j'dags callin here

[CodyHartman 0]

He's getting 2.8:1 to call. It doesnt matter what his 2 cards are. Is he a 2.8:1 underdog?I think this call is nearly automatic. If you are thinking I am dominated and dont call despite your calling price, then you may need to rethink pot odds.

[turd ferguson 1]

He's getting 2.8:1 to call. It doesnt matter what his 2 cards are. Is he a 2.8:1 underdog?I think this call is nearly automatic. If you are thinking I am dominated and dont call despite your calling price, then you may need to rethink pot odds.

What? He was a 9:1 dog! How should i rethink my pot odds if i choose to fold when getting 2.8:1, and i am a 9:1 underdog? What the fuck am i missing?

[lboarts 0]

He's getting 2.8:1 to call. It doesnt matter what his 2 cards are. Is he a 2.8:1 underdog?I think this call is nearly automatic. If you are thinking I am dominated and dont call despite your calling price, then you may need to rethink pot odds.

Well said, easy call here. His stack size dictates this call as much as his pot odds do, and the fact that your 2 opponents are all in means he won't have to put any more into the pot. And the scenario should he win this hand is icing on the cake. A laydown here would be absurd, IMHO.

[CodyHartman 0]

He's getting 2.8:1 to call. It doesnt matter what his 2 cards are. Is he a 2.8:1 underdog?I think this call is nearly automatic. If you are thinking I am dominated and dont call despite your calling price, then you may need to rethink pot odds.

Well said, easy call here. His stack size dictates this call as much as his pot odds do, and the fact that your 2 opponents are all in means he won't have to put any more into the pot. And the scenario should he win this hand is icing on the cake. A laydown here would be absurd, IMHO.

Another point is after the hand he still had 2.2 million in chips and was 2nd chip leader.

[lboarts 0]

He's getting 2.8:1 to call. It doesnt matter what his 2 cards are. Is he a 2.8:1 underdog?I think this call is nearly automatic. If you are thinking I am dominated and dont call despite your calling price, then you may need to rethink pot odds.

Well said, easy call here. His stack size dictates this call as much as his pot odds do, and the fact that your 2 opponents are all in means he won't have to put any more into the pot. And the scenario should he win this hand is icing on the cake. A laydown here would be absurd, IMHO.

Another point is after the hand he still had 2.2 million in chips and was 2nd chip leader.

Ya, that's kinda what I meant by his stack size dictating an easy call. If he was an average stack, folding here might be considered, even with those pot odds.I've noticed alot of people considering pot odds in certain tournament situations and basing their decisions off that without even considering "stack odds", i.e. what percentage of my stack will this cost me? IMO this is one of the biggest mistakes people make.In a cash game, stack odds shouldn't even be considered, because your basing your decisions on what's profitable in the long run. So if you lose your stack, you write it off to variance and reload. But in a trny, where losing your stack means your done, the long run should carry less weight, and your stack odds should be considered as much as your pot odds. Not fully understanding this is what causes many good cash players to suck at trnys and vice versa.

[richgambler 0]

Im sticking to my guns on this one, fellas....I still think this call was pretty bad....I just dont see the reason to risk that many chips when youre clearly nailed to the wall(def. worse than a 3-1 dog, and not getting nearly the right price).....I dont know, maybe Im a donk :wink:

[Booyakasha 0]

He's getting 2.8:1 to call. It doesnt matter what his 2 cards are. Is he a 2.8:1 underdog?I think this call is nearly automatic. If you are thinking I am dominated and dont call despite your calling price, then you may need to rethink pot odds.

What? He was a 9:1 dog! How should i rethink my pot odds if i choose to fold when getting 2.8:1, and i am a 9:1 underdog? What the fuck am i missing?

Absolutely, you fold this hand - 2:1 is only valuable if you win your hand that much of the time - not if you're a 9:1 dog - easy fold. And he figured he was a dog pretty badly - so it certainly not right to call in this spot at all.

[Foulky 0]

I agree with rich on this one. DN once said that Juanda told him if you're a chip leader in a tournament there is no reason to put your money in at a bad spot just to try to gamble and knock people out because you can use those chips to bully people around and win them much easier. I won't even get into the math of 2.8-1 when he was a 9-1 dog. The bottom line is that there were 7 people left which meant that someone was gonna go out on the TV bubble. This means that people are going to play tight so let's say JC wins the hand a doubles up. That still leaves JDags 2nd in chips in very little danger of getting busted so he can bully people around, with the exception of Singer. I know he wants to win and he figures if he gambles there and wins that big pot it greatly increases his chances of winning, but losing that pot gave a ton of chips to Al who I should mention ended up WINNING the tournament. I wonder if he still would have won if JDAGS didn't give him those chips. He probably would have but we'll never know. I'm not insulting JDAGS though cause he's one of my favorite players and I love his willingness to gamble but there's a difference between being aggressive and gambling and being a little too reckless.

[lboarts 0]

He's getting 2.8:1 to call. It doesnt matter what his 2 cards are. Is he a 2.8:1 underdog?I think this call is nearly automatic. If you are thinking I am dominated and dont call despite your calling price, then you may need to rethink pot odds.

What? He was a 9:1 dog! How should i rethink my pot odds if i choose to fold when getting 2.8:1, and i am a 9:1 underdog? What the fuck am i missing?

Absolutely, you fold this hand - 2:1 is only valuable if you win your hand that much of the time - not if you're a 9:1 dog - easy fold. And he figured he was a dog pretty badly - so it certainly not right to call in this spot at all.

You're trying to apply a cash game mentality to a tournament situation. The fact that he's an underdog here has very little to do with the decision as to fold or call. The pot odds are good, the stack odds are good and the fact that he's still in 2nd if he loses, but way ahead in 1st if he wins, makes calling the absolute right decision.

[waldo 0]

easy call, no arguement possible

[Booyakasha 0]

He's getting 2.8:1 to call. It doesnt matter what his 2 cards are. Is he a 2.8:1 underdog?I think this call is nearly automatic. If you are thinking I am dominated and dont call despite your calling price, then you may need to rethink pot odds.

What? He was a 9:1 dog! How should i rethink my pot odds if i choose to fold when getting 2.8:1, and i am a 9:1 underdog? What the fuck am i missing?

Absolutely, you fold this hand - 2:1 is only valuable if you win your hand that much of the time - not if you're a 9:1 dog - easy fold. And he figured he was a dog pretty badly - so it certainly not right to call in this spot at all.

You're trying to apply a cash game mentality to a tournament situation. The fact that he's an underdog here has very little to do with the decision as to fold or call. The pot odds are good, the stack odds are good and the fact that he's still in 2nd if he loses, but way ahead in 1st if he wins, makes calling the absolute right decision.

That's rather silly thinking - you can't ignore the other part of the timing of the tourney when he made this call - the folks were at the bubble - JDAGs could have easily used his stack to pick up blinds and antes without any confrontation - this way - he gives players chips so that they are out of trouble and he isn't that 'comfortable' anymore.And I still think you shouldn't ignore your odds in this case - 9:1 is NOT good at all - no matter what money is at stake - that to me is just silly - you'd probably have better odds just randomnly going all in until someone calls you - and you'd have the same desired effect - but with a greater chance you'll knock someone out.

[lboarts 0]

He's getting 2.8:1 to call. It doesnt matter what his 2 cards are. Is he a 2.8:1 underdog?I think this call is nearly automatic. If you are thinking I am dominated and dont call despite your calling price, then you may need to rethink pot odds.

What? He was a 9:1 dog! How should i rethink my pot odds if i choose to fold when getting 2.8:1, and i am a 9:1 underdog? What the fuck am i missing?

Absolutely, you fold this hand - 2:1 is only valuable if you win your hand that much of the time - not if you're a 9:1 dog - easy fold. And he figured he was a dog pretty badly - so it certainly not right to call in this spot at all.

You're trying to apply a cash game mentality to a tournament situation. The fact that he's an underdog here has very little to do with the decision as to fold or call. The pot odds are good, the stack odds are good and the fact that he's still in 2nd if he loses, but way ahead in 1st if he wins, makes calling the absolute right decision.

That's rather silly thinking - you can't ignore the other part of the timing of the tourney when he made this call - the folks were at the bubble - JDAGs could have easily used his stack to pick up blinds and antes without any confrontation - this way - he gives players chips so that they are out of trouble and he isn't that 'comfortable' anymore.And I still think you shouldn't ignore your odds in this case - 9:1 is NOT good at all - no matter what money is at stake - that to me is just silly - you'd probably have better odds just randomnly going all in until someone calls you - and you'd have the same desired effect - but with a greater chance you'll knock someone out.

Did he know this when he called? I imagine he could've suspected it, but he dfinitely didn't know for sure. What if his 2 opponents both had small pairs, i.e. 10s or less? And even after losing that hand, he still had enough to continue pushing people around and stealing blinds.I can not believe how many people think this is a fold, so I'm going to assume those of you that advocate folding play more cash games than trnys. And yes, I know what assuming leads to.

[CaneBrain 95]

He's getting 2.8:1 to call. It doesnt matter what his 2 cards are. Is he a 2.8:1 underdog?I think this call is nearly automatic. If you are thinking I am dominated and dont call despite your calling price, then you may need to rethink pot odds.

What? He was a 9:1 dog! How should i rethink my pot odds if i choose to fold when getting 2.8:1, and i am a 9:1 underdog? What the fuck am i missing?

Absolutely, you fold this hand - 2:1 is only valuable if you win your hand that much of the time - not if you're a 9:1 dog - easy fold. And he figured he was a dog pretty badly - so it certainly not right to call in this spot at all.

You're trying to apply a cash game mentality to a tournament situation. The fact that he's an underdog here has very little to do with the decision as to fold or call. The pot odds are good, the stack odds are good and the fact that he's still in 2nd if he loses, but way ahead in 1st if he wins, makes calling the absolute right decision.

That's rather silly thinking - you can't ignore the other part of the timing of the tourney when he made this call - the folks were at the bubble - JDAGs could have easily used his stack to pick up blinds and antes without any confrontation - this way - he gives players chips so that they are out of trouble and he isn't that 'comfortable' anymore.And I still think you shouldn't ignore your odds in this case - 9:1 is NOT good at all - no matter what money is at stake - that to me is just silly - you'd probably have better odds just randomnly going all in until someone calls you - and you'd have the same desired effect - but with a greater chance you'll knock someone out.

Did he know this when he called? I imagine he could've suspected it, but he dfinitely didn't know for sure. What if his 2 opponents both had small pairs, i.e. 10s or less? And even after losing that hand, he still had enough to continue pushing people around and stealing blinds.I can not believe how many people think this is a fold, so I'm going to assume those of you that advocate folding play more cash games than trnys. And yes, I know what assuming leads to.

I cant believe how many people think this is an automatic call with only AJ. THis is an OBVIOUS marginal situation where folding is fine and so is calling. I think you are ignoring the factor that there are 7 people left for a 6 person TV table. People will not be going all in with small pairs. He knew he was dominated....if you read the pokerpages account JDags admits as much. And he was. I think you could honestly figure from that action that with AJ you are 20% to win AT BEST.Still calling is not bad. It is a play based on his large chip stack at the time. But if he had folded would you really call it a bad play? Come on.

[lboarts 0]

Still calling is not bad. It is a play based on his large chip stack at the time. But if he had folded would you really call it a bad play? Come on.Okay, I can take the diplomatic road and say no, a fold wouldn't be bad.Ummm.... never mind, I can't do it. A fold there would be terrible, IMHO.

