Donkey Test - Call 5BB All-In?

[Sherman]

Review:

Assuming there are no other tournament dynamic considerations, this is a call. Here is a great chance to eliminate a "good" player who could get in your way of winning the tournament. Also, given that he is good, he should be pushing pretty wide here and I wouldn't be surprised if our T5 was ahead PF a substantial % of the time.

HOHII in the fly swatting section talks about "putting" a villain A/I with 10x the number of chips. NOT calling an all-in.

But here it doesn't matter because we are getting the right price and have an opportunity to knock out an otherwise dangerous player.

[metsandfinsfan]

again kip it's not a cash game. You cant look at it solely from a tourny chip ev perspective. Knocking a player out of the tournament at a final table of a multi is huge

A key part of the question is this
Late in a large No Limit Hold 'Em tournament.

If we are in the money already, which i assume we are, and the final table is where the payscale starts going up, then every player we eliminate is huge huge huge. So you cant look at it as 13:8 pot odds. You need to look at it that if we lose, it will hurt us very minimally (less than 10%) and if we win it will knock someone out of the tourny

i still say easy call

[KipBond]

[ QUOTE ]
again kip it's not a cash game. You cant look at it solely from a tourny chip ev perspective. Knocking a player out of the tournament at a final table of a multi is huge

[/ QUOTE ]

I know. Sklansky in NLHTAP is talking about tournaments. I understand that knocking a player out is +EV (more real $$), but keeping him in might also be +EV. Depending on other dynamics of the table, it might be better to keep him in to gather more chips while other short stacks are playing conservatively hoping to move up in real $$.

[seke2]

I like that I can now pretty much and check if Sherman responded to a thread to see whether or not I need to bother. I was gonna post my thoughts, then I read his post and see he said exactly what I was gonna say already.

[8Adam8]

If there are antes, call
If there are no antes, fold

[halpgr]

I was thinking that if villain is a strong player then it could be an argument to fold. If we double him then he becomes a much greater threat to Hero. By folding hero keeps him short so that he is little threat.

If hero calls and shortie doubles, then next time around Hero would have to spend around 20% of his stack to look up a shortie push. By folding this time it makes it easier for hero to call shorties inevitable pushes later on.

[8Adam8]

Guys, "calling because you have the chance to eliminate a strong player" is simply stupid here.

If you are getting about 2.2-3:1, you sort of have to call. If you aren't, you can fold.

[bogey1]

I confess, I never understood the fly swat rule unless it involved implicit collusion to knock someone out very, VERY late in the tourney.

Why dump chips to a player with a hand that's not even better than random? If we can put the villian on a truly random hand, then call. It boils down to "If I have odds against his range, call, if I don't, fold."

I don't grasp why we'd throw money in without odds just hoping to bust someone. Unless, like I said, it's incredibly late in the tourney or doubling him still leaves him really short or some such oddity.

[Rant]

[ QUOTE ]
If we are in the money already, which i assume we are, and the final table is where the payscale starts going up, then every player we eliminate is huge huge huge. So you cant look at it as 13:8 pot odds. You need to look at it that if we lose, it will hurt us very minimally (less than 10%) and if we win it will knock someone out of the tourny

i still say easy call

[/ QUOTE ]

It isn't like he's going to automagically win if we don't knock him out. If we fold he's going to be at 13K, still very short and still very, very likely to be knocked out soon. Doubling him up is much worse for us.

[LMAO]

[ QUOTE ]
If there are antes, call
If there are no antes, fold

[/ QUOTE ]

I voted call because there has to be antes at these blinds.