QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

Seat 1: Jemb (14425 in chips) is sitting out
Seat 2: ogganova (1425 in chips)
Seat 3: noseyboy (10975 in chips)
Seat 4: $kipToMyLou (26850 in chips)
Seat 5: Strakov (8025 in chips)
Seat 6: realmann04 (15275 in chips)
Seat 7: OnlyPlayRagz (8950 in chips)
Seat 8: pucis (14500 in chips)
Seat 9: basebal1b (16725 in chips)
Strakov: posts small blind 100
realmann04: posts big blind 200
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to basebal1b [Qd Qs]
OnlyPlayRagz: folds
pucis: folds
basebal1b: raises 400 to 600
Jemb: folds
ogganova: folds
noseyboy: folds
$kipToMyLou: raises 1200 to 1800
Strakov: folds
realmann04: folds
basebal1b: folds


It feels incredibly nitty, but this has to be just a fold preflop on the internet often times, right? Against an unknown we'd almost always be willing to get it in when the flop comes 942 here, so is it too silly to just lay the hand down instead of getting our 83BBs in this early?

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

Looks perfect.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

This is an easy call, you can see a flop and reevaluate, plus you have set odds.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
This is an easy call, you can see a flop and reevaluate, plus you have set odds.

[/ QUOTE ]

u really don't have set odds for sure... it's very close. However, I'd probably call regardless.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

Seems like an easy call to me.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

I think a fold is fine in almost every tournament of this nature "except" in this tourney and the also the stars million. IMO there are just way to many satellite donks in this tourney to fold in that spot. I call and reevaluate on the flop and if his DB looks right, i stak off on a 9 4 2 board as you said.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

What Ansky said

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

Why are the set odds close here? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

Nowhere close having right implied odds to play for set value.

16725/1800 = 9.3:1 and you need at least 18:1 (9:1 to hit multiplied at least 2:1 that he comes along for entire stack).

Anyone know what the odds are that no A or K show up in flop ?

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Nowhere close having right implied odds to play for set value.

16725/1800 = 9.3:1 and you need at least 18:1 (9:1 to hit multiplied at least 2:1 that he comes along for entire stack).

Anyone know what the odds are that no A or K show up in flop ?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's 1200 to call, 7:1 to hit. Whatever the minimum implied odds multiplier is, it should be applied to someone who 3bets an UTG raiser. You'd have to assign a range to the 3bettor that includes lots of hands with aces and kings to come up with an answer to your question about A or K flopping that would apply to this situation.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Nowhere close having right implied odds to play for set value.
16725/1800 = 9.3:1

[/ QUOTE ]

Your math is off. It's not 16725, and not 1800.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is an easy call, you can see a flop and reevaluate, plus you have set odds.

[/ QUOTE ]

u really don't have set odds for sure... it's very close. However, I'd probably call regardless.

[/ QUOTE ]

I probably call as well, vs. an unknown.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nowhere close having right implied odds to play for set value.
16725/1800 = 9.3:1

[/ QUOTE ]

Your math is off. It's not 16725, and not 1800.

[/ QUOTE ]


The correct way to calculate these is total pre-flop outlay divided into the smallest of your stack and the stacks you think you are likely to play for stacks post-flop, plus any dead money from other players.

To calculate otherwise is to artificially inflate the opportunity by ignoring the cost to play the hand up to the decision point. It's true that by the decision any prior outlays are no longer your chips, they are the pot's chips, but the only way to rate opportunities in a relative context is to use a standard method that can be applied everywhere.

Another way to look at it: Imagine a series of pre-flop min-re-raises by two players on either side of you. If you calculate your implied odds based on cost to call each time the action comes to you, eventually you will be allin and obviously not getting the implied odds you need to play for set value.

Regarding odds to hit: It's 11.8% for a PP to hit a set or better on the flop. That works out to 8.47:1. I like to approximate that as 9:1 because I like to err on the side of caution.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

baltostar, your numbers are correct in a raised pot, but you def don't need 18:1 implied odds in a reraised pots, esp in shannon's spot, since villain almost certainly has a big hand to three bet here, and implied odds are higher than usual.

i also call PF and think folding > calling

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

Ok. Well, what should the multiplier be? Villain's only risked 1/16 of his stack. I don't think it's anywhere near a lock he players for stacks. 8.5:1 * 3:2 = 12.75:1 ? In any event the odds aren't there.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nowhere close having right implied odds to play for set value.
16725/1800 = 9.3:1

[/ QUOTE ]

Your math is off. It's not 16725, and not 1800.

