[SGspecial]

[ QUOTE ]
The completion was a mistake, and chasing the money with no hand is a mistake. If he calls the raise, he will have paid 2 SB (albeit in two installments) to win 3.9 SB. If we just consider the immediate call, getting 4.9:1, well then he has put enough money in already to "justify" calling the raise, but that's crazy and not really a solid argument for this line. The pot "justifies" the call, but the line as a whole is clearly flawed. Put in enough ill-advised action early and you will eventually find yourself in a position that mathematically justifies calling one more bet, regardless of your chance of winning. This is not sound poker, it's a martingale.

[/ QUOTE ]

What the heck is a martingale? Wasn't he the host on Tic Tac Dough?

Seriously tho, you've hit upon a really key concept in poker. The original completion has some merit since there are a lot of antes to shoot for, but let's agree is was a marginally bad play from EP. That marginally bad play has put you in a spot where you may get correct pot odds to call every subsequent bet, but take the worst of it the whole time. I mean, it's really hard to turn down 5:1 odds as a 2:1 dog don't you think? (note: this is not even counting the times when the T is restealing) Then he picks up an underpair and unless the T makes an open pair on board PI is priced in the rest of the way.

Point is, you can't turn down good pot odds because you made a bad play earlier -- that's losing poker. So like Steve said, if you avoid bad plays early you don't get stuck in hands where you can play optimally the rest of the time and still get crushed.