+EV vs Survival

[dj11]

This hand represents, to me, a classic +EV vs Survival situation. This either/or condition occurs often to most all of us, and I'm spoiling for a fight here. I played this hand, this way expressly as an +EV move. According to the EV fanatics, I probably played this right.

I don't think EV should guide life or death situations. While I'm fine with them in smaller pots, Life or Death is serious stuff that (IMO) doesn't need to occur until way later in a tourney.

It wasn't so long ago that I would have backed down at the first raise, and would never have taken this to the graveyard. WHile each individual street gives me good odds to continue, the net effect even had I filled the flush, would not have been proper as I would have only doubled up, which in a round about way is not getting the 4-1 or better odds needed to persue the nut flush.

Stacks:
* MP2 with 8415
* Lewis5066 with 7639
* BTN with 5313
* SB with 10525
* BB with 1430
* UTG with 6745
* MP1 with 5880

Blinds:
Site: full tilt poker
* * Dealt to UTG:J♥ A♥
* * Sklansky group 2
Preflop:
* * 1 players fold.
Hero raises to 600
* * 3 players fold.
* * lewis5066 calls [600]
* * 3 players folded.
* * Total folds this street: 7
* * Potsize: 1500
Flop: Q♦ 7♥ 6♥ Hero bets [800]
* * 3 players fold.
* * lewis5066 raises to 1,600 Hero calls [800]
* * Potsize: 4700
Turn: 5♣ Hero bets [1,600]
* * lewis5066 raises to 5,439, and is all in Hero calls [2,945] [ all-in ]
* * Lewis5066 shows : 7♠ 7♣ Hero shows : J♥ A♥
* * Uncalled bet of 894 returned to Lewis5066
* * Potsize: 13085
River: 4♦
* * Lewis5066 shows three of a kind, Sevens
* * Hero shows Ace Queen high
* * Lewis5066 wins the pot (13,790) with three of a kind, Sevens

Poker Hand Converter By Cardschat.com Poker Forum

 

[jokish123]

Hey still learning. Can you please explain to me what +EV means?

 

[Steveg1976]

EV= Expectation value. But to expand on that in tournaments and sit & go's there is also

cEV= Chip Expectation Value
$EV= Money Expectation Value

 

[Steveg1976]

DJ - In this case as he raised you on the flop after your C-bet, if you check the turn and he shoves then you are not getting the correct price to chase your flush draw as you will be getting about 3/1 not the 4/1 that would make it correct. You effectively hung yourself betting into the villian on the turn from a pot odds perspective.

Though I understand (I think) your bigger point about using only odds in tournaments to base your decisions.

 

[jokish123]

EV= Expectation value. But to expand on that in tournaments and sit & go's there is also

cEV= Chip Expectation Value
$EV= Money Expectation Value

oh thank you for explaining.

 

[robwhufc]

WHile each individual street gives me good odds to continue, the net effect even had I filled the flush, would not have been proper as I would have only doubled up, which in a round about way is not getting the 4-1 or better odds needed to persue the nut flush.

True, but you're betting into him, if he folds on any street then you've won the pot here. Of course, he's got a set and isn't folding anywhere (as an aside i haven't hit a set in the last week plus, here he not only hits it, but does so on a flop that gives you the nut flush draw - nice).

I wouldn't be too put off by his turn min-raise. 50% of the time he is pot building, and 50% of the time he is bluffing. The only decision you have is whether or not to bet out again on the turn (if you do, you've got to go to the end) or just check. I think this is the ideal situation to semi bluff, he will either fold to constant agression, or you will catch (and i'd be counting Aces as outs here too, pair of queens is more likely than set).

He got lucky here, you played it exactly as I would have done.

 

[BelgoSuisse]

i don't understand why you would call his flop raise, then lead turn and call his shove. If your plan is to do that, i think it's better to just shove his flop raise.

 

[c9h13no3]

i don't understand why you would call his flop raise, then lead turn and call his shove. If your plan is to do that, i think it's better to just shove his flop raise.

This. A 3-bet looks a lot scarier than just calling and leading, plus we have more equity.

