Gus' 6,4 Hearts Call Against Tony G on PAD

[theman]

alright, what you guys think about Gus' call of Tony G on PAD last week?

it was down to the final three (Gus, Ferguson, and Tony G) with Gus as the short stack and Tony G as the chip leader.

Tony G raises with AK and Chris Ferguson folds. Gus looks down at 6,4 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] and thinks and think. Finally he flat calls!...

To me this was the dumbest/worst played hand I've ever seen. First, that call represented 1/3!!! of Gus' short stack. That's a lot to call off with 6,4 hearts. If he felt Tony G was weak, he should have moved in to take it down before flop (at least have fold equity). By calling there, what was he trying to hit? Sure, if your opponent has a big hand, 6,4 is probably live...And suited connectors are good hands to bust a premium hand with. BUT, the problem is that suited connectors are better played in ring games and with good implied odds. Gus was't going to get paid off that much even if he hit a miracle straight. Most times, he's going to lose that hand.

And what was he TRYING to hit? A lone 6 or 4? ...So you call 1/3 of your stack and hit a lone 6 or 4...now you commit your whole stack and tourney on that? What if Tony G has an overpair...you're dead (and he KNOWS Tony probably won't fold after the flop no matter what hits, because it's so little to call).

So other than a miracle flush/straight, which is statistically not llikely to hit (esp in shorthand versus ring game) and that he won't get good implied odds to bust Tony, AND that Tony won't fold to him post-flop....What value is there in calling Tony's raise with 6,4 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] when you're the short stack at the table?

IMO, he should have been more patient, waited for two big cards or a decent hand to move all-in. The 6,4 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] showed frustration to me. It seemed like he purposely wanted to suck out and prove himself with those low-equity cards. Gus seems to enjoy doing that to ppl and it work well...IF you're a big stack or even even stacked...but not short stacked.

What did others think of that hand?
-TheMan

[Dan87]

have you ever heard of the stop n go?

[theman]

[ QUOTE ]
have you ever heard of the stop n go?

[/ QUOTE ]

i don't know what that is. could you explain?

[chicken10der]

The same thing I tried to explain in the other thread that you made about Gus playing on PAD.

[theman]

so stop and go is to call a raise and then go all-in afterwards regardless of what hits?

[theman]

[ QUOTE ]
so stop and go is to call a raise and then go all-in afterwards regardless of what hits?

[/ QUOTE ]

if so, why would Gus use that here with the short stack? he knows that no matter what hits, Tony won't fold anyways post-flop (since he was he big stack vs Gus' short stack and it would be cheap to call..AND that's EXACTLY what happened as Tony said, "I have to call, it's too little").

i can see how this could be potentially useful if you put your opponent on a bluff/weak and want to just call and go all-in. but given the chip stack ratios, Tony wasn't going to ever fold probably (pre OR post flop).

-TheMan

[Chuck Norris]

[ QUOTE ]
So other than a miracle flush/straight, which is statistically not llikely to hit (esp in shorthand versus ring game)

[/ QUOTE ]
am i missing something? do odds of things happening change in sh v. ring game(assuming he meant "full ring game")

[theman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So other than a miracle flush/straight, which is statistically not llikely to hit (esp in shorthand versus ring game)

[/ QUOTE ]
am i missing something? do odds of things happening change in sh v. ring game(assuming he meant "full ring game")

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, this is something Antonio Esfandiari talks about in his cash game book (on shorthanded play). I don't recall specifically if Doyle deals with it in SS, but for sure Antonio talks about it and it's somewhat just a generally known fact.

But the basic idea is that suited connectors and gapped connectors play more ideally in a ring game, because when you call a raise with them you are more likely up against a big hand than shorthanded. A hand like Ace, King, Q's etc. will give you more live cards. In a ring game, ppl a theoretically less likely to raise (esp like in first position) without a big pair (or AK). Whereas shorthanded, you have ppl raising with much less stringent requirements. So Antonio's point was simply that that suited connectors are:

a.) more likely up against a big pair and live in full ring game.

b.) and if A is true, more likely to be profitable when played, so that if you hit your hand, you'll get paid off (since most ppl have trouble letting go of pair).

c.) more likely has live cards to catch.

-TheMan

[Kimbell175113]

Theman,

Gus doesn't care what his cards are. They're not bad enough to fold against Tony's range, and they're not good enough to get all-in preflop and see five cards to a showdown. Honestly, the stop-n-go is THE ONLY option left.

[Chuck Norris]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So other than a miracle flush/straight, which is statistically not llikely to hit (esp in shorthand versus ring game)

[/ QUOTE ]
am i missing something? do odds of things happening change in sh v. ring game(assuming he meant "full ring game")

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, this is something Antonio Esfandiari talks about in his cash game book (on shorthanded play). I don't recall specifically if Doyle deals with it in SS, but for sure Antonio talks about it and it's somewhat just a generally known fact.

But the basic idea is that suited connectors and gapped connectors play more ideally in a ring game, because when you call a raise with them you are more likely up against a big hand than shorthanded. A hand like Ace, King, Q's etc. will give you more live cards. In a ring game, ppl a theoretically less likely to raise (esp like in first position) without a big pair (or AK). Whereas shorthanded, you have ppl raising with much less stringent requirements. So Antonio's point was simply that that suited connectors are:

a.) more likely up against a big pair and live in full ring game.

b.) and if A is true, more likely to be profitable when played, so that if you hit your hand, you'll get paid off (since most ppl have trouble letting go of pair).

c.) more likely has live cards to catch.

-TheMan

[/ QUOTE ]
ok, so it has nothing to do with statistics then really, right?