Aug 30, 2010

And here's the typical structure of a $26donkament on Fulltilt (3,000chip starting stack 'double stack').

dmorris68 · Aug 31, 2010

Poker Orifice said:
How can we figure the blind off time when we don't know how many orbits we'll typically go through at each level?

It's based on reasonable assumptions of hands/hour, which is typically much higher online than live since online we have a short clock. It's been awhile since I read the book but the estimate of 50-60 hands per hour for online sounds reasonable.

I have both of Snyder's books and can recommend them if you've not read them. The first book is an excellent analysis of fast tournaments like most online and the small-buyin live MTT's. The second volume is all about large, slow, deepstacked events.

He's come up with this utility factor, as well as other factors like a patience factor and a skill factor, to classify tourneys. It's pretty unique, something never really covered in the usual poker tomes, and gives you some concrete numerical criteria for estimating your chances in MTTs.

SlackerInc · Sep 8, 2010

Poker Orifice said:
And here's the typical structure of a $26donkament on Fulltilt (3,000chip starting stack 'double stack').

Okay, so let's assume 54 hands per hour, which is right in the reasonable range and allows us to assume one orbit per blind level, making the calculation of blind-off time much easier.That gives us a blind-off time of right about 2 hours and 5 min., and after doing all the math, gets us a utility factor of 35, compared to UFs of 30 and 31 for the Stars 3000-chip MTTs (depending on whether they use the 10 minute or 15 minute blinds, respectively). It does look however like FT starts, just after this blind-off point, to take a bigger bite in blinds and antes at a faster rate than PS does, so in all actuality the two sites are probably just about even for their 3000 chip MTTs.

I also redid my calculation for the 5000 chip FT "super stack" (with 12 min. levels) as I'm not sure what I previously used for hands/hour. Now I am getting 103, so I probably used 60/hr. before.

Reluctant fold with JJ (rivered straight) facing overbet

SlackerInc

Rising Star

The_Pup

Rock Star

SlackerInc

Rising Star

The_Pup

Rock Star

SlackerInc

Rising Star

The_Pup

Rock Star

The_Pup

Rock Star

OnyxPanther

Enthusiast

Poker Orifice

FoolsTilt

Poker Orifice

FoolsTilt

Poker Orifice

FoolsTilt

OnyxPanther

Enthusiast

SlackerInc

Rising Star

Poker Orifice

FoolsTilt

SlackerInc

Rising Star

Poker Orifice

FoolsTilt

Poker Orifice

FoolsTilt

Attachments

Poker Orifice

FoolsTilt

Attachments

dmorris68

Legend

SlackerInc

Rising Star

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site