wow the dumbest move i've ever seen

[brian67 0]

Spademan, you're off here. Be the table captain all you want, this is a bad play when you have a super short stack behind you and the second smallest pair possible.

Pairs that are not AA or KK are in basically the same shape here anyways, other than the high pairs that can take away a few cards to a straight. If you are the shortstack, you need to make moves. If the best you can get is a coinflip to double up then you have to take it. There is only so long that you can wait with high blinds and a low stack. As long as he isn't moving in against a higher pair, he is doing just fine.

[EyeintheSkyy 0]

For the sake of argument lets apply some math here. Lets say that here, 4 boy folds and lets the ss get blinded off in the next two hands and then plays for first. Given Keith Crimes over 2-1 lead I would say 30% of the time 4-boy will win 1st, and 70% of the time he will win 2nd. A fair estimation of the first place prize money based on sng payout structures would probably be 225$. So 30% of the time he wins 225 ( for a value of 67.5 ) and 70% of the time he winds 135 ( for a value of 94.5) making the total moves ev a whopping 162$. If however he pushes, and is one hundred percent confident that his opponent holds overcards... 47% of the time he gets 3rd for a payout of 95$( for a value of 44.65) 53% of the time he doubles up, the ss gets blinded out and he now holds the 2-1 chiplead. So in that 53% of the times, 70% of the time he will win first for 225( for a value of 83.475 ) and 30% of the he gets second for 135( for a value of 21.465). This makes the push with the 4s total ev estimation to be about 149.59. So every time you make this push 100% confident your opponent holds overcards, you lose over 10 dollars. Correct me if you feel differently.

If everyone were equal players, played the same every game, every time, I would agree.But aggression skews the numbers. Weak/tight skews the numbers. One person having a dead on read on another skews the numbers.If I have no read, or a tenative read on the other players I agree with your assessment 100%.If I feel I can put the other guy on cards with a certainty I trust, it changes the numbers all around.

He is already factoring in that you have a dead-on read and not putting in the possibility of an overpair at all. He is leaving out fold equity, but I agree it can't be all that much - and it probably is easily offset by leaving out the possibility your read is wrong. Again, he is giving you credit for a perfect read and his numbers still say don't push. I'm folding here every time. If he is on a steal and wants to believe it means he can push me around, all the better.

[jack24bauer24 0]

Its a horrible play with 33, there's no doubt about it. The fact that he was ahead in the hand isn't the point, you can't look at results like that. Unless you KNOW your opponent has ak and WON'T call you can't move in with 3s. Also, to do so when the short stack is about to be blinded out of the tournament meaning everyone else makes the money is pure stupidity.Of course you play to win, but its not like this guy is folding QQ against the chip leader just trying to make the money...he had 33 for petes sake, and if you get called you are either dominated or such a slight favorite it doesn't matter.Moving in with 33 here is idiotic.

[jack24bauer24 0]

I dont see how it was the dumbest move ever, like everyone was saying you were playing from behind. He could have made that same move with Jacks, 9s or even 10s and it's still a coin toss. Depending on the player and position most would not move in with only 3s but its a strong play at a chip leader. Ive seen alot dumber things than that, it was actually a normal play preflop.

Its a normal play by a donkey. 33 isn't the same as going all in with 9s, 10s or jj....it would have been cuz the other guy had ak, but there are other hands that can get called by...you go in with 33 you are getting called by aa, kk, qq, jj, possibly any other PP where the 33 is a massive dog, or if you are called by ANY OTHER HAND OTHER THAN 22, 32 OR x3 you are a coin flip from elimination when someone is about to be blinded out and you make the money.This is a stupid stupid play.

[SoullesS 0]

The guy made a stupid play, but the dumbest move you have ever seen? Some call the hyperbole police there going to take you away to exxagerationtraz

rofl.. couldn't have said it better myself hahahahahaha

[brian67 0]

Not saying that I would make any sort of move close to this with 3 3, but in fairness there were a lot of hands that he could have gotten to fold. Obviously the A K won't back down in this spot, but say he had A 8 or something similar, then a laydown is much more likely.

[custom36 4]

His move wasn't stupid with the 3's. But I'm not going to waste my time trying to explain why - most people won't understand or will be too proud to admit they're wrong.

