is it better to fold pre-flop in an easy game w/ jacks?

[awakuni]

[ QUOTE ]

When you play against a table full of bad players with different stack sizes, the value of your chips is close to linear, and there is little reason to be risk-averse.

[/ QUOTE ]

as just a side thought, if i thought i was a much better player than everybody else at the table aren't my chips even more valuable because in theory i can do more with them and should actually be a little more risk-adverse?

[Gonso]

If you though he was tilting, sure, no problem isolating and playing him HU. I definitely don't want to take a flop with JJ multiway though, so for me calling is still not an option. If you jam and some doofus calls with AT or whatever, hey fine.

As originally posted, eh. I'm not suggesting you turn fold off a massive +EV spot, but as posted I can't say that it was not knowing the guy. I'd have to credit him with a hand as posted, and in the abstract I don't think I'd be far ahead enough to justify putting the rest of my stack in jeopardy... you have 5 players YTA, although at least two should certainly be folding

[bigbrett]

I don't think I would ever fold this hand for $20. I think I'm with the crowd that would make it $40-50 to go, hoping to isolate against AK, and be willing to push the rest if I get re-raised again for my whole stack. I'm not crazy about going all-in preflop with jacks, but these games it's probably not a bad play

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
make it $40-50 to go, hoping to isolate against AK, and be willing to push the rest

[/ QUOTE ]
That's not optimistic enough. In this type of game, don't be surprised if you isolate J9.

In the $100 max game at Foxwoods with a $2 big blind, a player pushed in EP for $20, and was called in LP. The pusher had QT, the caller JT.

People are too quick to imagine a coinflip is going to happen. If someone has TT, people will say the opponent has AK or QJ. If someone has AK, people will say the opponent is playing 44. When people play weak hands like the nuts, don't wait for KK to get involved.

In a past SNG hand, someone trapped with 55 against a big blind who would always push against limpers. Some people said it was a bad play, just asking for a coin-flip, but it picked up a lot of dead money, and it's pretty likely for a random hand to have at least one 2, 3, 4, or 5. The big blind had 52o.

[WhiteWolf]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

When you play against a table full of bad players with different stack sizes, the value of your chips is close to linear, and there is little reason to be risk-averse.

[/ QUOTE ]

as just a side thought, if i thought i was a much better player than everybody else at the table aren't my chips even more valuable because in theory i can do more with them and should actually be a little more risk-adverse?

[/ QUOTE ]
It's a cash game. If you get it in as a 60/40 favorite and lose, you just rebuy. You give up a lot of expected value if you sit around waiting for even better situations.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
if i thought i was a much better player than everybody else at the table aren't my chips even more valuable because in theory i can do more with them and should actually be a little more risk-adverse?

[/ QUOTE ]
There are two competing factors.

[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] If you bust out, you get the profitable opportunity to rebuy. Risking busting out increases the average number of chips you have on the table. If you are getting 3:2 to put your last 200 BB chips in as a 3:2 underdog, and can rebuy for 100 BB, then folding leaves 200 BB on the table, while calling averages 3/5(100) + 2/5 (500) = 260 chips.

[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] When you double up, you can continue to apply your skills to the extra chips you have... until you cover your opponents. When you start to cover your opponents, it becomes increasingly unlikely that additional chips will be used, so you expect to apply your skill advantage less effectively.

[Paul2432]

In a cash game, the idea that there will be a "better spot" later is a terrible rational for making a play. You should make whatever play is most profitable in a given situation regardless of what might happen on a future hand. I can think of only two excpetions: 1) You are on a very limited bankroll and the game is extremely soft. In that case passing on marginally profitable high risk plays might be good idea. 2) In a capped buy-in game if you and a very bad player have a large stack compared to the buy-in it might be a good idea to fold a marginally profitable hand that risked your stack so you can take the bad players stack in a later hand (of course there is no guarantee, he could lose it to another player or leave the table).

That said, in the situation you've given, it's tough to say. If players are really loose, I'd probably call.

Paul

[drzen]

[ QUOTE ]
That said, in the situation you've given, it's tough to say. If players are really loose, I'd probably call.


[/ QUOTE ]

He says they are "super nitty". I guess they're all folding either way, but I'd like ATs to pay the max to take his shot.

[mvdgaag]

Maybe it has been replied before, but in a cashgame you should never pass a profitable spot.

This only makes sense in a tournament. For example you are a 55% favorite now and the next two hands, but you have to go allin. You will not bust out of the tournament in these three hands 5 out of 6 times if you take all these edges!

Of course you have a chance to be an overwhelming chip leader one in six times. But especially in the early stages this doesn't help you much, since you will have a lot of hands to play and have a small chance to keep the chip-advantage you have now...

In a cashgame however you should take all the smallest edges unless you are on a small BR (for the same reasons as in a tournament). You can lose and buyin again, but your long term expectation is highest if you take all these small edges.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe it has been replied before, but in a cashgame you should never pass a profitable spot.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is not correct. That's why I said, "in general" but posted an exception.

You can't buy in for however much you want. If a fish has 300 BB, and you can only buy in for 100 BB, don't take a 500 BB coin-flip for your whole stack which expects to gain 1 BB. You expect to be able to use the chips from 100 to 300 BB more profitably than you expect to use the chips from 700 to 900 BB, so in that case, the chip value is sublinear, and you should be risk averse.

That said,

[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] People are very bad at recognizing which edges are small. Poker players are used to asking what the right play is, not seriously considering how right it is. Modern backgammon players tend to have a much better idea of how right a play is due to objective numerical feedbaack from computer programs, and I think that's part of the reason it's relatively easy for us to learn to play poker well. When people say they are passing up a small edge, they are often passing up a big edge.

[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] Most of the time, chip value is very close to linear, which means you should not be passing up edges.

[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] At times, you should be happy to gamble. The chip value may be superlinear, or you may be able to set up a better combination of stack sizes. If there is one good player with a deep stack behind you, taking a marginal gamble against this player can make much more profitable situation. Either you cripple him, or your stack is reduced to an amount where his deep stack is not as much of a threat to taking the rest of the table's money.

[ QUOTE ]

This only makes sense in a tournament. For example you are a 55% favorite now and the next two hands, but you have to go allin. You will not bust out of the tournament in these three hands 5 out of 6 times if you take all these edges!


[/ QUOTE ]
This is very misleading. You should almost always be happy to get your chips in as a 55-45 favorite in a tournament. There was a mediocre article on this in the 2+2 Internet Magazine, and a better one in CardPlayer earlier. You have a significant chance to bust out, but you will be in a poor position to win the tournament or even cash if you fold. Your tournament is always on the line, even if you fold. The risks of blinding down, or not having enough chips to take advantage of a later situation are less obvious than the risk of busting out immediately, but they are still there and are usually about as important.

Fossilman said that if you knowingly give up a 60:40 edge, you're not a good player. However, people erroneously believe that by giving up large edges, they will somehow become good players.

Cue the chimpanzee to jump in and scream that I'm wrong about everything because I've said something counterintuitive, hence worth saying.