[lboarts 0]

He knew he was dominated....if you read the pokerpages account JDags admits as much.Yes, he knew he was dominated, but there are times when you must call even though you know your the underdog, and this is one of those times. If you look at the worst case scenario vs the best case scenario, how can you not call here?Worst case scenario: he loses the hand and is still in 2nd in chips.Best case scenario: he wins the hand, knocks 2 people out, and goes to a 5 handed final (TV) table with a dominating large stack.I'd be interested to hear some top pros' views on this. Hopefully DN will give us his take on this hand.

[elkang 0]

I loved the call for a number of reasons. It was definitely a "gamble" play and not one by the strict numbers. A first ever 5 PERSON WPT Final Table would have been a great story.Sadly, the story is that Al's near triple up led to his victory and Dag was out in 4th.

[elkang 0]

Also, I voted NO. I would not have made the call. I certainly do respect it and see a lot of value in it beyond that hand.Later on at the final table Kathy lays down AJ in a similar situation. She played smart.

[Silence 0]

Hello all, this is John. I've never posted on this forum before so i'm using a friend's account. There were a few reasons i called in this spot. First, if i call and lose the hand, im still second in chips heading to the final table, if i win i'm the chipleader at a 5 handed final table. Also, i was getting close to 3-1 on the call and while i know im in bad shape, if the hands were qq and kk rather than AA, then it is certainly the proper call. Also, on the initial flat call, i have no problem whatsoever with that. I love flatcalling raises and seeing flops. I love to flat call with any hand i wanna play, whether it be AJ suited, 45 suited, 44, 99 qq, or AA. I like seeing flops in position because i feel i play better post flop than almost all opponents. Obviously i prefer not to play too many flops out of position against top professionals, but against most players, i wanna see the flop. The notion of reraising or folding with a hand like 77 is so ludicrous. Only people scared to play flops play poker that way. When youre playing deep stack poker which we were at the time, im always seeing the flop. I'm never getting the money in pre and playing crapshoot poker. The final table with big blinds is a different story. This final table was a joke. The blinds raised so quickly all skill was taken out of it. However, you will see a hand if they decide to air it. I believe hand #9 at the final table. Singer raised utg and Al reraised. I thought for about two minutes before folding JJ. He later told me he had qq. But anyways, since i diverted, i felt i had to call due to pot odds and the chance for the chip lead 5 handed and still being second in chips if i lost.

[Municipal Hare 0]

Hello all, this is John. I've never posted on this forum before so i'm using a friend's account. There were a few reasons i called in this spot.  First, if i call and lose the hand, im still second in chips heading to the final table, if i win i'm the chipleader at a 5 handed final table.  Also, i was getting close to 3-1 on the call and while i know im in bad shape, if the hands were qq and kk rather than AA, then it is certainly the proper call.  Also, on the initial flat call, i have no problem whatsoever with that.  I love flatcalling raises and seeing flops.  I love to flat call with any hand i wanna play, whether it be AJ suited, 45 suited, 44, 99 qq, or AA.  I like seeing flops in position because i feel i play better post flop than almost all opponents. Obviously i prefer not to play too many flops out of position against top professionals, but against most players, i wanna see the flop. The notion of reraising or folding with a hand like 77 is so ludicrous.  Only people scared to play flops play poker that way.  When youre playing deep stack poker which we were at the time, im always seeing the flop. I'm never getting the money in pre and playing crapshoot poker.  The final table with big blinds is a different story. This final table was a joke. The blinds raised so quickly all skill was taken out of it.  However, you will see  a hand if they decide to air it. I believe hand #9 at the final table. Singer raised utg and Al reraised. I thought for about two minutes before folding JJ. He later told me he had qq.  But anyways, since i diverted, i felt i had to call due to pot odds and the chance for the chip lead 5 handed and still being second in chips if i lost.

You kooky cracker!