Commited

[ceire]

in a cash game how much of your money do you put in before you are committed?
Yest i ended up putting in half my stack then folding because i was 90% sure i was behing however he showed a bluff?
what i m asking is do you always call of the rest of your stack after you have put in a certain amount or do you change your mind half way through the hand?

[Bona]

Since I mostly play limit but some NL I am just going to ask some questions here, I guess for both of us to think about and perhaps some more experienced NL players will come along with logical answers.

First: Why would we call the rest of our chips in a cash game if we are 90% sure we are beat? The only reason I can think of is if the pot is offering us 9+ to one odds and we are closing the action. Otherwise why not just get away from it?

When you put in half your stack you either thought you were ahead or the pot was giving you correct odds to call right? If you thought you were ahead has anything changed? If you were drawing behind with proper odds did you miss? Are the current odds to call less than we need? Maybe post the hand?

[PantsOnFire]

It's hard to say exactly when you are committed but it usually happens before you realize it if you are not playing attention.

Say you have $100 in a 1/2NL game. You raise to $10 and get 2 callers, on the BB. There is now $31 in the pot and you have $90 left. At this point, you will likely be committed with your next bet. Say you like the flop and bet $30 which is not unreasonable. You get one caller. You now have $60 left and the pot is $91. You see how fast that can happen? You are now committed.

So the key is the point of betting on the flop in my example. You are not committed on the flop but when you bet and got a caller, the pot is now 150% of the size of your stack. You need to move in on the turn. If that doesn't feel good, then maybe you shouldn't have bet that flop.

You must plan out the hand before you start betting, even preflop when the pot is $3 and you have $100.

So what is the cutoff? Well it depends on your hand and what you feel villain is on. For example, if you are on the flop and the pot is now the same size as your stack, you will be getting at least 2:1 odds if you go all-in. So if you have the nut flush draw, it should be a no brainer that you need to move in. If you have TPTK, you also might need to move in. And keep in mind that you moving in first will give you some fold equity as well compared to calling all-in.

[phydaux]

Read Professional No Limit. The middle third is all about this.

Cliff notes:

1/3 of your stack is the commitment point. Once 1/3 of your starting stack is in the pot, and there are still cards to come, it is usually wrong, mathmaticaly, to fold your hand unless you are sure you're beat. If you are not sure you are beat, then you are only rarely more than a 2:1 dog to win the hand. And that's what the pot is offering you, plus implied odds.

So once 1/3 of your starting stack is in the pot, your two best options are to either fold right away or be willing to get all in.

10% is the commitment threshhold. Once 10% of your starting stack is in the pot, then one reasonable-size bet (roughly pot-size) will bring you to the 1/3 mark - the commitment point.

So once 10% of your starting stack is in the pot, you need to start making a plan - Am I probably going to fold this hand, am I going to bluff at the pot (thereby putting ~1/3 of your stack in the pot) and fold if I'm played back at, or am I willing to get all in?

(BTW, "willing" doesn't nessasarily mean "intending." A lot of players get tripped up there.)

The moral of the story is that, because of the exponential growth of NL hold'em bet sizes, commitment comes much earlier than most players realise. So you need to start planning your hand around commitment very early.

[Albert Moulton]

Read Professional No-Limit Hold 'Em Volume One.

There is an excellent discussion of "The Commitment Threshold," and how it effects your plan for playing a no limit hold 'em hand.

The basic ideas are summarized with a couple of "rules."

[ QUOTE ]
Don't put in one-third or more of your starting stack and then fold. Or more specifically: Between you and each opponent, avoid putting in more than one-third of the smaller starting stack and then folding.

[/ QUOTE ]

And also,

[ QUOTE ]
Make your commitment plan before putting in one-third of the money.

[/ QUOTE ]

Based on that 1/3 rule, the "Commitment Threshold" is then one bet prior to putting in 1/3 of the effective stacks.

[ QUOTE ]
You reach the commitment threshold when the pot becomes one-fourth of the remaining money.

[/ QUOTE ]

In practice, that more or less can be estimated as about 10% of your stack, assuming your opponent has about the same number of chips.

[ QUOTE ]
Once you put in 10% of your stack, your're at or beyond the commitment threshold.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, to put it all together...

[ QUOTE ]
If you make or call a big bet after putting 10 percent of your stack in, you will have put in one-third of your stack. Once one-third goes in, you should seldom fold. So, at 10 percent, you should make a commitment plan, such as: "I will go all-in if the flush doesn't come, but fold to a big bet if it does."

[/ QUOTE ]

and

[ QUOTE ]
Once near the commitment threshold, your basic strategy should be to commit or avoid making or calling a large bet.

[/ QUOTE ]


Now, all that being said, there is a whole page of "Exceptions" to this general set of rules around commitment. And if you were really "90% sure i was behin[d]" and the pot odds were less than 9:1, then folding would be correct.

However, the point here is that (1) when 10% of your stack went in, you should have already had a plan before making the next bet or call regarding your willingness to commit your stack, and (2) once 1/3 (or, in this case, 1/2) of your stack went in, you should have been operating under a commitment plan of some sort, such as, "if the next card is a blank, then I will [push, c/c, CRAI, whatever], but if it is a flush card and he makes a big bet, then I'll fold."

[ceire]

ty all

[PantsOnFire]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Don't put in one-third or more of your starting stack and then fold. Or more specifically: Between you and each opponent, avoid putting in more than one-third of the smaller starting stack and then folding.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Once you put in 10% of your stack, your're at or beyond the commitment threshold.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]
Wow, the numbers in my example match this exactly (hint, I have that book [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]).

[pzhon]

This is a complicated area where people will apply things from PNL out of context.

To me, pot commitment means you are willing to call all-in. The point at which you are committed depends on your hand. With a stong hand, less money needs to be in the pot for you to be committed than with a weak hand. With a draw on the flop, less money needs to be in the pot for you to be committed than with a draw on the turn. So, it is possible to be committed on one street, but not the next. More subtly, when you have an information disadvantage, it is possible to have a correct call against a push, but to have a correct fold against a smaller bet.

It is important to understand being pot-committed both to avoid making your own mistakes but also to choose a good line against your opponent. You would like them to be committed when their hands are weaker, and you don't want to try to bluff someone who is pot-committed. You also should prefer to set up easier decisions for yourself. Realizing that you are marginally committed when you face a push is usually, but not always, a sign that you chose a poor line earlier.

Preflop, it is very hard to find correct folds after 1/3 of your stack is in the pot. Decent hands may be committed with 1/5 of their stacks in the pot, at which point they get 3:2 on a push.

I've had 1/2 of my stack in the pot and folded, correctly, many times. Generally, this came from times when a bluff was met with a raise, or when I had a made hand with little drawing power and simply did not have the odds to call. Some people will say that I should have bluffed all-in earlier, but that glib advice disagrees with game theory.