[brian67 0]

His move wasn't stupid with the 3's. But I'm not going to waste my time trying to explain why - most people won't understand or will be too proud to admit they're wrong.

Agreed. Explaining why still won't make them change their minds.

[AspiringPro 0]

ak not bad call as it is 3 handed and if he has orig raised and the small and big blind in there he might be gettin about 2-1 pot odds also so callin even if he is sure it is coinflip is good play however in tourneys I suppose survival more important!

[sloshr 0]

I don't agree with the push here, but what I really don't understand are the people who fold here. If you don't want to gamble with the leader, you can still call the small raise, try to flop a set and double up if you do, but fold otherwise. If you still will not gamble with a set and care that much about 2nd place money, give up poker, or better yet, play in my game.I call in this spot, and I even have position. Who knows, he may even check the flop and I can pick up the pot without risking my stack. All-in is not the "dumbest play ever", but I think it is a bad play. My rankings are:CallReraise moderatelyAll-inFold

[TheHugeGuy 0]

I can't believe so much discussion is being had about this.Taking on the chip leader for all of your chips pre-flop with 33 is a horrible idea when the 3rd player is so ridiculously short on chips. Who cares whether 33 was slightly ahead or not? It was a completely miserable play.Its roughly a 50/50 chance to double up, sure. That means that 50% of the time you are losing the money that you would have won by finishing 2nd instead of 3rd. I guess in this situation, the jump from 3rd to 2nd was $50 ... So half the time you are just throwing away a "guarenteed" $50. The other 50% of the time, you double up on chips but still are not being guarenteed 1st place money. So instead of winning at least $50 more every time, and sometimes more, you're winning $50 more HALF the time, and are still not being guarenteed the 1st place money. Taking a race in this spot is wholly irresponsible for the guy with 33.

[Guest]

Unless I had no faith in my post-flop skills, this is a clear call. You don't want to get too involved in a hand with the chipleader in this situation. Dumbest move in poker? Not by a long shot, but it shows how poor players play that situation.

[AspiringPro 0]

This situation happened to me in big mtt should go in bad beat forum but never mind. I had 33 and there is 4 left the chip leader is in bb im utg and the other two have hardly any chips and are crippled. So I am conscious to not get tangled in pot with 33 against chip leader. But I decide good chance to put in small raise to steal blinds both short stacks fold and cl calls flop comes q35 chip leader moves allin. I decide despite the risk of 4th I have to call as I know I am big fav. He turns over q3 hits q on turn to bust me out 4th. I was gutted. Then what does he say oh i called PF by accident cheers for letting me know. He proceeded to easily win as his lead was unsurmountable.

[Spademan 94]

Of course you play to win, but its not like this guy is folding QQ against the chip leader just trying to make the money...he had 33 for petes sake, and if you get called you are either dominated or such a slight favorite it doesn't matter.Moving in with 33 here is idiotic.

First of all, a lot of you guys are pussies, and would get run over by an aggressive player whenever there are short stacks around money levels.Not that I think pushing is the only move if you put him on overcards, but the reasoning some of you are giving...And ...it is..."like this guy is folding QQ against the chip leader".vs AK, 33 and QQ are similar hands, wtf are you talking about?I digress though, if you think it's a terrible move, good on ya and hope to see you 3 handed with a short stack around sometime.

[brian67 0]

Its roughly a 50/50 chance to double up, sure. That means that 50% of the time you are losing the money that you would have won by finishing 2nd instead of 3rd. I guess in this situation, the jump from 3rd to 2nd was $50 ... So half the time you are just throwing away a "guarenteed" $50. The other 50% of the time, you double up on chips but still are not being guarenteed 1st place money. So instead of winning at least $50 more every time, and sometimes more, you're winning $50 more HALF the time, and are still not being guarenteed the 1st place money.Taking a race in this spot is wholly irresponsible for the guy with 33.