[/ QUOTE ]


The correct way to calculate these is total pre-flop outlay divided into the smallest of your stack and the stacks you think you are likely to play for stacks post-flop, plus any dead money from other players.

[/ QUOTE ]

No its not, you're process is really terrible and makes no sense.

1800 is absolutely irrelevant to the matter of implied odds, 1200 is your number.

You arent even taking into account the current pot odds, which lessens the implied odds you need.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nowhere close having right implied odds to play for set value.
16725/1800 = 9.3:1

[/ QUOTE ]

Your math is off. It's not 16725, and not 1800.

[/ QUOTE ]


The correct way to calculate these is total pre-flop outlay divided into the smallest of your stack and the stacks you think you are likely to play for stacks post-flop, plus any dead money from other players.

To calculate otherwise is to artificially inflate the opportunity by ignoring the cost to play the hand up to the decision point. It's true that by the decision any prior outlays are no longer your chips, they are the pot's chips, but the only way to rate opportunities in a relative context is to use a standard method that can be applied everywhere.

Another way to look at it: Imagine a series of pre-flop min-re-raises by two players on either side of you. If you calculate your implied odds based on cost to call each time the action comes to you, eventually you will be allin and obviously not getting the implied odds you need to play for set value.



[/ QUOTE ]

LOL!!!

By the way, if you haven't read my post you are quoting, your math is off. It's not 16725, and not 1800.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
No its not, you're process is really terrible and makes no sense.

1800 is absolutely irrelevant to the matter of implied odds, 1200 is your number.

You arent even taking into account the current pot odds, which lessens the implied odds you need.

[/ QUOTE ]

Trust me. I know my game theory. The "event" is the flop, not each time the action comes to you.

As I said earlier: imagine you're sandwiched between two big stack opponents who min re-raise each other until one is allin. If at each decision point you calculate implied odds to play for set value based on your cost-to-call, you might easily make every successive call, and would become allin yourself, at which point you would have ~2:1 going into the flop -- hardly sufficient odds to play for set value.

Pre-flop pot odds are not directly relevant to calculating maximum implied odds.

Pre-flop pot odds are relevant to calculating the odds required to play for set value because committed chips reduce the multiplier used to discount the likelihood of stacking if you hit.

In this case, the max implied odds are hero's max payoff achievable post-flop (in this case: hero's stack + dead money in blinds) against hero's total pre-flop outlay = (16725 + 300)/1800 ~= 9.5 : 1

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is an easy call, you can see a flop and reevaluate, plus you have set odds.

[/ QUOTE ]

u really don't have set odds for sure... it's very close. However, I'd probably call regardless.

[/ QUOTE ]


Oops, thought Hero covered Villain for some reason. Still a call though.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

"Trust me. I know my game theory. The "event" is the flop, not each time the action comes to you.

As I said earlier: imagine you're sandwiched between two big stack opponents who min re-raise each other until one is allin. If at each decision point you calculate implied odds to play for set value based on your cost-to-call, you might easily make every successive call, and would become allin yourself, at which point you would have ~2:1 going into the flop -- hardly sufficient odds to play for set value."


Baltostar,
this is very wrong. its wrong because you are closing the action, so you do not have to worry about the possibility of putting more money in on this street.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

Baltostar:

I think the first thing you ever learn in microeconomics is to ignore sunk costs. You are faced with a decision as to whether to put in a specific number of chips, 1200. The "implied odds", which is really the implied expectation, are what you expect to win if you hit, multiplied by the percentage that you hit. It's really that simple. And flopping a set or better is 7.5:1, the 7:1 I stated earlier was off the top of my head, not that it makes a difference.

I know enough about game theory to know that game theory has either virtually or absolutely nothing to do with this problem, depending on your perspective.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

This seems like a super easy call for set odds considering its reraised pot. Did i completely miss that day in school?

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No its not, you're process is really terrible and makes no sense.

1800 is absolutely irrelevant to the matter of implied odds, 1200 is your number.

