Delayed All-In from the BB

[Cheetah]

I was involved in the following situation in a MTT:

I had 4BB left and was in the BB. My image was very tight. The SB was a very weak loose player with much larger stack. She habitually limped with marginal hands, and would call all-ins from tight players with hands like KJ.

There were no limpers this hand and she completed the SB. I had K6. Normally, this is a good hand to go all-in with, especially with my miserable stack.

However, given that I had virtually no FE left and given her calling tendencies, I decided that if I pushed now, she would have called me most of the time and then I would be about 50/50 to win.

Instead, I decided to check and push after the flop regardless of cards if it was checked to me. Since she was a loose passive player, and since I have checked behind before many times, I didn't think she would bluff post-flop.

That increases my odds of winning to about at least 2/3 because 2/3 of the time she will not connect with the flop.

In that specific case, flop came A-high, she checked, I pushed and she folded.

In summary, sometimes it may be better to delay pushing after the flop in order to increase the odds of winning. This is especially applicable when there is little FE left for pre-flop push, but enough stack left that it would be significant on the flop.

The down-side of this play is that when you win, you don't double up. So basically we win more often, but a smaller amount. So if we are far from the money with a tiny stack, that is not necessarily a good play. But if we are close to the money, as I was, this increases the chance to get there without changing much the odds of making final table.

 

[Steveg1976]

I was involved in the following situation in a MTT:

I had 4BB left and was in the BB. My image was very tight. The SB was a very weak loose player with much larger stack. She habitually limped with marginal hands, and would call all-ins from tight players with hands like KJ.

There were no limpers this hand and she completed the SB. I had K6. Normally, this is a good hand to go all-in with, especially with my miserable stack.

However, given that I had virtually no FE left and given her calling tendencies, I decided that if I pushed now, she would have called me most of the time and then I would be about 50/50 to win.

Instead, I decided to check and push after the flop regardless of cards if it was checked to me. Since she was a loose passive player, and since I have checked behind before many times, I didn't think she would bluff post-flop.

That increases my odds of winning to about at least 2/3 because 2/3 of the time she will not connect with the flop.

In that specific case, flop came A-high, she checked, I pushed and she folded.

In summary, sometimes it may be better to delay pushing after the flop in order to increase the odds of winning. This is especially applicable when there is little FE left for pre-flop push, but enough stack left that it would be significant on the flop.

The down-side of this play is that when you win, you don't double up. So basically we win more often, but a smaller amount. So if we are far from the money with a tiny stack, that is not necessarily a good play. But if we are close to the money, as I was, this increases the chance to get there without changing much the odds of making final table.

Doesn't a play like this though also increase the likely hood that if we are called we are going to be way behind if as in this example we miss the flop? By pushing all in pre-flop doesn't that apply additional pressure to the person making the call, as the amounts in the end are the same just the amount of known information is different (the flop)?

I can see the value but this is a move I am little bit shy to use basically allowing a free flop to pick up the blinds.

 

[jeffred1111]

You are in the BB and you have a hand with wich you have an equity advantage (K6 is @ 54% against a random hand). With SB being very weak and donkish, he could very well be completing a rd hand. So I'd say it's actually the opposite of how you see it: when a tight player completes, check that K6 since @ 4BB you have no fold equity anyway. When SB is weak and donkish, shove since you are actually in front: we are in dire need of doubling up @ 4BB and any equity edge is huge for us. You can also wait for a better hand than K6o, but at 4BB, you don't have much time and should be willing to gamble/flip.

The way you played it is also good (but not as good since you gain nothing but 1BB when villain folds) and is something of a reverse Stop n' Go. Get villain a chance to see a horrible flop for him and fold.

 

[Aalgaard]

So I'd say it's actually the opposite of how you see it

Agreed. with such a low stack K high vs limping SB should be all in preflop

 

[lottomode777]

That's a good strategy unless you play against me. If I miss the flop, I like to bet an amount of the pot that is close to commiting the smallstack, but makes it look like I have a hand (not overbetting or putting them all in), and allows me to fold and save chips incase they shove back. When I connect with the flop, I like to sandbag smallstacks hoping they'll push with nothing/ worst hand. You'd have to be in the small blind to beat me to the bluff.
It would probably be better to pickup the blinds going all in preflop while you have a decent size stack to make them fold 85% of their hands.
With a random hand, they might not catch a piece of the flop, but they may catch a good draw, which makes them more them 33% to continue past the flop.
I never let myself get below 9-10 Big blinds, unless I just got bad beated. So, I tend not to make any moves post flop with such a tiny stack that the other players have odds to call with almost any hand.