Ahh and there it is. The 3 3 wins slightly more than half the time even when called, and you also are making the guy first of all find a huge hand, and then still be able to call you down with it. The move would not be as good if you are assuming that an opponent will never fold, but if you consider that you will win slightly more than 50% when called, and that you will not be called every single time the move cannot be that bad. If getting your chips in with the better hand sounds like a ridiculous concept, then you might want to reevaluate poker in general and how to play a shortstack. I guess most of you guys would not have even played the hand without KK or AA right?

[jack24bauer24 0]

Of course you play to win, but its not like this guy is folding QQ against the chip leader just trying to make the money...he had 33 for petes sake, and if you get called you are either dominated or such a slight favorite it doesn't matter.Moving in with 33 here is idiotic.

First of all, a lot of you guys are pussies, and would get run over by an aggressive player whenever there are short stacks around money levels.Not that I think pushing is the only move if you put him on overcards, but the reasoning some of you are giving...And ...it is..."like this guy is folding QQ against the chip leader".vs AK, 33 and QQ are similar hands, wtf are you talking about?I digress though, if you think it's a terrible move, good on ya and hope to see you 3 handed with a short stack around sometime.

I was saying that you aren't simply playing for 2nd place money by folding 33 here the way you would be if you folded QQ against the chip leader in fear of being busted out in 3rd place if he happened to win the hand...that would be playing scared and stupid, whereas 33 is just playing ridiculously. As far as you saying you'd see me 3 handed with a short stack, thats not the situation we are talking about now are we? We are talking about the 2nd in chip guy going all in with 33 against the chip leader when the short stack is going to be blinded out. Feel free to disagree, but at least deal with that situation at hand instead of just making up a totally different scenario to make you feel better about yourself.Seeing as you've never seen me play in a tournament, your claim that I play weak tight and am always short stacked and will never make a move I seriously value your opinion of my play and realize you are a superior player (SW).I 5 table daily on stars under the name likestowhine and play in quite a few tournaments...it would be a pleasure to play with you sometime and we'll see how weak tight I am.

[jack24bauer24 0]

Its roughly a 50/50 chance to double up, sure. That means that 50% of the time you are losing the money that you would have won by finishing 2nd instead of 3rd. I guess in this situation, the jump from 3rd to 2nd was $50 ... So half the time you are just throwing away a "guarenteed" $50. The other 50% of the time, you double up on chips but still are not being guarenteed 1st place money. So instead of winning at least $50 more every time, and sometimes more, you're winning $50 more HALF the time, and are still not being guarenteed the 1st place money.Taking a race in this spot is wholly irresponsible for the guy with 33.

Ahh and there it is. The 3 3 wins slightly more than half the time even when called, and you also are making the guy first of all find a huge hand, and then still be able to call you down with it. The move would not be as good if you are assuming that an opponent will never fold, but if you consider that you will win slightly more than 50% when called, and that you will not be called every single time the move cannot be that bad. If getting your chips in with the better hand sounds like a ridiculous concept, then you might want to reevaluate poker in general and how to play a shortstack. I guess most of you guys would not have even played the hand without KK or AA right?

By your logic why not just go all in every other hand or something, seeing as the chances of someone picking up a hand worthy of calling an all in with are slim when playing heads up. I don't remember saying you fold the 33...if you put the guy on ak why not see a flop and if there's no ace or king, you bet/check raise as opposed to going in a race? Moving in with 33 against the chip leader when you have such a short stack remaining is a bad player....moving in with 33 as the chip leader and is quite different.If you are going to play 33 like that why not use the stop and go play instead? If your read is so bang on, so incredibly amazing that you know he has ace king, why not see the flop and if there's no ace or king you are very likely to win the pot going all in then and picking up a nice pot.

[Spademan 94]

As far as you saying you'd see me 3 handed with a short stack, thats not the situation we are talking about now are we? We are talking about the 2nd in chip guy going all in with 33 against the chip leader when the short stack is going to be blinded out. Feel free to disagree, but at least deal with that situation at hand instead of just making up a totally different scenario to make you feel better about yourself.Seeing as you've never seen me play in a tournament, your claim that I play weak tight and am always short stacked and will never make a move I seriously value your opinion of my play and realize you are a superior player (SW).I 5 table daily on stars under the name likestowhine and play in quite a few tournaments...it would be a pleasure to play with you sometime and we'll see how weak tight I am.

