$1+.10, 2TT, Stars. All-in on first hand?

[Poker Clif]

Thanks for all your comments on early big hands. Since my post, I've won a lot of big early-round all ins, but I do understand why being in a turbo makes differnce with AK. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Now I'm pondering the later part of a tournament. Chen and Ankenman, in The Mathematics of Poker, say in their page 136 chart and related commentary, that in a tournament it is always mathematically corect to go all-in with ANY pair when you have less than fifty (50) big blinds. I'm starting out with a small bankroll and going more for the place (simply cashing), rather than taking more risk for the win at this point, and the authors admit that with this strategy they have big wins, but also a lot of just-out-of-the-money finishes. Always something new to ponder in the world of poker I guess.

[jafeather]

[ QUOTE ]
in a tournament it is always mathematically corect to go all-in with ANY pair when you have less than fifty (50) big blinds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please don't do this

[FeNeF]

[ QUOTE ]
Chen and Ankenman, in The Mathematics of Poker, say in their page 136 chart and related commentary, that in a tournament it is always mathematically corect to go all-in with ANY pair when you have less than fifty (50) big blinds.

[/ QUOTE ]
Utter nonsense.

[StregaChess]

[ QUOTE ]
page 136 chart and related commentary, that in a tournament it is always mathematically corect to go all-in with ANY pair when you have less than fifty (50) big blinds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Contact the publisher and ask for the errata. That really sounds like crack to me. Can anyone defend that?

[Poker Clif]

Your concern is appreciated. I got this as a library book. I won't have the time to work through some of the math and take a closer look unless I decide to buy it. However, some information that may help you put this into context: First, Chris "Jesus" Ferguson knows the authors, wrote the forward, and strongly endorses the book. Second, here is a quote, from page 137, to give you an idea of where the authors are coming from: "...97s is a jam for stack sizes up to approximately 36 units, despite the fact that it is an underdog against a random hand; what matters is only its equity against the range of hands with which the opponent will call."

Any further comments would be both interesting and appreciated.

[weknowhowtolive]

Thats far from advocating a push with any hand against any opponent with 50bb

[Poker Clif]

The quote was to give an example of the authors' reasoning. They did not say push with any hand against 50BB. The chart shows that you push with any PAIR, as well as with other hands down to KTo and K8s.

[Jerrod Ankenman]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for all your comments on early big hands. Since my post, I've won a lot of big early-round all ins, but I do understand why being in a turbo makes differnce with AK. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Now I'm pondering the later part of a tournament. Chen and Ankenman, in The Mathematics of Poker, say in their page 136 chart and related commentary, that in a tournament it is always mathematically corect to go all-in with ANY pair when you have less than fifty (50) big blinds. I'm starting out with a small bankroll and going more for the place (simply cashing), rather than taking more risk for the win at this point, and the authors admit that with this strategy they have big wins, but also a lot of just-out-of-the-money finishes. Always something new to ponder in the world of poker I guess.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whoa, whoa, whoa. It is totally incorrect that you should push with up to 50 BB. In fact, the entire section of the book immediately following the jam-or-fold table examines the question of when you should play the jam-or-fold strategy when headsup, and concludes (on p 139) that you should do so when the stacks are less than 10-12 blinds.

Later, on pages 269-271, we address the question of when to jam-or-fold when we are first in outside the blinds, and we conclude that you should do so if your stack is less than 6-7 times the pot, depending on position.

The values in the jam-or-fold table that go above these limits (up to 50) are simply the solutions to a particular toy game and presented for completeness and because some readers may be interested, but not to imply that you should play this strategy when headsup. I'm not sure how you could have concluded that the "related commentary" supported the view that you should jam with up to 50 blinds.

If you were playing headsup and the rules were that you could only jam or fold, this would be correct. However, you can conveniently raise a smaller amount.

Hope this helps with anyone's confusion about this point.

Jerrod

[Poker Clif]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for all your comments on early big hands. Since my post, I've won a lot of big early-round all ins, but I do understand why being in a turbo makes differnce with AK. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Now I'm pondering the later part of a tournament. Chen and Ankenman, in The Mathematics of Poker, say in their page 136 chart and related commentary, that in a tournament it is always mathematically corect to go all-in with ANY pair when you have less than fifty (50) big blinds. I'm starting out with a small bankroll and going more for the place (simply cashing), rather than taking more risk for the win at this point, and the authors admit that with this strategy they have big wins, but also a lot of just-out-of-the-money finishes. Always something new to ponder in the world of poker I guess.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whoa, whoa, whoa. It is totally incorrect that you should push with up to 50 BB. In fact, the entire section of the book immediately following the jam-or-fold table examines the question of when you should play the jam-or-fold strategy when headsup, and concludes (on p 139) that you should do so when the stacks are less than 10-12 blinds.

Later, on pages 269-271, we address the question of when to jam-or-fold when we are first in outside the blinds, and we conclude that you should do so if your stack is less than 6-7 times the pot, depending on position.

The values in the jam-or-fold table that go above these limits (up to 50) are simply the solutions to a particular toy game and presented for completeness and because some readers may be interested, but not to imply that you should play this strategy when headsup. I'm not sure how you could have concluded that the "related commentary" supported the view that you should jam with up to 50 blinds.

If you were playing headsup and the rules were that you could only jam or fold, this would be correct. However, you can conveniently raise a smaller amount.

Hope this helps with anyone's confusion about this point.

Jerrod

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the clarification. Nothing like getting it straight from the horse's mouth. I tried to real carefully, but as I said, I had limited time with a library book, and the chart, and the small section of commentary that I read, didn't say that it was a toy game. If I had read one page earlier or later, I probably would have caught it.

At some point I will buy your book, and go through it more methodically. I'm sorry about any confusion that I may have caused.

Thanks for your very interesting book.

Clif