|
|
#31
03-16-2007, 05:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: All-In Check Down Etiquette ???
2. If I have a big stack at a tourney in a situation like yours, I may not even want the shortstack to be knocked out. In bubble situations, big stacks can bully and collect even more chips so why would you want to change that?
Finally someone agrees with me. If im the big stack there are many time I wont even want someone to get knocked out so I can continue to rob everyone blind on the bubble. By the way in this case the guy complaining is a braindead donkey. 
|
|
#32
03-16-2007, 05:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: All-In Check Down Etiquette ???
[ QUOTE ]
darynisrite, your smallish bet shows them you have a hand , them calling is retarded, if you flip over something like 9 high then maybe thats a little dickish but only slightly [/ QUOTE ] No, I'd say a pure bluff into a dry sidepot would be very dickish. If you can't win, a bluff like that is a lot like chip dumping--you're protecting the all-in shortstack with no possible gain for yourself. Seriously dickish. My own rule in such situations is to use betting to indicate to my fellow players if I have anything. If I flop two pair or better, I'm betting it. I'm telling 'em I have something I'm pretty sure is good, and I can no longer just check it down and wait to be drawn out on by one of the others still active. Nobody's ever expressed unhappiness with me over this. And if someone plays back at me, the game is back on ferreal--I'm now in a battle for a serious pile of chips and may be able to do damage to two opponents instead of one.
|
|
#33
03-16-2007, 06:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: All-In Check Down Etiquette ???
No, I'd say a pure bluff into a dry sidepot would be very dickish. If you can't win, a bluff like that is a lot like chip dumping--you're protecting the all-in shortstack with no possible gain for yourself.
Thats not always true Hypothetically: 10 people left 9 pay but 4-9 pay almost the same (but a significant some say 50 k for 9th) Blinds 100/200 Stacks are b.w 1000 and 1500 except I have 20k Why on this planet would I wanna knock anyone out?
|
|
#34
03-16-2007, 06:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: All-In Check Down Etiquette ???
Personally, I think it is a little off to bet the nuts on the river. A river you only got to see due to the 'collusion' happening at the table.
I have no problems with betting the flopped nuts, or a very strong hand, but I think once you enter into the 'collusion pact' the hand should just be checked down. However, if somebody decides to try to take advantage of the 'check down collusion' then their stack becomes a fair target. Must say, reading this thread, I am suprised that my idea is in the minority.
|
|
#35
03-16-2007, 06:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: All-In Check Down Etiquette ???
[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I think it is a little off to bet the nuts on the river. A river you only got to see due to the 'collusion' happening at the table. I have no problems with betting the flopped nuts, or a very strong hand, but I think once you enter into the 'collusion pact' the hand should just be checked down. However, if somebody decides to try to take advantage of the 'check down collusion' then their stack becomes a fair target. Must say, reading this thread, I am suprised that my idea is in the minority. [/ QUOTE ] But the point is that you don't enter into a "collusion pact" that would be against the rules. What you do is act in a way that benefits you, and hope that the other players recognize that they will be equally benefitted by acting likewise that is not the same as entering into a pact (And as others have pointed out in this thread it is not always true that you or the other players are benefitted by eliminating the all-in player). Players who enter into a pact are cheaters.
|
|
#36
03-16-2007, 06:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: All-In Check Down Etiquette ???
The unwritten rule is youdont bluff at the dry side pot
His call is terrible to begin with on the river, but in this case the unwritten rule makes the call that much worst with 52nd pair. Hes just pissed because he ate lead paint as a baby.
|
|
#37
03-16-2007, 08:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: All-In Check Down Etiquette ???
Common etiquette is to check down and only bet if you have the nuts. Your opps were obv too stupid to realize that this is what you were doing...their loss, your gain.
|
|
#38
03-16-2007, 08:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: All-In Check Down Etiquette ???
It's not even dickish to bluff into a dry side pot. You can play your hand however you want. However, it IS stupid to bluff into a dry side pot if you want to knock the player out. The exception to wanting to knock them out has already been noted.
When I get mad at people who stupidly bluff into dry side pots, I am getting mad at stupidity, not dickishness.
|
|
#40
03-16-2007, 09:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: All-In Check Down Etiquette ???
ok. There may be rare times when bluffing with the intention of giving the chips to the all-in shortstack is a good strategy. But I believe these times are few and very far between. Once you're in the money and each additional player out represents more guaranteed cash in your pocket, it's hard for me to imagine a situation where the EV from keeping a player in exceeds the EV from knocking 'em out; particularly when you factor in the possibility someone else has a real hand and calls your bluff. On the bubble, as the chip leader, with a solid read on the other players when you have command of the table... ok. Pretty sure I've never seen anyone actually do this in a B&M tourney, though.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