You arent even taking into account the current pot odds, which lessens the implied odds you need.

[/ QUOTE ]

Trust me. I know my game theory. The "event" is the flop, not each time the action comes to you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Clearly you do not, because your entire analysis is wrong at the core. Calling 1200 is the only relevant decision point, current pot figures into the amount we have to get postflop you dont have to get the full 8.5x, and your amount put in on past actions is totally completely absolutely irrelevant, you are flat out lying when you say you know your game theory bro, quit lying over the internet ish just isnt right.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
This seems like a super easy call for set odds considering its reraised pot. Did i completely miss that day in school?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's what I thought, until Ansky, who usually knows what he's talking about, said it was close, which caused me to ask how it was close, which got us into the spot we're in now.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

Doesn't matter if you are closing the action or not. Your risk is the total amount of chips you must commit to continue play past the event (in this case the flop).

Misunderstanding this is exactly how so many players get pulled into playing for set value when they don't have the necessary implied odds. They limp, someone min-raise, they re-calc their odds based on cost to call, and call again, even though their true implied odds are no longer their.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

Call pf, what's all the fuss about?

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't matter if you are closing the action or not. Your risk is the total amount of chips you must commit to continue play past the event (in this case the flop).

Misunderstanding this is exactly how so many players get pulled into playing for set value when they don't have the necessary implied odds. They limp, someone min-raise, they re-calc their odds based on cost to call, and call again, even though their true implied odds are no longer their.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://tobkes.othellomaster.com/imag...crazy-face.jpg

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

Baltostar,
Plz just stop posting him, like can a mod ban him. Because every thread he posts in he makes ridiculous arguments that are obviously wrong and derails the thread from potentially good discussion. Or maybe an alternative just have a baltostar discusses poker theory thread and only allow him to post there.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't matter if you are closing the action or not. Your risk is the total amount of chips you must commit to continue play past the event (in this case the flop).

Misunderstanding this is exactly how so many players get pulled into playing for set value when they don't have the necessary implied odds. They limp, someone min-raise, they re-calc their odds based on cost to call, and call again, even though their true implied odds are no longer their.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you a troll or do you really just not understand at all? The amount you're committing to continue is 1200, FORGET ABOUT THE ORIGINAL RAISE AMOUNT, its completely irrelevant to the mathematical portion of determining implied odds.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't matter if you are closing the action or not. Your risk is the total amount of chips you must commit to continue play past the event (in this case the flop).

Misunderstanding this is exactly how so many players get pulled into playing for set value when they don't have the necessary implied odds. They limp, someone min-raise, they re-calc their odds based on cost to call, and call again, even though their true implied odds are no longer their.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://tobkes.othellomaster.com/imag...crazy-face.jpg

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT. Baltostar, I actually found some of your theory posts mildly interesting. But you are absolutely dead wrong here, and really should stop posting this, since it's not a matter of opinion, and you might confuse someone.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

balto,
the time to worry about the issues you bring up is before you put the first chip in the pot. So, in this hand for example, when you raise QQ to 600 you need to consider the possibility that you will be putting in more chips than just the 600 and its implications for playing the hand. After you have put the 600 in, and the action comes back to you facing a reraise, you need to consider your immediate odds, which is the amount of money in the pot now vs how much you now have to put in. Part of that consideration of course is how likely you will be to lose chips after the flop (negative implied odds), and how likely it is you will make additional money (implied odds). You are right in that many players make mistakes BEFORE they put the first chip in the pot because they dont consider how many more chips will continue to go as action progresses. That does not change the fact that at the current decision points you cant use the money you've already put in to calculate your odds because you dont get that money back. In this example right now you have to put 1200 more and see a flop (with no risk of putting anything more in the pot before the flop), or fold and put in zero more.


To be fair to you, you are not bad at pointing out mistakes players commonly make. However, and this is why everybody including myself is losing patience with you, you constantly attribute your observations to your own brilliance at spotting the communities problems, instead of learning the fundamentals of poker well and coming to understand that the issues you are spotting have been brought up before, and talked about, and are generally grasped by good players.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

What do people do with TT/JJ here if they're considering mucking QQ to the rr? How about AK?

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't matter if you are closing the action or not. Your risk is the total amount of chips you must commit to continue play past the event (in this case the flop).