 

[jeffred1111]

I also think Harrington 3:1 should apply here since we will be @3BB or less if we don't win this pot.

 

[Biffle16]

You should be pushing hands with 10BB left. If you are down to 4BB, you are not going to scare any big stacks. I personally start to get nervous around 15 BB.

 

[Chiefer]

i posted this article awhile back, and i just posted it again for someone in the brags and beats sub forum. i think it also implies here. so here it is. it has helped me in that situation.

www.cardschat.com/forum/general-poker-13/500-posts-later-98301/

 

[barney102]

A good bit of information, that I can most Definably use in the future. Too many times have I gone out near the bubble with marginal hands as I was scared of not making it. Perhaps a few more sensible plays like this, and ill make that money more consistantly

 

[aliengenius]

I like this move a lot. Also, it works in reverse too. If you are in the sb and the weak passive bb is very short, such that he is willing to go with a hand like any suited king by calling all in, you can often just limp and then bet his remaining stack on any flop. He will think "hehe I am getting a 'free' flop and can fold if I miss". But really you are giving him a look at only three cards instead of all five, as it is likely that he will in fact miss the flop.

 

[lottomode777]

The problem is you'll be letting a lot of bad hands see a free flop that would have fold to preflop shoves like 3 5, 4 9, which make up two thirds of possible hands. Then you have to hope they don't catch any pair, any tempting draws, like open end straight or flush, with those rags. A player will probably have a King or Ace rag 1 out of 6 or 7 hands, so why be worried about getting called if you shove? You'll just end up giving them an easy decision, wether to raise all in on you because they like their hand, or take the free flop. I rather make a better rag hand like 4 9 fold to my 3 4 preflop, then let them raise all in on me with the 4 9 if they want to.

 

[Chiefer]

in short. if you know you are going all in regardless. stop, raise enough to get rid of the 4 9 or 3 4, see the flop, push like you made your hand.

 

[Cheetah]

That's a good strategy unless you play against me. If I miss the flop, I like to bet an amount of the pot that is close to commiting the smallstack, but makes it look like I have a hand (not overbetting or putting them all in), and allows me to fold and save chips incase they shove back. When I connect with the flop, I like to sandbag smallstacks hoping they'll push with nothing/ worst hand. You'd have to be in the small blind to beat me to the bluff.
It would probably be better to pickup the blinds going all in preflop while you have a decent size stack to make them fold 85% of their hands.
With a random hand, they might not catch a piece of the flop, but they may catch a good draw, which makes them more them 33% to continue past the flop.
I never let myself get below 9-10 Big blinds, unless I just got bad beated. So, I tend not to make any moves post flop with such a tiny stack that the other players have odds to call with almost any hand.

I believe I stated the conditions clearly. The player was very unlikely to bluff on the flop.

 

[Cheetah]

in short. if you know you are going all in regardless. stop, raise enough to get rid of the 4 9 or 3 4, see the flop, push like you made your hand.

The issue here is not what the default strategy should be, but rather what the optimal one would be in this particular case.

It seems I have to do calculations on that one too to resolve it. I don't have the time now, but when I do, I will post them.

The reason I posted this in the first place was to promote an interest in alternative plays that are better suited than the default play to a particular situation.

The issue at hand is much more complex than it may appear because when the bubble is near, $EV is the relevant driving factor. Sometimes, that means that cEV is less important than the probability to survive.

 

[Cheetah]

I like this move a lot. Also, it works in reverse too. If you are in the sb and the weak passive bb is very short, such that he is willing to go with a hand like any suited king by calling all in, you can often just limp and then bet his remaining stack on any flop. He will think "hehe I am getting a 'free' flop and can fold if I miss". But really you are giving him a look at only three cards instead of all five, as it is likely that he will in fact miss the flop.

This nails the issue. Pre-flop, all-in moves imply that all 5 cards will be seen. Post-flop moves do not! This is why there is a significant difference in the probabilities for success.

The idea of giving someone a free look at the flop is more complex than it sounds on the surface. One could reverse this statement and say that we are not letting them see a turn and river by playing post-flop.

 

[Chiefer]

ok, well i tried. hope you like the article anyway. i'll try harder next time. GL.

 

[Tammy]

I don't have a problem with the way Cheetah played this. It may not be ideal in most situations, but in this particular case I believe he is not so much playing the cards, but the player. As stated in the OP, he has a solid read on his opponent, and is exploiting that. I have done this at times as well, and with good results.

Now, of course, if it's a multi-way pot, I don't think this would have been the optimal play, but with no limpers, and SB limping, it's a battle of the blinds. With Cheetah's read, she's probably limping with any two cards. It's good to mix things up once in awhile, especially when you have a good read on your opponent.