looks like a horrible call, but actually...

[NickG 0]

i doubt all the people think he's a horrible player.First off, playing cards is gambling.second off, this is one play...blah blah..really don't know the guy. who really cares? i sure don't.thirdly...did i say cards is gambling? yea..- Jordan

The people who think this is a bad call seem to think he is a horrible player, and have expressed this opinion in very insulting terms.I'm honestly not sure what the point is you are trying to make with the rest of this response.

[healeydays 0]

"I'm a pro and you suck"

and that pro sounds like he's a miserable sod...

[pokerboyvn 0]

Humble "donk" like me would be happy to splash $200+10 for some pointers... Let me know when you're free to educate me and I'll make sure I'm available.  Make it 5k.Let me know.

Another dickhead.More like a donk with a lot of money to spare.Did you just win a lottery? Why don't you play heads upwith Andy Beal??I think this will shut ur mouth up

[Pokerghost2 0]

i dont think hes a donkey. i dont think it was a horrible call but the play overall was bad. end result of the play was getting all ur money in heads up w 78 before the flop. this donkey couldve easily turned over some dumass hand like J8 and had u dominated. and also every once in awhile donkeys catch a hand 2. i could raise someones blind for two thirds of my chips with 7 2o and then make a good call after they pop all in cuz im getting a great price. start to finish i dont like the play. nail that clown when u have a hand.

[jaaaaakke 0]

Edit : I gave it more thought.I think if you did put him on Ace high, I dont like the call.Ahigh wins unimproved, and thats key in heads up.

[troyomac 0]

OK, here's how I understand the stacks:If walktheplank calls and wins, he win the tournament.If walktheplank calls and loses, he has 200 and his opponent has 1800...he has about a 10% chance of winning.If walktheplank folds, he has 850 and his opponent has 1150...a 42% chance of winning.So for the call to be worth it:P + (1-P).1 > .42.9 P +.1 > .42.9 P > .32P > .35If walktheplank thinks he has greater than a 35% chance of winning, he should call.  He will at least this chance of winning unless he strongly believes he is dominated.What am I missing here?Maybe IF walktheplank thinks he is a better player than his opponent, he may believe he has better than a 42% chance to win when he has 42% of the chips.  But why should he necessarily believe that?   Maybe he doesn't want to make the mistake of overestimating his ability in a situation that is generally dominated by luck.Most of the other players in this thread seem to think he is a terrible player.  If he's such a terrible player, why shouldn't he take the (shade under a) coin flip to win the whole thing?

Are you saying that if some random fish had 1100 chips to phil ivey's 900, that the fish has a better chance of beating him??? not a prayer my friend.

[NickG 0]

OK, here's how I understand the stacks:If walktheplank calls and wins, he win the tournament.If walktheplank calls and loses, he has 200 and his opponent has 1800...he has about a 10% chance of winning.If walktheplank folds, he has 850 and his opponent has 1150...a 42% chance of winning.So for the call to be worth it:P + (1-P).1 > .42.9 P +.1 > .42.9 P > .32P > .35If walktheplank thinks he has greater than a 35% chance of winning, he should call.  He will at least this chance of winning unless he strongly believes he is dominated.What am I missing here?Maybe IF walktheplank thinks he is a better player than his opponent, he may believe he has better than a 42% chance to win when he has 42% of the chips.  But why should he necessarily believe that?   Maybe he doesn't want to make the mistake of overestimating his ability in a situation that is generally dominated by luck.Most of the other players in this thread seem to think he is a terrible player.  If he's such a terrible player, why shouldn't he take the (shade under a) coin flip to win the whole thing?

Are you saying that if some random fish had 1100 chips to phil ivey's 900, that the fish has a better chance of beating him??? not a prayer my friend.

Um....I said in that very post that a better player has more than a 42% of winning with a 42% of the chips. Where in the world did I say what you are implying?In this situation, we don't know the skill level of either player, and the OP didn't say anything about his beliefs there. So we have to assume they are relatively equally skilled. So yes, one player with 1150 chips has a better chance of winning than an equally skilled player with 850 chips.

[troyomac 0]

i/m drunk sorry

[LuckyMcCatcher 0]

This is a godawful structure. i would be more worried about your gambling skills than any specific strategic considerations. Any pot you play preflop could force you all in and you wouldnt be wrong, but why would you risk 200 to win 200 in such crappy structure?

[typesick 0]

You played for all your chips with 8 high.You misplayed the hand.

[NickG 0]

You played for all your chips with 8 high.You misplayed the hand.

Are you criticizing the intial raise or the all-in call?I probably would have limped, and called a small raise but folded to a big raise. But once the raise has been made, I think he's clearly pot-committed to put in the rest of his chips.

[SuperJon 175]

You played for all your chips with 8 high.You misplayed the hand.

Are you criticizing the intial raise or the all-in call?I probably would have limped, and called a small raise but folded to a big raise. But once the raise has been made, I think he's clearly pot-committed to put in the rest of his chips.

Pot committed? He put in 250 of his 1100. I hardly believe that qualifies as pot committed.

[NickG 0]

You played for all your chips with 8 high.You misplayed the hand.

Are you criticizing the intial raise or the all-in call?I probably would have limped, and called a small raise but folded to a big raise. But once the raise has been made, I think he's clearly pot-committed to put in the rest of his chips.

Pot committed? He put in 250 of his 1100. I hardly believe that qualifies as pot committed.

He only has to put in another 650 to win 1150. He's pot committed unless he knows he dominated.

[SuperJon 175]

You played for all your chips with 8 high.You misplayed the hand.

Are you criticizing the intial raise or the all-in call?I probably would have limped, and called a small raise but folded to a big raise. But once the raise has been made, I think he's clearly pot-committed to put in the rest of his chips.

Pot committed? He put in 250 of his 1100. I hardly believe that qualifies as pot committed.

He only has to put in another 650 to win 1150. He's pot committed unless he knows he dominated.

and with 8 high, you're a fool to think you're not dominated, thank you.

[NickG 0]

You played for all your chips with 8 high.You misplayed the hand.

Are you criticizing the intial raise or the all-in call?I probably would have limped, and called a small raise but folded to a big raise. But once the raise has been made, I think he's clearly pot-committed to put in the rest of his chips.

Pot committed? He put in 250 of his 1100. I hardly believe that qualifies as pot committed.

He only has to put in another 650 to win 1150. He's pot committed unless he knows he dominated.

and with 8 high, you're a fool to think you're not dominated, thank you.

The only cards that dominate 8-7 are pairs 7 & above and hands with an 8 or a 7 AND an overcard (which are unlikely given the all-in raise except for A7 and A8 ). Hands with 2 overcards don't dominate you to a degree that you are not getting the right pot-odds, unless they are also suited in hearts.

[teneight 1]

You played for all your chips with 8 high.You misplayed the hand.

Are you criticizing the intial raise or the all-in call?I probably would have limped, and called a small raise but folded to a big raise. But once the raise has been made, I think he's clearly pot-committed to put in the rest of his chips.

Pot committed? He put in 250 of his 1100. I hardly believe that qualifies as pot committed.

He only has to put in another 650 to win 1150. He's pot committed unless he knows he dominated.

and with 8 high, you're a fool to think you're not dominated, thank you.

The only cards that dominate 8-7 are pairs 7 & above and hands with an 8 or a 7 AND an overcard (which are unlikely given the all-in raise except for A7 and A8 ). Hands with 2 overcards don't dominate you to a degree that you are not getting the right pot-odds, unless they are also suited in hearts.

nickG, next time you are heads up and you have 1100 left and you raise it up to 250 with 23s, just to try to steal, and the guy moves in, call since you have the odds to call. i mean, it's only the tournament on the line, no big deal right since you are getting mathematically corrects odds to call.:sw::nickg, stop thinking math for once and look at the actual hand, he could've easily had A7 ::weak ace:: and been dominted.

[fopkins 0]

$10 says smash doesn't play the guy. Any takers?-fop

[NickG 0]

You played for all your chips with 8 high.You misplayed the hand.

Are you criticizing the intial raise or the all-in call?I probably would have limped, and called a small raise but folded to a big raise. But once the raise has been made, I think he's clearly pot-committed to put in the rest of his chips.

Pot committed? He put in 250 of his 1100. I hardly believe that qualifies as pot committed.

He only has to put in another 650 to win 1150. He's pot committed unless he knows he dominated.

and with 8 high, you're a fool to think you're not dominated, thank you.

The only cards that dominate 8-7 are pairs 7 & above and hands with an 8 or a 7 AND an overcard (which are unlikely given the all-in raise except for A7 and A8 ). Hands with 2 overcards don't dominate you to a degree that you are not getting the right pot-odds, unless they are also suited in hearts.

nickG, next time you are heads up and you have 1100 left and you raise it up to 250 with 23s, just to try to steal, and the guy moves in, call since you have the odds to call. i mean, it's only the tournament on the line, no big deal right since you are getting mathematically corrects odds to call.:sw::nickg, stop thinking math for once and look at the actual hand, he could've easily had A7 ::weak ace:: and been dominted.

Yes, he could have had A7, but he is just as likely to have A2-A6 (in fact, more likely, b/c you have one of the sevens), which is a coin flip. On average, the range of possible hands here easily gives you the pot odds to call. There are far more hands in which you win >40% of the time than hands you win <30% of the time.23s here is much less powerful hand than 87s, because you are going to be at best 35% to win the hand. You are much more likely to be up against an overpair, and much less likely to hit a straight. Moreover, there is no chance that your opponent holds an undercard or underpair giving you a coin flip. I would guess your expected win % from 23s is probably around 30%, compared to about 40% with 87s.

[Actuary 3]

. i could raise someones blind for two thirds of my chips with 7 2o and then make a good call after they pop all in cuz im getting a great price. start to finish i dont like the play.

bingo.