Donkey Test - Call 5BB All-In?

[Nairb]

[ QUOTE ]
Harrington said that with regards to headsup play I'm fairly sure...

[/ QUOTE ]

Heads up it is definitely a no brainer but Harrington refers to it in the late stages of the tourney the 10% rule applies AS LONG as you are well in the green zone and your M and Q are high in relation to the rest of the table.

Anyway:

Better than 2 to 1
Prob have 2 live cards
Can eliminate a player LATE in tourney
risking less that 10%
One of the chipleaders


How could this even remotely be a fold?

[cheburashka]

[ QUOTE ]
didnt harrington say he would "put them all-in" not call all-in? cause the extra fold equity obviously weighs in heavily.

Anyway:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 44.251% 41.86% 02.39% 10535890248 602458206.00 { T5o }
Hand 1: 55.749% 53.36% 02.39% 13430062140 602458206.00 { random }

And villain has exactly that here, a random hand. The spot is great for him to push after so many ppl are already out and first in vigorish and folders before you are so much more important than the actual card.
I would push here in his spot 100% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Harrington sez:

"If I have at least 10 times as many chips as another player, I will cheerfully put them all-in with any two cards. The combined probability that they will fold to my bet or that I will win the hand if they call is always great enough to risk the chance of at most a 10 percent hit to my stack."

[levAA]

[ QUOTE ]
"If I have at least 10 times as many chips as another player, I will cheerfully put them all-in with any two cards. The combined probability that they will fold to my bet or that I will win the hand if they call is always great enough to risk the chance of at most a 10 percent hit to my stack."

[/ QUOTE ]

ahhh - good post, that we review the literature. so obv. i was wrong.

[halpgr]

How late is it in the tournament?

As a chip leader, it may be in your interest to keep shortie around as shortie or someone else will surely bust before you do. Some other short to mid stacks may not be so sure. Since you're sure to move up you may have little short term interest in eliminating shortie, while others may have much more interest in in seeing him gone. With a cripple stack around it makes it easier for a big stack to be aggressive with other short to medium stacks who are waiting for shortie to bust so they can move up the pay level. A fold isn't bad here.

[Jbrochu]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"If I have at least 10 times as many chips as another player, I will cheerfully put them all-in with any two cards. The combined probability that they will fold to my bet or that I will win the hand if they call is always great enough to risk the chance of at most a 10 percent hit to my stack."

[/ QUOTE ]

ahhh - good post, that we review the literature. so obv. i was wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

But then I believe he goes on to cite an example from the final table of his ME win where he called a push from the BB holding junk and not getting very good odds. When he flipped up his cards you could hear the other players and the audience gasp. Harrington said this had the added benefit of keeping people from pushing into him lightly the rest of the way.

This 10% rule seems to be one of the most controversial bits of advice in his books. Seems to me many good mtt'ers disagree with Harrington.

[cheburashka]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"If I have at least 10 times as many chips as another player, I will cheerfully put them all-in with any two cards. The combined probability that they will fold to my bet or that I will win the hand if they call is always great enough to risk the chance of at most a 10 percent hit to my stack."

[/ QUOTE ]

ahhh - good post, that we review the literature. so obv. i was wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Me too; I answered "call" when I took the test for exactly the same reason. But if there's one thing I've learned from going through this exercise, it's that KipBond is not to be second-guessed lightly.

[levAA]

i remember this example - where the audiency whispered "harrington has gone mad".

But i think this was only a pot odd example, where he was in the big blind and got pot odds so good that he called with any 2 cards.

so from a mathematical point of view - there should not be a call in this particular example. from a psychological point this has to be a discussion if you allow a small stack - that can go in with anything - to steal your BB.

[Jbrochu]

[ QUOTE ]
i remember this example - where the audiency whispered "harrington has gone mad".

But i think this was only a pot odd example, where he was in the big blind and got pot odds so good that he called with any 2 cards.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think so. You can see this on the ESPN final table coverage and even the other players are looking at him like he's friggen nuts. The other players would understand a pot odds call in that spot with any 2. (At least back then since most were pros or very experienced recreational players.)

[Edit for sentence structure.]

[KipBond]

[ QUOTE ]
2. Also, here the villain puts in 10K in a ~5K pot, so 15K and you have to call 8K. So it's close to 2:1 and I use the 2:1 rule that HOH mentions also.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not right. There is 13K in the pot, 8K to call. So, a little over 3:2 pot odds.

[ QUOTE ]
As a chip leader, it may be in your interest to keep shortie around as shortie or someone else will surely bust before you do. Some other short to mid stacks may not be so sure. Since you're sure to move up you may have little short term interest in eliminating shortie, while others may have much more interest in in seeing him gone. With a cripple stack around it makes it easier for a big stack to be aggressive with other short to medium stacks who are waiting for shortie to bust so they can move up the pay level. A fold isn't bad here.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT.

I would have to say that given the scenario any justification for a call or a fold that doesn't consider your 2 cards has to be wrong. I think you can justify both by allowing for the CO to be moving all in with any-2 cards (then you call), or that he must have something like Q7+ (then you should fold).

You can justify a fold by saying it will be better to keep the short stack around so you can steal more pots. That's what I was thinking. But you can also say it will be better to knock out a "good tournament player". Although, you aren't guaranteed to knock him out, and will actually be giving him more ammunition -- so even then your cards have to be considered.

Hopefully the donkey test doesn't put too much weight on this question, because I think either answer can be justified. Good feedback so far... maybe Sklansky will show up to school us???

[ QUOTE ]
But if there's one thing I've learned from going through this exercise, it's that KipBond is not to be second-guessed lightly.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] Ahh... thanks. But, I'm no expert, that's for sure. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[levAA]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think so. You can see this on the ESPN final table coverage and even the other players are looking at him like he's friggen nuts. The other players would understand a pot odds call in that spot with any 2. (At least back then since most were pros or very experienced recreational players.)

[/ QUOTE ]

yes - you are right.