Small stack survival

Lafortezza

Was playing in the Fitz €100 game last night, got to the second last table after 5 tables started, and was titchy stack all along. One of the more frustrating but ultimately satisfying nights of poker I've had in a while.

People were dropping like flies from very early on. Our table was the table of death, every time we got a player knocked out, we'd get a new one and 3 hands later there'd be another punter walking for the door.
There was one asian guy at my table who seemed to be playing amazingly well. People were going all in on the flop and he'd have a little think and then call with middle pair and a decent draw, and he'd usually be ahead at the end.

I didn't see many quality cards and had to be content with limping and betting if I hit the flop at all so while there was about 4 big big stacks at my table I was trundling along nicely at about 5k-6k, you start with 4k in chips. Then the hand that made my night interesting....

In late position I look down to see two red Kings. On blinds of 50-100, there's a raise in middle position to 500 and one caller. It reaches me and I raise to 1500. Both players call for the extra 1000.
The flop comes A83 all spades.... I couldn't think of a worse flop for me. The first guy goes all in.... the next guys calls!! What do I do with my KK of redness?

I folded them. With the Ace overcard, the obvious spade flush draw on the board, and the 2 players all in ahead of me, I don't really have a choice.
As it turns out I was ahead and would have won the hand. The first guy had 10-10, one a spade. The next guy had 44 and was probably thinking of the value as I should have done.
Turn and river both came blanks and my unimproved pair of Kings would have taken it down. I still think I made the right call (just about)...

So now I'm small stack and feeling grumpy about having spent €100 on probably a short night of poker. The blinds still aren't killing me but there's enough big stacks around that one of them would easily call my all-in with 2 decent pocket cards.
I tighten up and wait for a premium hand. None arrives. For the next hour and a half. When I'm in the big blind I see the occasional flop but still don't hit.

Our table is broken up and I get moved to one where I am embarrassingly behind in chip count. I have about 2500, the next smallest stack is about 12000. I can't see Paddy Hicks hidden behind his monster stack.
So I wait it out again and again as the blinds trim me. I see hands like J3o and 95o over and over again. I'm blinded down to 1200, on blinds of 150-300. I go all-in on 86 of clubs and get called only by the small blind who has pocket 9's.
I'm so far behind I'm standing up and asking people to let me past before the river card gives me the gutshot straight.
I have some chips.

From then on its like I want to go out on every hand. I was 100% sure to go out on the 86s hand and now I have a few chips to play around with. I raise every flop and shove all in when I have even half a hand. My chip count goes up and down like a yo-yo. I bluff all-in on a board of K-K-10-Q with absolute rubbish and get called by pocket nines, the river comes a 10 for a split pot. I fill inside straights, hit trips on the river, do an Amp special and go all-in on the button with 72o. Sometimes it works sometimes I get busted.
Its far more fun then folding and folding and waiting for a good hand.

I finally get busted with 88 all-in get called by 66 and QQ, the Queens hit trips on the turn. Great fun though, and the €100 freezeout is far tougher than the buy-in games.

kipple

4.5 K + 2 all ins 8 K = about 20 K in the pot
You have about 4K left. You are getting 5 to 1 to call.


I would have called if there was only on "all in" it is close but sometimes you need to make those calls to have a chance of winning?



T.

Marq

[haven't read the spoiler]
I think it's an easy enough fold: with two callers you have to assume that at least one of them has an ace, so you're already behind regardless of the flush draw. With three spades on board even if someone is only holding one spade you're only a marginal favourite to win, if someone has a made flush you're drawing dead. These guys have already already called a big raise so I personally think the ace being out there is more likely, though I wouldn't rule out the possibility of a pair of eights or a good drawing hand like JT of spades. one of your kings could well be dead aswell. It all points to a pass, though that's easy for me to say when I'm not looking at a pair of kings in my hand.

As you say...You're probably behind

Lafortezza

There was alot of people gone after 3 or 4 hands last night. Which is particularly nasty after paying €100 for the privilege.
I should have made a crying call because of the amount of chips in the pot but probably wanted to get a few more hours of poker in for my money.

DeVore

That always happens, I'm amazed how loose that 100 game is sometimes, very fast and you'll lose body parts if you dont know what you are doing or if you make a wrong move at the wrong time. Its definitely big boys rules!