You're kinda lost aren't you.Nowhere did I say anything about you being short stacked.What I said was, I'd like to see you three handed "with a short stack around".Meaning, you and I are not short stacked, but the other player is.I never claimed you were weak/tight either, you must be pretty self-concious.I've said multiple times that folding the 3's here isn't bad.Multiple times.But if you're folding them vs what you think is overcards, it's weak.Pretty simple really.

[brian67 0]

By your logic why not just go all in every other hand or something, seeing as the chances of someone picking up a hand worthy of calling an all in with are slim when playing heads up. I don't remember saying you fold the 33...if you put the guy on ak why not see a flop and if there's no ace or king, you bet/check raise as opposed to going in a race? Moving in with 33 against the chip leader when you have such a short stack remaining is a bad player....moving in with 33 as the chip leader and is quite different.

I never said that you could apply it to all situations, as poker is completely situational. As i also specifically said i would not play the hand in this way. But none the less, you cannot call a guy a donk for getting all his chips in with the best hand and then getting busted.

If you are going to play 33 like that why not use the stop and go play instead? If your read is so bang on, so incredibly amazing that you know he has ace king, why not see the flop and if there's no ace or king you are very likely to win the pot going all in then and picking up a nice pot.

I personally would have seen the flop with this either way. Put out a fair raise to try to scare out the total garbage, and then evaluate on the flop. If the guy knew he was up against A K, which he didn't, then the move would have have been slightly more foolish for obvious reasons. Well they might not be obvious to everyone so i'll elaborate. The best poker you can play is where you would not change your play if you could see the other person's cards. So with that in mind, 3 3 would clearly not move in pre flop as he would know that he would certainly be called by A K. The question however was not whether this was the perfect play, but rather an acceptable one. And yes, any situation where you get your chips in with the best of it is certainly acceptable.

[EyeintheSkyy 0]

I never said that you could apply it to all situations, as poker is completely situational...<snip>  ...And yes, any situation where you get your chips in with the best of it is certainly acceptable.

This last statement contradicts your first and is clearly not true. Someone earlier on in this thread gave a mathematical arguement for all-in being -EV even if you know your opponent is on two overcards, not a higher pair. I have yet to see anyone challenge his numbers, but even if you do, your statement that ANY situation where you get your chips in with the best of it is acceptable is still not true.Leave aside that it is pretty hard to be CERTAIN you are getting the best of it with a 3-3. Say you at the WSOP and play is at the bubble. You are in second and the chip leader is at the same table - I don't really have to spell out the whole thing, you can take it from there. Would you say it makes sense to risk ALL your chips on just the sunny side of a coin flip? Sure, it is an extreme situation, but you said any situation. Sometimes it is going to be a -EV move. I'd say it is in the OP's original post unless someone can point out a gross inaccuracy in the analysis given earlier in this thread.

[brian67 0]

I never said that you could apply it to all situations, as poker is completely situational...<snip>...And yes, any situation where you get your chips in with the best of it is certainly acceptable.This last statement contradicts your first and is clearly not true. Someone earlier on in this thread gave a mathematical arguement for all-in being -EV even if you know your opponent is on two overcards, not a higher pair. I have yet to see anyone challenge his numbers, but even if you do, your statement that ANY situation where you get your chips in with the best of it is acceptable is still not true.Leave aside that it is pretty hard to be CERTAIN you are getting the best of it with a 3-3. Say you at the WSOP and play is at the bubble. You are in second and the chip leader is at the same table - I don't really have to spell out the whole thing, you can take it from there. Would you say it makes sense to risk ALL your chips on just the sunny side of a coin flip? Sure, it is an extreme situation, but you said any situation. Sometimes it is going to be a -EV move. I'd say it is in the OP's original post unless someone can point out a gross inaccuracy in the analysis given earlier in this thread.

