Is Paul Sexton really this weak tight?

[BigAlK]

For those who have read Full Tilt's latest "Tip from the Pros," did this strike you as extremely weak-tight? I suppose it is possible to be so short stacked that folding into the money might be the most +EV, but I don't see how folding KK could possibly be right.

[mflip]

Some pros aren't good?

[LottaNirvana]

He said that he " Would've Folded Poket Kings"
that's SO easy to say AFTER the tourney...
but when you're super short stacked and look down at those cowboys, I seriously doubt that he ( or just about anyone ) would've mucked 'em, <u>no matter what he says now</u> .

[Cleverbeans]

Look at the situation he presents though, even if he triples, so he gets KK in against two other hands the BB will still put him in. He's in Harrington's Dead Zone in the example and the only hope is really to see someone else knocked out on the bubble and get something. In this rare situation I can see his point, since you've got to triple, and you have 4 hands to do it, but can slip into the money with some luck since others will be put in before you - try for the money. Any decisions to be made about playing for a big stack and getting first have long past.

Lets consider this situation, your KK against 2 other random hands is ~70%, we could probably discount this vs the ranges of callers against us but to see the point we don't have to. In the next four hands you'll have to double after you tripled with less then one BB to improve you survivability. Lets assume for the sake of argument that in those 4 hands you manage to get into a 60/40 with the BB from early position. So, in short you need to win with KK at 70%, then with your 60% chance on the second hand, if you win that one you get an extra 10 hands to try and double again before the blinds put you all in. That gives you an amazing 42% chance of improving your odds of cashing. In the meantime, Sexton says that "a couple" of players are going to be put in first, with a random hand vs a random hand that's 50% with only two players being put in ahead of you, they'd both have to win the showdown which happens 25% of the time.

Now what's better? Cashing 75% of the time or surviving ONE more orbit 42% of the time as an extremely optimistic estimate? I think for the example given Sexton had it right.

[JoeyJoJo Shabadu]

He deserves to get AA next hand 2 hands after folding KK...

[BigAlK]

[ QUOTE ]
Look at the situation he presents though ...

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually think you're right Cleverbeans. Although he doesn't specifically say how big his stack is he calls it "supershort" and indicates he'll be forced all-in in the big blind even if he triples. That's got to be something in the neighborhood of 1.5bbs or less and solidly in the "deadzone." (I don't remember offhand, but that's an M of 1 or less, right?) Giving up on the tournament and folding into the money is, I believe, the most positive EV move here.

But I wonder how many of the people reading this will understand how specific the situation Sexton outlined is. They have to put together the "super short stack" description along with realizing what stack size would pot committ them in the big blind after a triple up. Increase your stack to 4 or 5bbs (still "supershort" IMO) and the right move isn't nearly as clear. Tripling up there would give you enough breathing room to possibly get something going.

About a year ago Gus Hansen did one of these tips where he described a move of calling in the BB and betting out on a raggy flop (the raiser probably has 2 big cards and the flop missed them). It seemed to me there was a significant increase in that move for the next month or so after. In the short term I expect to see an increase of people on Full Tilt with less than 10bbs folding into the money, at least at low to medium buy-ins.

[mflip]

He should never get as low as he is in his example outside of losing a big pot to someone you barely have covered the hand before. Because he is thinking, well there's no point in doubling now he is probably also trying not to bust an orbit or two earlier when doubling would have helped.

[betgo]

Awful tip. Paul Sexton is a very tight player. I made a mistake losing half my stack to him with JJ vs. KK on a low board in the FTOPS ME.

Some of these FTP red name pros are very marginal pros. I think some of them get by on the money they get from FTP because they can't make that much playing. Paul Sexton is obviously there mostly because of his name and daddy got him the job there.

I would be more concerned about playing a regular high stakes online tournament player than a red name pro, and online tournament players are mostly not in the same league with successful cash game pros.

[BarryLyndon]

Who's Paul Sexton?

[betgo]

[ QUOTE ]
Who's Paul Sexton?

[/ QUOTE ]
Good question. The son of the commentator on TV. Like I say, I assume dad got him a job as a Full Tilt pro.