The New Face of Poker(a funny little story)

[matthiggins 0]

I would agree with the laydown with that many all-in bets. Though this logic might not coincide with what everyone else thinks, its something I would contemplate. I would assume that at least one of the players (trembler?) has AA, KK or AKs. I'd be up on AKs, but barely, and AA, KK would have me dominated. Like it was said earlier, you're only looking at 2 outs in that situation, which is never a good thing. Another thought I had immediately is with that many calls, at least two have over-valued their hand, however, this over-valuing may have hurt me. For example, it wouldn't be absurd to think that someone in this situation has called all in with AQs or KQs. Now this leaves me with one out, where either of those players has an overcard, as well as straight and flush possibilities. I'd be ok losing my 600 bet to see what the other players played in this situation, gaining some valuable knowledge about my opponents. In this situation, I could sit here and kick myself for not calling a HUGE pot I would've won, however, I'm confident enough in my abilities, and coupling that with the info I just gained about the winner (and seeing the others eliminated) I'd be ready to get on with the tournament and continue making smart plays. Besides, I'd have no problem playing short stacked against someone who goes all in with 4 calls and A9s (not to mention someone that trembles with a mediocre hand). and XXEddie, I'd love to sit down at a table with you.

[Hatedariver 0]

One of the problems with "new" players is they see coin flip hands on T.V. all the time and they think this is how poker is supposed to be played. They also think AK is the greatest hand since sliced bread, but that's another discusion. Depending on what point of the tourney it is, it's a tough call to make with that many people calling in front of you. I played in a tourney last night, with a shrinking stack in early position and went all in with QQ and didn't get any callers. Every table and situation is different, I'd probably have to lay down the Q's in that situation. Intersting stuff.

[mk 11]

if you change only 1 of these opponents to "sane" and give them AA or KK, queens are a 3:1 dog, which still makes it a tough laydown as you're getting 5:1 from the pot.this is a tournament, however, and a good tournament player lays this hand down (you're broke, you're done) unless it's winner take all.

Acually QQ v. AA or KK is about 4.5:1 (roughly about 82/18)

I was keeping the other 3 players (we'll call them maniacs 1,2, and 3, respectively) in the hand as well with their sixes and fours. In that situation, AA is only a 3:1 favorite over queens (but about a 6:1 favorite over 44 and a 60:1 favorite over the two pairs of sixes, as only a straight or flush will help them). This is not my math, but rather the odds calculator's at cardplayer.com.

[JohnnyFourthSt 0]

... unless I had picked up on a previous tell showing one of the players had a huge hand.  ...

Well, the original poster did factor in a big tell, the fact the guy that re-raised him was trembling. According to Mike Caro, trembling is a sign of a very strong hand. The problem is, the trembler may not understand what a very strong hand is ..... So it was a good laydown, THAT time. But the next time one might be more inclined to call, since you know the guy will re-raise with a questionable hand while out of position.

[justblaze 0]

ive refrained from getting involved in many of the idiotic debates here, such as people arguing as to how those who dont tip dealers everytime they drag a pot are the dredge of society, but eddie im gonna do you a favour: You are misunderstanding the meaning of what a 'right' and 'wrong' call is. You are looking at this from a results based perspective. this is a terrible, and ultimately expensive way to analyze poker. This question was obviously meant to be with regards to a strategical analysis of the play. Strategically, the fold here is the ONLY correct play, for several different reasons.Firstly, you must consider that this is a tournament. your tournament life, as it is known, is at stake. If the OP makes the call here for 2200 more, he is left shortstacked with about 1600 if he loses. The payoff is huge, but unlike a cash game, he cannot reload. Therefore, the risk is too great to call here. Not only is this a tournament, but it is one of significant buyin, of more money than you ever or ever should (barring some ludicrous trust fund) play with given your assessment of this hand. We must expect that the majority of these players are somewhat competent (it turns out they are not). They have also managed to make it through half the field, which should further point to some degree of competency. The first raiser we can assume (correctly) has at least one overcard and most likely AK. When the second guy goes all in we must assume he has a big pair, 10's or better. If im the third guy, im not getting involved without AA or KK, and KK im gonna be nervous. Now it comes back around to us: we've got a reraise, an over the top all in, and another over the top all in. Weve committed 600 chips and are faced with calling off half of our stack. AT THE VERY LEAST, there is both a A and a K in play, and likely at least one of our Qs. There is plenty of play left in the tourney and we will not be shortstacked if we fold. If we call, we are at best a cointoss which is reckless halfway through a tourney for half our stack with a nice chipcount, and likely behind. plus, if an A or a K hits, we are down to what is likely 1 out and optimistically 2 outs. THERE IS NO CHOICE BUT TO FOLD. ignore the results. they are meaningless. In the long run you will lose this hand repeatedly. Even with 3 of the worst plays in poker history you were a coin toss. If even one of these guys had any business being in this pot, youre a heavy underdog. If you have AK and i have KK and were both all in and you spike an Ace on the river, who played it better? not you my friend. There is a reason people complain about being three outered: it doesnt happen often. its not supposed to happen often. it wont happen often. it goes against the laws of mathematics that it will happen often. what will happen often is the person with three outs, or in this case, QQ, will lose substantial amounts of money over and over again. PS you dont happen to live in toronto do you? we have this home game...

[Guest XXEddie]

To Justblaze, MattHiggins, and Workz...if you want to sit down and play with me just name where and when, I would LOVE to take your money!!!

[justblaze 0]

name a site... we'll play headsup SNGs best four of seven...

[justblaze 0]

well, eddie, 15 hours and no reply. i guess you're not quite so eager to play me as you purport to be. Or maybe you are, but lost your bankroll calling QQ for all your chips behind 3 all ins?

[Guest XXEddie]

well, eddie, 15 hours and no reply. i guess you're not quite so eager to play me as you purport to be. Or maybe you are, but lost your bankroll calling QQ for all your chips behind 3 all ins?

Unlike you if I post something....I dont sit on the computer all day waiting for a reply...I have a real life other than poker and poker forums...maybe you should get one. and come to Pacific Poker ANYTIME and I will take all you have

[Munky 0]

Good fold.