another typical tournament vs ring game decision

[lokibeat 0]

Two table small stakes MTT. Down to 9 players (out of 14). I'm in the big blind with about 2k in chips. Blinds are 100/200. I have AQs. First two players fold, and then players 3 through SB limp. I figure AQ is worth raising in this spot (questionable?).I raise to 800. First limper re-raises all-in, for about 4k. He's got me covered. Everyone else folds. I do some quick math, there's about 2600 in the pot and I have about another 1200 meaning I could get about 3-1 on my money. I don't know what he has, but limping early I don't put him on any of the danger hands, i.e. AA, KK or QQ. So I call. I'd won a coin-flip earlier so I guess I kind of felt on a roll.He turns over pocket 7's. Another player says he folded pocket 7's, but I'm not too comfortable since I'm sure the other 4 limpers have some of my outs.Flop does nothing for me, neither does the Turn or River. I'm out of the tournament.My question is this. Do you make the "right" decision regardless of it means you're out of the tournament or do tournament decisions mean you don't call all your chips unless you think you're significantly ahead. i.e. if' I'd had TT in this situation.

[Jordan 1]

uhm, people are going to limp early with AA KK QQ more often than limping late with them.just thought I'd throw that in there.- Jordan

[lokibeat 0]

Been there done that, have yet to see it in live play though. My read said it was unlikely he had those hands. If that had been the case, I wouldn't be posting. I've already complained about that. In general, this was a very passive game with no real aggression (other than me when I was position enabled).

[strategy 4]

Even in live play, I've seen it pretty often. I guess if you were certain nobody was doing it (ie you'd logged hours with all of the people in the hand) it's no big deal to assume because they limped, they don't have a big pair. With no read, it's very dangerous.The correct decision in tournaments is usually to take any edge, so long as the situation doesn't make it completely stupid to do so. A good example of how taking an edge would be bad:A 3 player tournament, 2nd place gets their money back. You have 200 chips, blinds at 10/20, and you're in the BB. A short stack with 20 left is UTG, and the big stack with 2000 is on the button and has raised you all in, and you look down to see TT. Taking the edge you likely have with the race against the big stack would be idiotic because it's immaterial if you double up. You'll still have a LONG ways to go in the heads up match, and you risk going broke when someone else is all in the next hand.Anyway, back to my point. Unless the circumstances are extreme, you normally want to take pretty much any edge you can get. A lot of people have this misconception about tournaments--they think it's okay to give up some smaller edges and wait for situations with no risk. In a big tournament with a $1500+ buyin, this can conceivably be correct thinking. It's rarely right in a $100 tournament. Top two vs. a set doesn't come around often enough to win small buy-in tournaments.This is all from Paul Phillips' tournament strategy. I've read most of his stuff on his journal and on RGP, and frankly he gives a lot away for nothing.