|
|
#12
02-14-2006, 01:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 55 - spite push?
[ QUOTE ]
icm fold: 0.0924 icm call/lose: 0.0578 icm call/win: 0.1376 According to this, I have to win 43.4% to break even by ICM/$EV. [/ QUOTE ] I can't argue with this, so I guess I'll have to change my mind and say calling the all-in is better than folding. You have to be >45% against his range with A8s since his reraise is probably bulls***. I'm with the people who want to check and see a flop though. 
|
|
#13
02-14-2006, 01:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 55 - spite push?
I don't know, but you said he was a donk. People are putting him on way too tight a range for a donk. One should probably weight the better hands higher, but doesn't anyone else see what donks do?
Now there are donks and there are DONKS. I make loosish calls against DONKS and am generally happy doing it, though nothing sucks worse than getting pwned by a DONK.
|
|
#14
02-14-2006, 03:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 55 - spite push?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] icm fold: 0.0924 icm call/lose: 0.0578 icm call/win: 0.1376 According to this, I have to win 43.4% to break even by ICM/$EV. [/ QUOTE ] I can't argue with this, so I guess I'll have to change my mind and say calling the all-in is better than folding. You have to be >45% against his range with A8s since his reraise is probably bulls***. I'm with the people who want to check and see a flop though. [/ QUOTE ] I suppose checking is the standard play. I raised for the following reasons... - I likely have the best hand. - I have position. - There is no one else in the pot. - His stack is too small to break me. I should note that 70 is not my standard raise here. I think I wanted to raise 80 or 90, but I couldn't get the slider to stop where I wanted....and I just gave up and hit raise when it was on 70. Some might call this laziness, or a lack of fine motor skills. I prefer to think of it as varying my bet sizes based on a random external factor for game theory reasons.
|
|
#16
02-15-2006, 07:24 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 55 - spite push?
Truly unbelievable that several of you advocate risking nearly half your stack with A/8 in the early levels against a limp/re-raiser all-in...(I'm sure the fact that it's suited greatly influences your decision)...
I guess if you're a very average player who doesn't care about chip preservation, it MIGHT be okay. If you're a decent player who can outplay opponents later in the game, it's a terrible all-in call.
|
|
#17
02-15-2006, 02:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 55 - spite push?
[ QUOTE ]
Truly unbelievable that several of you advocate risking nearly half your stack with A/8 in the early levels against a limp/re-raiser all-in...(I'm sure the fact that it's suited greatly influences your decision)... I guess if you're a very average player who doesn't care about chip preservation, it MIGHT be okay. If you're a decent player who can outplay opponents later in the game, it's a terrible all-in call. [/ QUOTE ] Why don't you try outplaying your opponents during the whole tournament? What hand range do you put him on to make this call wrong?
|
|
#18
02-15-2006, 04:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 55 - spite push?
A/8 is a very marginal hand and you are likely dominated by your opponent. I believe that NOT going down to 500 chips early in the tournament is more important than POSSIBLY moving up to 1400 chips. I'm all about Gigabet's block theory and occasionally making marginal calls so that you can get to the next tier, but it certainly works both ways. This is a VERY marginal call that will significantly reduce your chances of placing if it doesn't work out...
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
