SOOPOO
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 103
  • Posts: 6014
Thanks for this post from:
miplet
August 6th, 2019 at 4:51:54 AM permalink
People have used a lot of neuronal activity for this. If I asked "after rolling 18 yo's in a row"..... Your answer would be couched in "this is impossible unless something fishy is going on". Same for the scenario presented here. If this is a real money tournament with real prizes and real people this just isn't going to happen!
Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 120
  • Posts: 12283
August 6th, 2019 at 6:19:49 AM permalink
Quote: SOOPOO

People have used a lot of neuronal activity for this. If I asked "after rolling 18 yo's in a row"..... Your answer would be couched in "this is impossible unless something fishy is going on". Same for the scenario presented here. If this is a real money tournament with real prizes and real people this just isn't going to happen!



I believe the OP was phrased as a hypothetical, wasn't it?

Either way, this is something that could at least conceivably happen. And, actually, something very close to this happens frequently in (particularly free) online games. It's a pretty far-fetched proposition, but not ridiculously so.

Besides, I learned something throughout the course of this discussion that I found interesting, which is that AA can fail to have the best probability to win the hand even without another AA being out, but the two other aces do need to be in other hands.
Vultures can't be choosers.
RS
RS
Joined: Feb 11, 2014
  • Threads: 62
  • Posts: 8615
August 6th, 2019 at 2:58:57 PM permalink
Quote: SOOPOO

People have used a lot of neuronal activity for this. If I asked "after rolling 18 yo's in a row"..... Your answer would be couched in "this is impossible unless something fishy is going on". Same for the scenario presented here. If this is a real money tournament with real prizes and real people this just isn't going to happen!


I ainít no poker pro. But this seems like it could definitely happen. First player has a decent/strong hand. So does the next player. Already 2 all ins. Third and fourth player donít have fantastic hands, but theyíre getting decent pot odds, especially if they consider they are underdogs (in terms of grinding out rest of tournament against better players). Getting it in slightly bad isnít terrible for a fish. Now you got 4 players all in....I donít know how bad a hand has to be to make that a very terrible play to shove at that point. You donít need to have AA or KK to shove at that point. Suited connectors are good(?) and even one gappers are too, especially for a worse player who needs to rely more on luck than skill.
01000101 01110000 01110011 01110100 01100101 01101001 01101110 00100000 01100100 01101001 01100100 01101110 00100111 01110100 00100000 01101011 01101001 01101100 01101100 00100000 01101000 01101001 01101101 01110011 01100101 01101100 01100110 00101110
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 103
  • Posts: 6014
August 6th, 2019 at 3:10:41 PM permalink
Quote: RS

I ainít no poker pro. But this seems like it could definitely happen. First player has a decent/strong hand. So does the next player. Already 2 all ins. Third and fourth player donít have fantastic hands, but theyíre getting decent pot odds, especially if they consider they are underdogs (in terms of grinding out rest of tournament against better players). Getting it in slightly bad isnít terrible for a fish. Now you got 4 players all in....I donít know how bad a hand has to be to make that a very terrible play to shove at that point. You donít need to have AA or KK to shove at that point. Suited connectors are good(?) and even one gappers are too, especially for a worse player who needs to rely more on luck than skill.



We can agree to disagree. If I'm the 9th guy at a real tournament table and all 8 went all in on the first hand I'd be concerned things are not on the up and up. As far as Mission's comment about a non real money game, with nothing to win or lose, then, whatever you do is ok, OF COURSE>>>>>

It is a VERY bad decision to shove in 5th spot with a bad hand...... You don't know that we are playing some silly hypothetical that the net 4 guys will go all in also...
JoelDeze
JoelDeze
Joined: Apr 20, 2016
  • Threads: 49
  • Posts: 467
August 6th, 2019 at 4:01:04 PM permalink
Quote: SOOPOO

I think I like Gordon's response. Something fishy must be going on for the 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th guys going all in.

This is sort of like the question of would you bet on a yo after 17 yo's in a row. The premise is so outlandish you can't rationally answer the question.

I'd say a better question to ask a more realistic question, like would you go in first hand of WSOP main event if two people shoved first hand and you have AA in big blind? A novice like me would call. Negreanu, Chan, Hellmuth instafold. They know over time they can beat most tables. I know over time I get beaten.



^^ I agree with the above. First, a majority of the players should/would fold in that scenario. Has anyone ever entered a tournament where 9 players went all in? I haven't.
ďItís a dog eat dog world out there and Iím wearing milkbone underwear .Ē Ė Norm Peterson
Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 120
  • Posts: 12283
August 6th, 2019 at 4:27:20 PM permalink
Quote: SOOPOO

We can agree to disagree. If I'm the 9th guy at a real tournament table and all 8 went all in on the first hand I'd be concerned things are not on the up and up. As far as Mission's comment about a non real money game, with nothing to win or lose, then, whatever you do is ok, OF COURSE>>>>>

It is a VERY bad decision to shove in 5th spot with a bad hand...... You don't know that we are playing some silly hypothetical that the net 4 guys will go all in also...



I'm not sure what you mean by, "On the up and up."

If it's a tournament table being dealt by a casino, then my assumption might be the eight players (some or all) decided there might be an advantage in having one of the participating players move forward in the tournament with a deeper stack, and that, if that player cashed, the participants would all then split those winnings. Whether I was a part of that group or not, it wouldn't change the fact that I have aces in the hole.