Firstly, the top quote was mainly referring to expectation. Personally i would try to minimize the risk while still trying to make a profit. I personally make my moves post flop because i like to have more information about my opponents holdings and hopefully bet while i am a much larger favorite. Yet, either way what is being discussed is whether the move was acceptable, which it certainly still was. And do you honestly disagree with the second quote? Poker is about decisions, correct ones earn you money, and bad ones cost you money assuming the opponent is equal in skill. If an opponent is bad enough you can still profit from making less bad decisions than him. The thing that you are not getting is that the 3 3 gets extra equity from being the aggressor. And your situation about being in the WSOP on the bubble is quite different, yet in that case it would probably make me more likely to move in pre flop. Of course that's a situation that has no information involved with it, but assuming it's at the bubble then the blinds are pretty high, and everyone tightens up more. The way i play hands has largely to do with the psychology of the table, and when isolated, against the opponent i face in the pot. The problem here is that you can't seperate what i said i do not often do from what i said was in this case an acceptable move. If you found an argument for a pair being an underdog to two over i would like to see it, just make sure the math accounts for only 5 community cards. :wink: If you are so against ever playing coinflips then you are probably finding that you A) can't win a tournement, and B) seem to get blinded out of almost every one.

[Spademan 94]

The thing that you are not getting is that the 3 3 gets extra equity from being the aggressor.  And your situation about being in the WSOP on the bubble is quite different, yet in that case it would probably make me more likely to move in pre flop.  Of course that's a situation that has no information involved with it, but assuming it's at the bubble then the blinds are pretty high, and everyone tightens up more.  The way i play hands has largely to do with the psychology of the table, and when isolated, against the opponent i face in the pot.  If you are so against ever playing coinflips then you are probably finding that you A) can't win a tournement, and B) seem to get blinded out of almost every one.

Equity from being the aggressor indeed.I like to play in such a way as to keep my opponent as unconfortable as possible.Part of my thinking process in a hand is, "I pretty sure he's got AK or AQ... what would I hate pocket 3's to do against my raise here..."Well, I'd hate for them to move in, of course, because I'm a slight dog, and would *prefer* not to risk giving up my double chip lead and giving it to him... though I'd probably still call with the AK.Hand after hand it is this way. Unless I'm up against reckless aggression of course, in which case I reliquish the table leader title and stomp him with tighter, punish his aggression play.Again, not pushing here isn't bad, I don't think anyone says it is...but for some styles, mixed with good betting (or live, other) reads, it is perfectly acceptable.

[EyeintheSkyy 0]

The problem here is that you can't seperate what i said i do not often do from what i said was in this case an acceptable move. If you found an argument for a pair being an underdog to two over i would like to see it' date=' just make sure the math accounts for only 5 community cards. :wink: If you are so against ever playing coinflips then you are probably finding that you A) can't win a tournement, and B) seem to get blinded out of almost every one.[/quote']The arguement, made a page or two back was not that 3-3 is an underdog, but that move is -EV based on the chances of getting busted out in 3rd (almost 1/2) vs the chances of getting 2nd (almost certain) with a shot at 1st if you don't go all-in. Offset by the chances of winning vs 2nd if you go all-in and the 3's hold up. The writer assigned %'s to all these (and that is where you can argue he is off) and ended up with EV being over $10 greater if you fold vs going all-in. The key is the difference between 2nd and 3rd place money and the very short stack sitting in 3rd.And I am not at all opposed to playing the sunny side of a coin flip, but like you said, poker is always situational. Someone is about to be blinded out in this case. I'd fold and let it happen. Alternatively, I'd call and look at the flop. I'd be leery of re-raising - if I'm not willing to go all-in, why would I give him the chance to come back over the top of me? I can't imagine a situation where I would be SO sure of my read that I'd be willing to make that move pre-flop. Especially on-line. Look at a flop and fold when you see those aces and kings or just wait for a better spot.

[EyeintheSkyy 0]

Ya know, DN said he was going to start posting in Strat. I'd love to hear what he has to say about this hand. And, no, not because I'm sure he'd agree with me. He is pretty aggressive, he might just say, well, of COURSE you push! :canadarocks:

[Spademan 94]

Ya know, DN said he was going to start posting in Strat. I'd love to hear what he has to say about this hand. And, no, not because I'm sure he'd agree with me. He is pretty aggressive, he might just say, well, of COURSE you push! :canadarocks:

Doubt it. It's not an obvious push. Like everything, it's situational.The point I'm making is that it is nowhere near the worst move ever,and, depending on in-game factors, is a move I'd easily make.