Ethical/Rule question re: showing your cards in live games/tourneys

[EStreet20]

One thing you either don;t know or didn't take into account is that your blinds/antes are still posted in an MTT when you are away from the table so your example of late in a tourney when you are short stacked is ridiculous because you'll lose chips on every single hand. Also, your cash game example proves you don't know or understand the fundamental theorem of poker.... REad TOP.

Good luck
Matt

[Mayhem]

1) I'm quite thick-skinned when posting online, but that doesn't mean I'm not going to give what I get and just sit back and take crap.

2) I can't really debate my 'poker skills' because I'm sure it is a losing proposition, but if there is a way to find my tourney finishes etc. - I'm 'rottmaro' on PokerRoom. Just came in 5th of 143 in Sat night's 30+3 multi. And I probably would have come in higher if I had been able to show my straight to the guy that called my all-in with 2 overs and a flush draw after the turn.

I appreciate what people are trying to say - get your money in with the best hand and hope for the best - there's not much else you can do. But when you are faced with that proposition for large amounts of REAL MONEY - I'd like to do whatever I can to leave nothing to chance.

If you saved up $10K to play in the WSOP Main Event, you were on the bubble and you knew you would win a big pot vs. get busted out if the guy contemplating calling your hand caught a card on the river when you had him beat right then - wouldn't you want to just tell him "buddy - I've got you beat, don't call"? I sure would.

[mce86]

I was watching the final table at Trump in Gary Indiana...first place is 14,000. There are 8 people left, and a big pot comes up.
Player 1: Raise
Player 2: Reraise
Player 1: All In. (he has player 2 covered)

Now, player 2 is thinking about this big time...player 1 then slightly shows his bottom card... Ace of Diamonds

Player 2 gets agitated ans tells him he has one of those too. Player 2, then appears to change his mind from folding to calling after seeing they both had an ace, and calls flipping over AJo.

Player 1 immediately flips over two aces. The spectators went nuts, and player 2 then complained to the floor. Player 1 was just warned. It was beautiful.

[jba]

[ QUOTE ]

I probably would have come in higher if I had been able to show my straight to the guy that called my all-in with 2 overs and a flush draw after the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

you probably would have come in lower if you'd showed it. that's the point bud.


also, I'm very proud of the number of times my use of "vag" has been quoted in this thread.

[Mayhem]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I probably would have come in higher if I had been able to show my straight to the guy that called my all-in with 2 overs and a flush draw after the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

you probably would have come in lower if you'd showed it. that's the point bud.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unpossible

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
I appreciate what people are trying to say - get your money in with the best hand and hope for the best - there's not much else you can do. But when you are faced with that proposition for large amounts of REAL MONEY - I'd like to do whatever I can to leave nothing to chance.

[/ QUOTE ]

that is kind of like saying, i love chess, but dont want to leave anything to skill.

chance is part of this game. that's why we think in terms of expectation.

[ QUOTE ]

If you saved up $10K to play in the WSOP Main Event, you were on the bubble and you knew you would win a big pot vs. get busted out if the guy contemplating calling your hand caught a card on the river when you had him beat right then - wouldn't you want to just tell him "buddy - I've got you beat, don't call"? I sure would.

[/ QUOTE ]

that's the thing, this whole scenario shows why it's likely you think like this: playing above your bankroll makes you want to lock up wins. it's called "prospect theory" and some folks won a noble prize outlining it's precepts. in general, people are more apt to gamble LESS when winning and MORE when losing.

analogusly to this situation, because you are "guaranteed" a money finish if you just win this pot, you dont want to risk the 5-45% chance of your opponent hitting and knocking you out of the tournament simply b/c you have that place "locked up" by getting himt o fold.

but that just goes to show that you are uncomfortable losing the buy in. in reality, you could easily 1) NOT play a tournamnet that is so big you're willing to play poorly in terms of expectation just to eek into the money, or 2) NOT play that hand and simply blind yourself into the money.

in poker, this immense concern over the variance and not w/ the expectation tends to be highly correlated w/ average or below average play...the reason should be exceedingly obvious by now: if you dont play to maximize your expectation, how do you go about making the most you can?

and you also said "REAL money." well guess what, EVERY play you make in a tournamnet costs/makes you real money (in expectatiuon), it's just more material to you in the sense that you are guaranteed it if the guy folds.

the people on this forum do tend to be snobbish (or whatever word you want to use) when responding to posts like this in all likelihood b/c they get to show their superiority in terms of poker knowledge. i wrote this post out to assure you that you can do better than you think and that understanding the interplay between bankroll, variance, risk aversion, and expectation is crucial to being as good of a poker player as you can be.

judging from your though process and post, it just doesn't seem you are there yet.

also, citing past results like 5th/150 rather than % monied or how well you played and then linking NOT finishing 1st to a bad beat really outline what im talking about here.

please take this constructively and dont take the attacks you receive personally.

these forums were constructed so that you can learn.

enjoy!

Barron

[Mayhem]

Thanks Barron - I'm sure that response took some time to type out, and I appreciate your taking the time to do so.

Your points about bankroll, variance and expectation are well made. Unfortunately, for most of us that play as a hobby and 1 or 2 table online or play live for buy-ins of 1/4 to 1/3 our poker bankroll, some of the risks involved with certain plays are just not worth it - or at least are met with more emotinal results. Does this make me a 'worse' player? Perhaps. But for the occasional player... what really else can you do? According to the 'poker laws' described on this site - you should have 40 buy ins for a certain level of play. If my online bankroll is $400 - that means I would be playing micro-limit NL games, which would be absolutely no fun for me.

As I'm sure has been posted here a bazillion times - it's the difference of 'gambling for fun/rush' vs. 'playing poker for expected profit over time'.

As for my in-the-money %.. I would say 35-40% in the PR SnGs? And for ring games i have a pattern: I grind away a profit of about 25%-150% of my buy in over a few hours... and then lose a huge chunk on one hand. It's this type of continuous frustration that has led me to practically refuse to play for large pots unless I feel I'm WAY ahead.

Maybe I'm silly for adopting a 'personal rule' like this, but I have almost never had a losing session since I made that decision. I'm sure 'variance' says I will have a run of bad cards and get beat soon enough, but we'll see I guess.

Anyway - thanks again Barron. I may never become a poker pro - but I still enjoy doing whatever it is I'm doing.

And I guess everyone now knows they can bet 'rottmaro' out of a pot with a big bet. Oh well. Just also remember that if I call or raise you - I've gotcha beat. =)

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately, for most of us that play as a hobby and 1 or 2 table online or play live for buy-ins of 1/4 to 1/3 our poker bankroll, some of the risks involved with certain plays are just not worth it

[/ QUOTE ]

you have a poker bankroll. you acknowledge sitting down to a table w/ a large % of it. you then try to minimize your risk given you've already accepted MUCH MUCH larger risk (putting that large a % of your 'bankroll' on the table to play a game of chance). that exercise is inane to the point of redicularity.

think going to mcdonalds while on a diet, ordering double cheeseburgers, fries, a malt, a chocolate cake, and getting a diet soda instead of a regular soda b/c you're on a DIET!

the marginal savings of calories from regular to diet soda is pretty much what you're doing when you say you want to minimize the risk of losing any one particular hand. you've already accepted the massive risk of putting such a huge % of your money in play at any given time that the marginal effects of saving units of risk will in the end make no difference (i.e. if you continue to play w/ that % of your roll, you will go broke at some point or another. period.)

i dont mean to dispirit you like this, but you have to learn this now before you really get yourself in trouble.

good luck (and in your case i should say "(good luck)^100000")

Barron

PS- the solution is simple. either play no poker, or play lower where you can earn a poker roll large neough to play the games you want to over time. sorry, but those are your options...or you can continue to play the waiting game you are now.

[Mayhem]

I see what you are saying. Basically I will go broke at some point playing such a large % of my bankroll regardless of how I try to minimize the effect of negative variance.

Fantastic.

I think it would take forever playing mirco-limit tables to get the, what... $8K I would need to play at a level I desire. Maybe I'll give it a shot though - I know you all know what you're taking about, thanks.

[Cue-Ball 66]

[ QUOTE ]
You have a choice, keep being a weak tight player and keep wondering why you can come in the top 33% of multis but never actually make the money (or if you do, just slip in and get buyin plus a little back) and why you only ever have small wins at best.

OR, take the advice that people here give you, and stop playing like a vag.

Also, if you're going to keep posting on 2+2, I suggest you stop reacting like a vag when someone criticises you.

If I was 90% sure I had someone beat, I'd be praying to God Allah, Vishnu, and Thor to get them to call (assuming there was <10 times the size of the bet they had to call already in the pot, if there was more than that - on the turn in limit ring games basically - is they only time I'd want a fold. How big is your ego you think you'll have a better chance of winning chips than as a 10 to 1 favourite?

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately, if you want to be a winning player, you have to play with a very small % of your bankroll when you play. What this is obviously depends on how much money you have. If you need $8k to play at your desired level, but you play it anyway even though you only have $1k, you're asking for serious trouble...

...particularly if you're going to sacrifice EV as in the situation you've mentioned.