Misunderstanding this is exactly how so many players get pulled into playing for set value when they don't have the necessary implied odds. They limp, someone min-raise, they re-calc their odds based on cost to call, and call again, even though their true implied odds are no longer their.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you a troll or do you really just not understand at all? The amount you're committing to continue is 1200, FORGET ABOUT THE ORIGINAL RAISE AMOUNT, its completely irrelevant to the mathematical portion of determining implied odds.

[/ QUOTE ]

No I'm not a troll, I am a human.

In a tournament context, basing implied odds across a non-betting event (such as the flop) on cost-to-call arises from mis-applying cash-game principles to tournaments.

Please allow me to explain.

Consider the following proof based on two scenarios:

(For simplicity, assume you know that the blinds will both fold in both scenarios. Also assume that if you don't hit the flop you always choose to c/f and your opponent always bets.)

Scenario 1: Blinds 15/30. Stack 1000. You are on button with 22. All fold to big stack MP1 min-raises to 60 then folds to you. Your implied odds to play for set value are 1045/60 = 17.5:1 Your required implied odds are in the neighborhood of 17:1 or so (8.5:1 * 2:1). You call.

Scenario 2: Blinds 15/30. Stack 1000. You are in CO with 22. All fold to big stack MP1 who min-raises to 60 and then folds to you. As in Scenario 1, you call. Now, button min-raises to 120. All fold to you. If you base your implied odds on cost-to-call you are getting (1000 + 60 + 45)/60 = 1105/60 = 18.5:1, so you call.

What's the problem?

The problem is that Scenario 2 involves twice as much risk to your stack as Scenario 1. If you miss the flop you have lost 120 chips in Scenario 2 as opposed to 60 in Scenario 1.

However, in Scenario 2, you can only win 60 more chips than in Scenario 1 -- you can win only win 5% more.

In Scenario 2, your stack-utility risk is double for only marginally more stack-utility reward.

To play optimally, you cannot approach stack-utility risk in this manner in a tournament context. You can not utilize a criteria which instructs you to assume twice the stack-utility risk for approximately the same stack-utility reward across two otherwise near-identical scenarios.

In the 2nd scenario, the correct implied odds calculation is 1105/120 = 9.2:1 and so you fold (albeit the re-raiser probably brought the necessary odds down to around 13:1).

In a cash game, when you lose in Scenario 2, the twice-as-large loss is not material to your future ability to capitalize on opportunities (assuming you have more buy-ins available). Therefore, in cash games, implied odds may be based on cost-to-call.

However, in a tournament context, when you lose in Scenario 2, you have lost twice as much stack-utility, which (due to the escalating blinds structure) translates to a materially larger impact on your ability to capitalize on future opportunities than losing in Scenario 1.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Please allow me to explain.

[/ QUOTE ]

NO.

NO ONE HERE WANTS TO LISTEN TO YOU.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

Balto you're completely wrong but its quite obvious you're very happy basking in your own ignorance.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

Not to mention your example is ridiculously wrong in every way.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

I can't even read HSMTT anymore because baltostar puts me on tilt.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

guys, its really easy. just click on the name "baltostar" on one of those long-winded posts, and select "ignore this user".

Voila!

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

I really want Admo to create a photoshop of Baltostar like his StephenNUTS, Wolfund and olivert robots.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

For someone who seems to come to rational deductions, this is quite a weird line to take.

I'm pretty sure, the implied odds are based on cost to call.

You could reconstruct the second example with 60 chip antes from the 3 players involved instead of the min raises and evaluate it like that.

If on the other hand, you claim that the odds on the original 60 chip call, when you were not closing the action, are lower than calculated because of the possibility of reraise behind you, thats agreeable.

If anything, your odds are better in scenario 2( Express + implied)

-------
After rereading a bit of what you have to say, it makes sense, but it is just an approximation you are making for your convenience.

Yes post-facto, you can say that the situation you got yourself into did not warrant getting into because of the odds involved

You want to have a standard way of evaluating situations like that, you'll be better served by reducing implied odds on actions where you don't close the action. That would be a lot closer to the truth, albeit hard to compute.

ps: I have to admit that this 'heuristic' approach of yours isnt worthy of complete dismissal, and is mildly interesting.