could i have played this differently?

[Arin H 0]

I was playing in a 10 person NLHE tournament where everyone started out with $150 in chips and blinds started out at 1-2 and went up every 20 minutes. I had gotten my stack up to about 230 when it got to be six handed. At this point in the tournament the blinds were 15-30 when i picked up pocket 4s on the button . The small blind was a pretty tight and very unskilled player. The big blind had been playing very tight and really wasn't too much of a concern. I decided the correct play was either all in or fold since the blinds took a signficant portion of your stack every time around the table and anyone familiar with Dan Harrington's book knows that i had an "M" of only about 3 meaning i only had 3 times the amount of the pot . I decided to go all in and the small blind who had me covered by very little went into deep thought before calling with pocket tens and the big blind folded. I flopped a four only to be beat by 3 tens on the river. Now do u guys think i could've played that hand any differently or is it just a case of "thats poker"?

[TheIceman05 0]

I'd probably wait... You've still got a workable stack left, and there's no reason to push when you're positively going to be in a coinflip if anyone calls.But that's just meIce

[GrinderMJ 0]

if these players are as tight as you say, why not make a small feeler raise and if they come over the top, you fold.

[Jdr999 0]

I was playing in a 10 person NLHE tournament where everyone started out with $150 in chips and blinds started out at 1-2 and went up every 20 minutes. I had gotten my stack up to about 230 when it got to be six handed. At this point in the tournament the blinds were 15-30 when i picked up pocket 4s on the button . The small blind was a pretty tight and very unskilled player. The big blind had been playing very tight and really wasn't too much of a concern. I decided the correct play was either all in or fold since the blinds took a signficant portion of your stack every time around the table and anyone familiar with Dan Harrington's book knows that i had an "M" of only about 3 meaning i only had 3 times the amount of the pot . I decided to go all in and the small blind who had me covered by very little went into deep thought before calling with pocket tens and the big blind folded. I flopped a four only to be beat by 3 tens on the river. Now do u guys think i could've played that hand any differently or is it just a case of "thats poker"?

Your math is wrong.The pot (before anyone acts) is 45. You have 230 in chips left.230/45= 5.111. This is how many times the pot you have.As for your play, unless some one calls with pocket 2's or 3's, you are in a coinflip. It is playable from the button, but I wouldn't go all-in with them. I would raise it to 75-80, and see what happens. If you get re-raised, you know it's at best a coinflip, and at worst, you are a 4-1 dog.

[Arin H 0]

My math isnt wrong because at this time it was six handed and at short tables you use the concept of "relative M" which means i am multiplying my "M" by .6 which gives me a "relative M" of 3.

[Jdr999 0]

My math isnt wrong because at this time it was six handed and at short tables you use the concept of "relative M" which means i am multiplying my "M" by .6 which gives me a "relative M" of 3.

Sorry, I did not see that in the book. Still, with pair of 4's, and tight players behind you, you will only get called when they have a premium hand. It's a tough spot to be in, yet if the blinds were loose, aggressive players, I would probably push and hope for the best. By the way, what was your table image?

[dms26 3]

My math isnt wrong because at this time it was six handed and at short tables you use the concept of "relative M" which means i am multiplying my "M" by .6 which gives me a "relative M" of 3.

I think you're putting a little too much thought into it. Why not slow down the blind structure and not make it an all in fest.

[Mr Monkey 0]

Why not slow down the blind structure and not make it an all in fest.

[Arin H 0]

By the way, what was your table image? My table image was very tight. I purposely showed about 4 hands in which i had 10s, Jacks, Aces, and Ace King and everyone seemed to think i was a very tight player thats why i thought this steal was the correct move.

[Stylin_Fish 0]

I too don't remember anything about "relative M" in Dan Harrington's book. Are you talking about volume II because that is one I havn't read yet. I saw no such thing in volume I.

[Arin H 0]

Yeah the whole concept of relative M is in Volume 2 of Dan Harrington's book

[Guest]

Sorry' date=' I did not see that in the book. Still' date=' with pair of 4's, and tight players behind you, you will only get called when they have a premium hand. It's a tough spot to be in, yet if the blinds were loose, aggressive players, I would probably push and hope for the best. By the way, what was your table image?[/quote''] this makes no sense. against tight players, he has fold equity so a good deal of the time, he will win the blinds and if he's called, unless he's against a PP he will double up half the time. against LAGs you're gonna get called with a wider variety of hands, pretty much all of which are coinflips except hands like A3. i don't think it was a bad move.he pretty much had to fold, call, small raise, or all in. callings the worst obviously. folding a PP when 2 tight players in the blind when you have less than 8x the bb is pretty weak i think. if he puts in a small raise, thats almost half his stack and if he's called, hows he gonna play a flop with 3 overs with 225 in the pot and 130 chips?

[chindi 0]

he pretty much had to fold, call, small raise, or all in. callings the worst obviously. folding a PP when 2 tight players in the blind when you have less than 8x the bb is pretty weak i think. if he puts in a small raise, thats almost half his stack and if he's called, hows he gonna play a flop with 3 overs with 225 in the pot and 130 chips?

I think that if the flop comes three overs, then he's got a real decision for commiting the rest of his chips... but I'd rather have that decision then. If the players are as tight as he makes them out to be, I'm not sure what going all-in accomplishes that a 3x BB raise doesn't. The SB only has him covered by a slight margin, so he'd be looking at the same % of his stack as the OP was. Chances are if he calls the raise, he'd call the all-in, and either call is an indicator that you're beat unless you get help. So.... I'd say the raise leaves you with more options. Of course, chances are you raise, he calls, and catching your 4 your chips go in anyway... but I'm becoming a fan of options .

[gobears 0]

I think that it's called "Effective M", not relative M.Push or fold is the play. Pushing is fine IMHO. With your effective M around 3, there's no sense just raising 3xBB and folding if someone comes over the top.

[Guest]

he pretty much had to fold, call, small raise, or all in. callings the worst obviously. folding a PP when 2 tight players in the blind when you have less than 8x the bb is pretty weak i think. if he puts in a small raise, thats almost half his stack and if he's called, hows he gonna play a flop with 3 overs with 225 in the pot and 130 chips?

I think that if the flop comes three overs, then he's got a real decision for commiting the rest of his chips... but I'd rather have that decision then. If the players are as tight as he makes them out to be, I'm not sure what going all-in accomplishes that a 3x BB raise doesn't. The SB only has him covered by a slight margin, so he'd be looking at the same % of his stack as the OP was. Chances are if he calls the raise, he'd call the all-in, and either call is an indicator that you're beat unless you get help. So.... I'd say the raise leaves you with more options. Of course, chances are you raise, he calls, and catching your 4 your chips go in anyway... but I'm becoming a fan of options .

so would you raise 3x BB with the intention of folding if he goes all in, considering that you'd be getting around 3-1 or 4-1 pot odds?