I'd have folded the Kings too I think. I certainly would have complained loudly and sulked a bit but I would definitely have folded. Its possible that one of them had an underpair and the other is on a flush draw and that would have occured to me but the possibilities are too many and just about all the others have you beat already, or can fairly easily out draw you. I wouldnt put anyone on the flush just then because the chances of suited cards betting through that is low (except AK suited) so I would put them on under pairs but trips is your silent enemy here as are fluke flush draws.

I would say though that I probably would have been all in pre-flop with Kings though, the 1500 bet is weak with such a big hand. Bust their heads with it and take the chips already committed... I doubt either of them would have called your all in and you'd be in great shape against anything but Aces...

DeV.

mewso

You were a victim of bad play on your opponents part really. So many regulars in there seem to get very attached to low pairs.

Lafortezza

Originally posted by DeVore
I certainly would have complained loudly and sulked a bit DeV.

You? Nevar!

Hectorjelly

Originally posted by lafortezza
There was alot of people gone after 3 or 4 hands last night. Which is particularly nasty after paying €100 for the privilege.
I should have made a crying call because of the amount of chips in the pot but probably wanted to get a few more hours of poker in for my money.

Originally posted by lafortezza
There was alot of people gone after 3 or 4 hands last night. Which is particularly nasty after paying €100 for the privilege.
I should have made a crying call because of the amount of chips in the pot but probably wanted to get a few more hours of poker in for my money.

No, in this case a call would be a huge mistake, in this case 9 times out of ten you will be against an Ace, just because your opponents played the hand terribly doesnt mean you should as well.

If your against an Ace you need to hit a K to win, there are two kings left in the pack, so you have worse than a 1 in 10 chance to win it. You would need to be getting odds better than this to make it a good play.

Marq

and if someone has one spade then there's only one card in the deck that can help you, as the king of spades fuqs you over as well.

Davey Devil

DeV's correct, your raise to 1500 was too weak, you gotta get your chips in, in that situation. Put your opponents to the test, give them a real decision to make. By going all-in you leave yourself not having to make any decisions. Even if they they both fold you have made a nice pick up of 1000.

Hectorjelly

Originally posted by Davey Devil
DeV's correct, your raise to 1500 was too weak, you gotta get your chips in, in that situation. Put your opponents to the test, give them a real decision to make. By going all-in you leave yourself not having to make any decisions. Even if they they both fold you have made a nice pick up of 1000.

I dont agree with this, you have KK and you want action! You dont want them to fold, you want them to call. As long as theres no ace your going all in on the flop. If there is an ace, well you live to see another day. In this specific case the opponents seem to bad they would of called anyway.

A stronger reraise wouldnt of been a bad play, but a raise to 1500 was fine.

bohsman

Ill agree with davey, leave the thinking to others and get your chips in, there were enough chips in for it to be a worthwile steal

Davey Devil

Ideally you don't want 2 callers with King's, with a raise of 1500 you are always going to get 2 callers. Also it was early in a loose tournament these guys could have any hand. It's likely that the guy with pocket 10's would have made the call and Tezza would have taken a big pot. Instead he lost 1500. Why take the risk so early in a tournament?

kipple

Ideally you don't want 2 callers with King's, with a raise of 1500 you are always going to get 2 callers. Also it was early in a loose tournament these guys could have any hand. It's likely that the guy with pocket 10's would have made the call and Tezza would have taken a big pot. Instead he lost 1500. Why take the risk so early in a tournament?

It is early in the tournament so you should always make the move that will bring in the most expected value in Chips as that is equal to expected value in Cash. The risk of getting busted is irrelevant. For most of the tournament the risk of getting busted is irrelevant.

Some Questions:
a) If you are given a 51% chance to double your chips with a 49% of going bust in the first hand do you take it?
b) If the answer is no; why not? and what odds do you need to go all in on the first hand?

The general question is what is the play with the most expected value if you have KK? What about KK if you are sure that you are not against AA? I am unable to do the maths but I think lafortezza raise was a good one and more profitable than going all in all be it with more variance. But I really dont know.

Now as a bunny who paid 100 Euro to enter a tournament I want to get some entertainment value out of it. And if I can last till the last 20 it is a good nights fun. But especially as a bunny I should be taking an agggressive high variance strategy if in the long run I want to win some cash.


T.

Hectorjelly

Originally posted by kipple

Some Questions:
a) If you are given a 51% chance to double your chips with a 49% of going bust in the first hand do you take it?
b) If the answer is no; why not? and what odds do you need to go all in on the first hand?
T.

I wouldnt take these odds because usually Im a better player than the others playing, and that I can get better odds later. Im not going to take a coinflip to decide how I get on in my tournament.

If I was playing against people who I considered better than me I might take it.


What odds do I need to go all in on the first hand? Ideally I want to either get my chips in first, so that I can add folding equity to the value of my cards, or I want to be pretty sure my opponents cards are dominated by mine, ie AK vs AQ or QQ vs JJ.

Davey Devil

Originally posted by kipple
It is early in the tournament so you should always make the move that will bring in the most expected value in Chips as that is equal to expected value in Cash. The risk of getting busted is irrelevant. For most of the tournament the risk of getting busted is irrelevant.

How wrong you are.

Hyzepher

Originally posted by kipple
It is early in the tournament so you should always make the move that will bring in the most expected value in Chips as that is equal to expected value in Cash. The risk of getting busted is irrelevant. For most of the tournament the risk of getting busted is irrelevant.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Tournament is about surviving first and amassing chips second. Tournament play is completely different to cash play and you cant make big decisions on odds the way you can in a cash game.

Hyzepher

kipple

How wrong you are.

I made three different statements in the part you quoted. I will expand on them. Which do you disagree with and why?

I am assuming that we are all trying to make the most Cash from the tournaments we play.

1. For 90% of a tournament you should make moves that are +EV (Expected Value) in Chips.

2. Chip EV = Cash EV for most of a tournamant. (For a tournament that has only one winner Chip EV is always equal to Cash EV) It is easy to come up with examples where Chip EV is not equal to Cash EV.

3. Going busted is not something that you should take into consideration for 90% of a tournament. You are NOT trying to survive you are trying to make +EV chip plays. Going busted first or on the bubble have the same pay out.


T.

mewso

Expected value, pot odds etc. are based on odds which in turn are intended to give you the advantage over the long term, not one individual hand. In a tournament getting knocked out therefore effects this. Getting knocked out when you were the 51% favorite leaves no consolation that over the following hours you will win more of these confrontations. You are out.

Davey Devil

Early on in a tournament the key is survival, you should avoid avoid big pots and limit your chances of going bust. Obviously if you have Cowboys you want some return for them and stealing the 1000 without the risk of being outdrawn is easily achived by going all-in. Raising to 1500 for value is not a good play at this stage. You are encouraging other players to call thus reducing the chances of winning the pot.

The best policy in tournament play is to keep winning small pots with minimun risk until you get to the money stages. At this point you can attack the table with the knowlege that your money is safe. Believe me having alotta chips at the start of a tournament in no way gaurantee's you winning any money. The key is to have the chips at the end of the tournament.

Lafortezza

Originally posted by kipple
Going busted first or on the bubble have the same pay out.
T.

Hopefully though somewhere along the lines of getting to the final table and bubble position you will have come across many other situations where you're better than 51%-49% favourite.

Hectorjelly

Originally posted by Davey Devil
The best policy in tournament play is to keep winning small pots with minimun risk until you get to the money stages. At this point you can attack the table with the knowlege that your money is safe. Believe me having alotta chips at the start of a tournament in no way gaurantee's you winning any money. The key is to have the chips at the end of the tournament.

This might be what you have found successfull, but its not neccessarily the best policy.

DeVore

All those fancy moves you think about (reraise bluffs, check-raising etc) that are nice and profitable but at a risk will earn you plenty at the start of the tournie but later on all that risk will pay for exactly one small blind!

Davey is right imho when the tournie is a freeze out, by taking big risks you open yourself up to being eliminated and there goes ANY chance of getting into the money.

Its easy to call the score with KK's after the hand is over... nothing is certain so you take the highest probability of the highest payout.

Option1a: You bet 1500 and get two callers, flop comes A high and you have to put it down.... Profit: -1500

Option1b: You bet 1500 and get two callers, flop comes rags, you raise and they probably leave (if they have any sense, you did after all reraise two bets).
Profit: 2000

Option2a: You bet all in, they both leave.
Profit: 1000

Option2b: You bet all in and one calls and gets splatted.
Profit: Double Through \o/

Optio2c:You bet all in and get nailed.
Profit: You're out.


Now, at the point you make the decision you dont know if decision-tree 1x will lead to outcome 1a or 1b, obviously 1b is preferable...
Also similarly with decision tree 2 and there we just want to avoid 2c.

Decision tree 2 has the biggest payout (2b) but also the biggest risk (2c).

I'll continue this later... have to run.

DeV.

Hectorjelly

Originally posted by kipple

2. Chip EV = Cash EV for most of a tournamant. (For a tournament that has only one winner Chip EV is always equal to Cash EV) It is easy to come up with examples where Chip EV is not equal to Cash EV.

T.

The reason that Chip EV =/= Cash EV is that in a cash game you can always reach into your pocket and take out more money, but once you lose in a tourament thats it. The theory only really holds if you feel you are a above average player, as if you are, you should be able to out play your opponents later in the game, so you can afford to not play this hand.

krattapopov

I agree with davey devil's stance on the matter, build your stack

all you need is someone to have a pocket ace and then hit an ace, so trying to bleed chips out of someone when the chance is their that you will lose chips is not advisable

I would definitely have gone all in with KK after a few raises therefore putting a big decision on the initial raisers.

Waylander

I think if you get a pair of kings you want a bit of value for them. I would have played it similar to the way it went.

cormie

Phew, just won an online tournament. I was down to 100 units with 18,000 on the table. I was down to 100 with about 7 people left and came back to claim 1st prize of 20c!!!! FEEEEELS SOOO GOOOOOOD!!!!

mewso

Originally posted by cormie
Phew, just won an online tournament. I was down to 100 units with 18,000 on the table. I was down to 100 with about 7 people left and came back to claim 1st prize of 20c!!!! FEEEEELS SOOO GOOOOOOD!!!!

Well done. And the relevence to this topic is.....?

cormie

My sincere apologies.

mewso

Slightly relevent then

TwoShedsJackson

I know limit hold'em is like garlic to a vampire to most of the folk on here but the 30+3 limit hold'em tournies in Partypoker could be a decent source of cash.

The standard of play is pretty cack, until you reach the money or near it when everyone tightens up, of course.

I placed 8th out of 340 last Friday for $306, and 5th out of 230 last night for $483, and if I can do it a lot more people should be able to

After Sundays BSOP heat I was taking Davey and Hyzepher's advice and getting more aggressive when it's short handed, and surprise surprise it works really well - cheers lads

cormie

My brother plays limit. Most pro's do because the ups are more or less as constand but the down aren't half as bad.

Hectorjelly

Originally posted by cormie
My brother plays limit. Most pro's do because the ups are more or less as constand but the down aren't half as bad.

I dont think thats right, Most Pro's play limit because thats what everybody plays in america. Traditionally the casinos prefer limit as it takes a lot longer for poor players to go bust. An expert player has much more of an edge in No Limit or Pot Limit than limit. You can have some pretty nasty downswings in limit (100 to 150 bb).

cormie

No limit is definitely a game to be won by the pro's. But when I say pro, I mean they do it for a living. They need to survive on what they earn, if they lose their bankroll, they can't survive that comfortably which is why they mostly go for limit. I'm sure all reasons apply.

DeVore

Americans favour limit because its the less aggressive game and its more friendly (a lot of people here play draw-poker similarly, max bet being half the pot or all of the pot etc). It means you get to see more flops and there is less preflop bullying and coin flips... it sounds interesting to me as the math comes into it a lot more but to be honest there is something just fnckin' ungodly cool about knowing that at any moment you could lose everything.
I think I'd be better at limit but I doubt I could stay awake long enough to play a tournie...

Poker is cruel but I'm a masochist!

DeV.

TwoShedsJackson

Well it's four hours at $120 an hour and I really like playing poker so I thought it was worth it There is very little bullying at the start but you will get quite a lot of it as it goes on.