I'm not a fan of shoving this draw either, since our aces are discounted by AQ/any set/76. With just 1 overcard, if we jam the flop, even if he has KQ we're only 45% to win. Which in a tournament, I think we have to pass on this spot so early.

 

[BelgoSuisse]

I'm not a fan of shoving this draw either, since our aces are discounted by AQ/any set/76. With just 1 overcard, if we jam the flop, even if he has KQ we're only 45% to win. Which in a tournament, I think we have to pass on this spot so early.

:dito:. i think the best line here is to call the flop raise since we get great odds, but then ckeck-fold the turn once we don't hit our draw.

The next best line is to shove the flop raise.

The line I like least is the one you took.

 

[dj11]

i don't understand why you would call his flop raise, then lead turn and call his shove. If your plan is to do that, i think it's better to just shove his flop raise.

This is probably a flaw in my game, I tend to rarely 3bet. It is possible he would think another thought preflop if I had, but again, I have not YET explored 3bets much.

 

[52poutanes]

i dont think a bet on the turn is the right way to play this hand after you a reraised on the flop....its obvious hes hit somthing on that flop and hes probably way ahead when he shoves the turn...i would have checked the turn and seen what he did....

 

[dj11]

Again, let me say that in this particular case I saw I could start a discussion I've been wanting for a long time, (months at least).

The odds here were close enough at every bet to justify my actions if I only used odds as the deciding factor. I did this hand this way on purpose.

Normally I don't chase unless I am deepstacked, and feel I own the table or have a damn good situation.

The final call on my part was the closest to not having correct odds, a bit under 4-1 at that point, but I had essentially pot committed myself.

I think my point is that in a tourney, the pot odds have to be dealt with differently than in a ring game. While the big concept of poker is that it is a never ending game, a tourney is an ending game, a subset of the big concept. To ignore that is about the same as playing 6 max the same way one plays full table games.

The other argument is that you have to play to win, not just get in the money. I don't remember anyone ever winning a tourney without getting ITM first. I have seen it often enuf, and been on both sides of the story, where at the final table the chip leader goes out early, and the small stack wins it all.

BTW, my normal, comfortable position is that in a tourney, survival is as important if not more important than making and acting on sound EV decisions. That does not say to make or act on unsound EV decisions. It does suggest to temper those decisions with a survivalist instinct.

 

[zachvac]

We've covered this before a little bit. You want to make the most +$ev move. In a tournament sometimes this is tough to calculate, but if you could that's what you'd do. Survival has nothing to do with it, other than the impact on $ev it has (as not surviving brings a 0 $ev). You may very well be making smart decisions by playing to survive, but it's because for example you don't want to take a 50-50 to double up or bust unless you think doubling up will double your expected winnings. That would be neutral chipev but -$ev, thus you play for survival and fold.

 

[ABorges]

We've covered this before a little bit. You want to make the most +$ev move. In a tournament sometimes this is tough to calculate, but if you could that's what you'd do. Survival has nothing to do with it, other than the impact on $ev it has (as not surviving brings a 0 $ev). You may very well be making smart decisions by playing to survive, but it's because for example you don't want to take a 50-50 to double up or bust unless you think doubling up will double your expected winnings. That would be neutral chipev but -$ev, thus you play for survival and fold.

I take a coinflip early on with no problem. Maybe I'm just not understanding, but why are you saying taking a coinflip early is -$EV? If you are I don't really agree with that, even if you bust half the time, dropping to 0 $EV, the other half I expect to get BETTER than double my current $EV given the edge you get with playing with a big stack, successfully stealing from mid stacks and bullying people around when the blinds go up a few levels. Tournaments pay out so top heavy you have to take every edge you can get no matter how small no matter what stage IMO.

Oh and as for the hand I think (I might be wrong here not really sure what stack sizes are): 3bet all in on the flop > call and check fold non heart turn > call and lead turn.

 

[shrtstakatak]

Could you guys explain exactly what you mean by 3bet?

Thanks...

 

[c9h13no3]

Could you guys explain exactly what you mean by 3bet?

Thanks...

Player 1 bets, player 2 raises, and then player 1 3-bets (re-raises). The 3-bet is the third escalation in bet on one round of betting.