Pop quiz: UTG shoves blind, you call with... ??

[Entity]

If this was a home game, I'd probably announce that I'll shove blind as well.

[Backspin20]

avg starting hand is q7o correct me if im wrong?

[Zele]

[img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[emerson]

[ QUOTE ]
A drunk player at a 200NL game takes a beat, and announces he is going all in blind next hand. He shoves his $100 stack forward before the cards are even dealt.

You are on the button. You have a full ($200) stack. It's folded to you. What is the weakest hand you would call with here? Lets assume both blinds are playing very tight and will fold.

(For those that don't play live much, as a predominantly live player I get put in positions like this more often than you may believe.)

[/ QUOTE ]

All in preflop against one random hand you'd have +ev with any hand in the top 50%. Harrington Vol 2, p 366

Any pair
Suited non-pairs: Q down to Q2, J5, T7, 98
Unsuited non-pairs: Ax, Kx, Q5, J8, T9

You'd be even money with the very worst of these and the favorite with anything else.

This assumes you can afford to bet $100 with a small edge.

[emerson]

[ QUOTE ]
Interesting responses. Can somebody help me out a little and explain why one might be willing to call with J7s or Q5s? Is it just do to the fact that your a slight favorite, like 52% vs, 48% over a random hand? If so I assume you would you always call a blind all in bet with these hands (not fearing action behind you)? (since he didn't look it makes no difference that he's drunk)

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess poker players have it too good. I've been a professional blackjack player for many years. I see you calling a 52% to 48% contest a small edge. This is a 4% edge and what a card counter will wait all day to get. This is when he'll push out as much money as he can. 4% is HUGE.

[Keys Myaths]

[ QUOTE ]
suited connecters 56+,

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just awful, and shows a severe lack of knowledge about why we play SCs.

[emerson]

[ QUOTE ]
If this was a home game, I'd probably announce that I'll shove blind as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

In the scenario given, it would be a positive EV bet if you called without looking at your cards. It is a 50:50 contest with the blinds as an overlay. A no brainer call if you had to call without looking.

[emerson]

[ QUOTE ]
avg starting hand is q7o correct me if im wrong?

[/ QUOTE ]

There is an additional factor to consider if the other players at the table, particularly the ones to your immediate right, have all folded. If they know anything about advantage gambling, they probably would have played any hand with an ace or king, or even Q with a decent kicker. From a card counting perspective, the deck may now be richer and increase the probability that the blind all in player has big cards. I don't know what the proper adjustment would be, but you may go a couple of notches above the 50% mark with your calling hands.

[ddubois]

Personally, I'm not a real gambler, so I'd probably tighten up to something like:

33+,A2o+,K6o+,Q9o+,J9o+,A2s+,K3s+,Q7s+,J8s+,T9s

Those hands are like 53 or 54%. I'm not comfortable flipping for buyins with a mere 50.1% edge.

[emerson]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If this was a home game, I'd probably announce that I'll shove blind as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

In the scenario given, it would be a positive EV bet if you called without looking at your cards. It is a 50:50 contest with the blinds as an overlay. A no brainer call if you had to call without looking.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ooops, I guess I forgot about the rake. There goes the overlay. So I guess it is important to ask if this is a time charge game or a raked game. If it is a time charge game and you have a $1 and $2 blind going into the pot, then you each automatically have an expected $1.50 gain on your $100 investment if you go in blind. This adds 1.5% to the profitablity of any hand you play, provided there is no rake.