To the last part, what's a bad hand in that scenario? If you believe that everybody else is playing high cards and you've got some low suited-connectors, then your hand actually becomes a decent hand. Let's look at the following scenario:

Hand 1: AcAd
Hand 2: KhKs
Hand 3: QdJd
Hand 4: KcQc
Hand 5: 5h6h

The probability of 5h6h to win that hand is 21.92% in that scenario and the only hand MORE likely to win is the aces. Even if you change KcQc to something like 9s8s, then the probability of 5h6h winning does drop below 20%, but it is still the second most likely hand to win, overall. Change it to 7c8c and the 5h6h is still the second most likely hand to win.

In the scenario above (the first one) shoving has a positive expected value, especially if there is an ante in this tournament. Even 5d6h is the second most likely hand to win, with a probability of 17.63%, if you change it to that.

Texas Hold 'Em is a weird game sometimes. If you change the order of the first four hands, I think you can very easily get into a scenario where every single player is justified in shoving, particularly if they are aggressive to begin with.
Vultures can't be choosers.
gordonm888
gordonm888
Joined: Feb 18, 2015
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 2070
Thanks for this post from:
SOOPOOMission146
August 6th, 2019 at 7:53:04 PM permalink
Quote: RS

I ainít no poker pro. But this seems like it could definitely happen. First player has a decent/strong hand. So does the next player. Already 2 all ins. Third and fourth player donít have fantastic hands, but theyíre getting decent pot odds, especially if they consider they are underdogs (in terms of grinding out rest of tournament against better players). Getting it in slightly bad isnít terrible for a fish. Now you got 4 players all in....I donít know how bad a hand has to be to make that a very terrible play to shove at that point. You donít need to have AA or KK to shove at that point. Suited connectors are good(?) and even one gappers are too, especially for a worse player who needs to rely more on luck than skill.



I agree- you aren't a poker pro. I do play WSOP Circuit events as a hobby, and have been at quite a few tables where I was the only non-pro.

The logic you describe is perfect for why all 9 players at a table might limp into the same hand (call the blind bet). But all 9 players pushing all their chips in? No.

In a tournament, the objective is to survive and eventually win cash, not to maximize your EV of winning chips in a single hand while exposing yourself to a 78% chance of busting out of the tournament.

In a WSOP tournament, I have indeed seen three people go all in on the same hand -the first person had QQ, the 2nd person had KK and the 3rd person had AA. But I have never seen more than three. The idea of 8-10 people going all-in on the same hand in a tournament is simply unrealistic. This thread is liking asking "if pigs could fly, could they fly at super-sonic speeds?"
So many better men, a few of them friends, were dead. And a thousand thousand slimy things lived on, and so did I.
98Clubs
98Clubs
Joined: Jun 3, 2010
  • Threads: 52
  • Posts: 1728
Thanks for this post from:
Mission146
August 7th, 2019 at 8:35:12 AM permalink
gordonm888: " In a tournament, the objective is to survive and eventually win cash, not to maximize your EV of winning chips in a single hand while exposing yourself to a 78% chance of busting out of the tournament. "

This is correct. In the stated OP, $500 with 500 entries... its survival. I've been "on the bubble" in several online tournies with rockets, and its an early fold 100% of the time. Wait to be late. I've also seen the OP opening with all-ins early and mid... again, an easy fold at start of tourny. No one else knows your pocket is AA, right?!?!?!

Even if BB, most on-lines start 10-20-40, some 20-40-80. The "loss" of a BB compared to a freezeout loss. There's the risk. IMHO fold, and remain.

98
Some people need to reimagine their thinking.
Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 120
  • Posts: 12283
August 7th, 2019 at 8:56:35 AM permalink
Quote: 98Clubs

gordonm888: " In a tournament, the objective is to survive and eventually win cash, not to maximize your EV of winning chips in a single hand while exposing yourself to a 78% chance of busting out of the tournament. "

This is correct. In the stated OP, $500 with 500 entries... its survival. I've been "on the bubble" in several online tournies with rockets, and its an early fold 100% of the time. Wait to be late. I've also seen the OP opening with all-ins early and mid... again, an easy fold at start of tourny. No one else knows your pocket is AA, right?!?!?!

Even if BB, most on-lines start 10-20-40, some 20-40-80. The "loss" of a BB compared to a freezeout loss. There's the risk. IMHO fold, and remain.

98



I still disagree, or think that it depends on the player. I think that the bigger stack gives me a better probability to eventually make it to the cash than folding does, even if I face a 78% chance of busting out of the tournament immediately.

I agree that being, "On the bubble," would make a difference, but being on the bubble and the very first hand of the entire tournament are two extremely different scenarios. If I'm, "On the bubble," then I would put my probability of making it to the cash at much higher than 22%, thereby making the fold pretty easy if the scenario is otherwise the same, or in similar scenarios. I seriously doubt that I fold aces if I catch somebody heads-up, or anything like that, but my fold range relative to the action certainly becomes more open.
Vultures can't be choosers.
98Clubs
98Clubs
Joined: Jun 3, 2010
  • Threads: 52
  • Posts: 1728
August 7th, 2019 at 9:54:34 AM permalink
In many on-line tournies, you are not going to see many repeat players unless you play daily or 2-a-day. In the years 2001-06 with $1 Tournies seating thousands, and $10 tournies seating 500+, I disagree. The cost of "learning your opponent" is phenominal, nearing astronomic.

In the OP, the presumed player HAD BETTER KNOW HIS OPPONENTS. At that price with 500 seats, one might expect to know quite a few, IF and only if that one's level of play. We do not know the level of play of the OP'er... take a chance against the big boys after a good win, or playing against like-opponents at the OP'ers level.

When seated against unknowns... el foldo. At best with a few known opponents, its a shove... at best.

98
Some people need to reimagine their thinking.

  • Jump to: