Call All-in Knowing You're Behind?

[DrZebra 0]

I would say that I am absolutely right, in that I have advocated folding from the git-go. As far as winning "the damn thing" one in three times as you have indicated, I don't know about you but that is definately not my objective when playing a satellite, as I intend to win a ticket every time I play. Winning this hand is nice and all, but it does nothing to guarantee a ticket, as there will still be like 18 players left. The reward does not outweight the risk here.

Reread and nod. We are in agreement my friend.You however said "in a tournament" earlier when you meant "in a satellite".That is all.

[shpaget 0]

Maybe it is just me, but I certainly don't like putting my tournament life on the line in a "race" situation, let alone when I am only 30 to 35% chance of winning (unless its perhaps down to three of us in a 3-pay SNG or something like that). Pot odds may say to call in a cash game, but it changes completely in a tournament IMO.

Once again - that 30-35% is only one of the scenarios...it may be the most likely, but it's not the only one.You could very well be winning here, with a hand that wins anywhere from 50% to 72% of the time.Your 3000 is only 28% of the total pot...pretty significant difference from 35%....and if you weight all the scenarios you're probably over 40%.Even in a tournament you can't walk away from that type of discount because you may bust. Over 100 tournaments, if you fold every time, you will sacrifice more seats than you will gain.The way I look at it:your chances of winning a seat increase more between 3000 and 10500 chips, than they decrease between 3000 and 0 chips.

[DrZebra 0]

your chances of winning a seat increase more between 3000 and 10500 chips, than they decrease between 3000 and 0 chips.

In the latter case they decrease infinitely. It would be very hard to convincingly prove that the former increases infinitely.

[Drwnded 0]

I would say that I am absolutely right, in that I have advocated folding from the git-go. As far as winning "the damn thing" one in three times as you have indicated, I don't know about you but that is definately not my objective when playing a satellite, as I intend to win a ticket every time I play. Winning this hand is nice and all, but it does nothing to guarantee a ticket, as there will still be like 18 players left. The reward does not outweight the risk here.

How do you expect to do that if you pass up +chip EV situations? This debate is one reason I specifically mentioned that this was a sat with the flat top 5 payout structure. If this were a normal tourney, I think it would be foolish to fold - you're likely about a 2-1 dog, and you're getting 2.5-1 on your money. In a normal tourney, your goal should be in the top 3 where the real money is, not to try and sneak into the money obviously, and if you pass up +chip EV situations like this you're not likely to make the top 3.Cash game: no brainer - you're giving away money long term if you fold here.Satellite, I still think it's a call. You're getting the right price, and if you win you'll be highly likely to make the top five if you avoid doing anything stupid. I suppose if you think you are far better than your opponents, and can afford to wait to get you're chips in when you are a dominating favorite, then you could fold. But then, most people far overestimate their skills relative to those of their opponents, and are more likely to wind up coinflipping for all their chips before they get blinded away.

[Rocketwadster 0]

How do you expect to do that if you pass up +chip EV situations? This debate is one reason I specifically mentioned that this was a sat with the flat top 5 payout structure. If this were a normal tourney, I think it would be foolish to fold - you're likely about a 2-1 dog, and you're getting 2.5-1 on your money. In a normal tourney, your goal should be in the top 3 where the real money is, not to try and sneak into the money obviously, and if you pass up +chip EV situations like this you're not likely to make the top 3.Cash game: no brainer - you're giving away money long term if you fold here.Satellite, I still think it's a call. You're getting the right price, and if you win you'll be highly likely to make the top five if you avoid doing anything stupid. I suppose if you think you are far better than your opponents, and can afford to wait to get you're chips in when you are a dominating favorite, then you could fold. But then, most people far overestimate their skills relative to those of their opponents, and are more likely to wind up coinflipping for all their chips before they get blinded away.

Agree to disagree I guess. My philosophy in tourneys and satellites has been stated, so no need to rehash again. I don't like calling here, you do, so be it.

[shpaget 0]

In the latter case they decrease infinitely. It would be very hard to convincingly prove that the former increases infinitely.

Arbitrarily:If I call and lose I win a seat 0% of the time.If I fold I have 3000 chips and win a seat 20% of the time.If I call and win I have 10500 chips and win a seat 60% of the time.Personally, I think you win this hand more than 40% of the time, and when you win you more than triple your chances of winning a seat.Over 100 tourneys, if I fold I win 20%, if I call I win 25%. That's an extra seat every 20 tourneys.Massage those numbers as you see fit, to what you deem reasonable - what you think this numbers are will determine if it's a fold or call.My numbers may indeed be unreasonable, but at first glance I don't think so.PS - I don't hate a fold here, and I don't consider it weak, I just believe long-term it sacrifices seats won.PPS - who calls here with KcQc, everything else the same?

[Actuary 3]

nm..ISAM

[Rocketwadster 0]

Arbitrarily:If I call and lose I win a seat 0% of the time.If I fold I have 3000 chips and win a seat 20% of the time.If I call and win I have 10500 chips and win a seat 60% of the time.

How can you possibly put those numbers beside those scenarios? There are still 18 players remaining, paying only top 5. Something isn't jiving with my head on this...

[shpaget 0]

How can you possibly put those numbers beside those scenarios? There are still 18 players remaining, paying only top 5. Something isn't jiving with my head on this...

Very simple...that word at the beginning of my post:ARBITRARILYYou have to be able to put those numbers up, and preferably based on some modicum of experience. They are the only way to determine if long term if a fold or call is correct here.Some people can confidently say that with an average chipstack, with 18 players left, I'll finish in the top 5 15% of the time...if I had 4x the average chipstack I'll finish in the top 5 80% of the time....others can say the difference is 30% for average to 40% for 4x average....others it will be 30/60.It's based on experience...it's based on an honest assessment of your skills, and the skills of the other players.