18 Person Sit N Go Decision

[Bubba83 0]

$5.50 buy-in on Full Tilt, top 4 players paid, 7 players left.Pay Structure:1st - $362nd - $273rd - $184th - $9Hero has 4,780 chips.BB has 5,055 chips.Blinds are 60/120.Preflop: Hero is second to act with A J :heart:UTG folds, Hero raises to 320, folds to BB who calls.Flop: 5 8 5 (700 in the pot)BB checks, Hero bets 600, BB calls.Turn: J (1900 in the pot)BB checks, Hero checks.River: 6 (1900 in the pot)BB moves all-in, Hero ???No reads on villain, he came from the other table so I haven't had much of a chance to play with him. I checked the turn in hopes of keeping the pot to a size where if he chose to bet pot on the river I could still call and have some chips left if he had a 5 and I lost. I'm also expecting that he could bluff at the river with a missed flush draw or maybe even think his 8 is good and bet pot or less than pot. When he moves in, it leaves me pretty confused, it's a big overbet. He has me covered so he's putting me all-in for what I have left, which at this point in the hand is 3,860 chips, that's twice the pot size. Would you call or fold? Why or why not?

[rogerwilco 0]

I really dislike the check behind on the turn, that is an excellent card for you but a lot of cards on the river could destroy your hand, I'd make BB pay for seeing the river. Of course it is possible, that villain has been slowplaying JJ+, but you can only guess at the river. If you bet the turn again, and villain pushes, it is an easier fold, imo. I'm not sure, I could fold on the river here, there are a lot of reasonable hands he could have that you beat.

[Bubba83 0]

In hindsight I wish I had bet the turn, but the only reason I wish I would have bet it is because I know that he goes all-in on the river. The reason I checked the turn is because I did not think he was going to move all-in on the river at all. My thinking was that I'd make more money when I'm ahead and lose less when I'm behind using this line.

[mk 11]

eesh. i would've checked behind on the flop, bet about 2/3 pot on the turn...would've made things easier.as played, i call on the end for sure. you've played the hand in a manner that will induce a bluff on the end pretty often. there aren't many hands he can call a raise with pre that have you beat. i'd expect to see a busted flush draw a lot of the time.

[rogerwilco 0]

In hindsight I wish I had bet the turn, but the only reason I wish I would have bet it is because I know that he goes all-in on the river. The reason I checked the turn is because I did not think he was going to move all-in on the river at all. My thinking was that I'd make more money when I'm ahead and lose less when I'm behind using this line.

I see, but one thing you certainly achieved by checking the turn is looking weak - if I'm villain, I couldn't put you on AJ or better, maybe AQ/AK. The only hands I can think of that are halfway likely that beat you are 66, 88, QQ, KK, AA, maybe A5, but would villain overbet the pot like that with such strong hands? The more I think about, the more I believe the weakness you showed made him bet the river with either a marginal hand or air and that the size of his bet means he doesn't want to get called.I call here with AJ (and probably lose to 85 or 97 of diamonds )

[Bubba83 0]

eesh. i would've checked behind on the flop, bet about 2/3 pot on the turn...would've made things easier.

That's easy to say if you know the jack is coming. Do you really check behind on the flop here? It's unlikely we're beat on that flop and betting lets him know we might have an overpair.If we check behind on the flop, chances are we'll miss the turn and then we're giving him a shot to take it down with air.

[mk 11]

Do you really check behind on the flop here? It's unlikely we're beat on that flop and betting lets him know we might have an overpair.If we check behind on the flop, chances are we'll miss the turn and then we're giving him a shot to take it down with air.

i check behind on a lot of flops if i hit my hand or whiff, so yes, i would check behind quite a bit here. if he leads into you on the turn and you miss again, folding is no biggie. if he checks it to you again, a delayed continuation bet will take it down a huge percentage of the time.

[Big_Slick_86 0]

I see, but one thing you certainly achieved by checking the turn is looking weak - if I'm villain, I couldn't put you on AJ or better, maybe AQ/AK. The only hands I can think of that are halfway likely that beat you are 66, 88, QQ, KK, AA, maybe A5, but would villain overbet the pot like that with such strong hands? The more I think about, the more I believe the weakness you showed made him bet the river with either a marginal hand or air and that the size of his bet means he doesn't want to get called.I call here with AJ (and probably lose to 85 or 97 of diamonds )

Agreed, I think a raise on the turn tells you where you are in this hand. The over bet on the river does seem like an "I don't want you to call me" raise. I play a lot of these low limit SnG's and the range of hands the villain could be holding are vast, I'm thinking he's holding A-10 or greater (not including the jack) and he's put you on a busted flush or He's got an overpair to the flop (the turn seemed to slow him down) and he's happy with the 6 so his pair could 99 or 10 10.I think it's a call here.The other thing was, has the action been fast and furious to this point? The blinds seem quite low for 7 people left?

[Bubba83 0]

The other thing was, has the action been fast and furious to this point? The blinds seem quite low for 7 people left?

Yes, my table was completely nuts from the getgo, they had to keep moving singles over from the other table to balance our tables out. The guy in this hand was from the other table though and I hadn't played against him until after we combined.

[ChrisRichey 1]

You lead way too much on the flop. I lead for 300-350 here, and then fire 1/2 size pot again on the turn. As played, I fold. You still have a pretty good stack for these blinds.

[Bubba83 0]

I could have led less on the flop for sure. I think he might smell weakness if I'm only betting around what I raised to preflop though, so I'd probably settle on betting 400 if I could have the hand back. Anyway, let's say he check/calls my 400 bet on the flop, that makes the total pot 1500 going into the turn where I catch my jack. He checks the turn, and I bet 750, then he check-raises all-in. Is it a fold? We'd have 3,310 chips left to call off if this happened.What if he just calls the 750 on the turn, and then pushes the river? Does it change things?I'll post results soon but I want to get feedback from copern too since it seems he is around now!

[copernicus 0]

The stacks are too deep for a "delayed continuation bet" to the turn to be effective. If hero really has a hand he is going to protect against that board on the flop, since the stacks are deep enough to price out draws on both streets. I agree a smaller cb on the flop is probably better. I dont like checking the turn, because its an invitation for a bluff. It looks like overcards that cb'd and didnt connect. With a bet on the turn you say that youve had something all along or connected with the J, and they are a lot less likely to make a move on you. As it is, hero is in a guessing game.

[Jam-Fly 8]

bet on flop is too big.as for the river decision, it's pretty tough. I believe you have an ave. chip stak at this point with reasonable blinds, so that would lead towards a fold. Most likely hand here is a 5 for the BB imo. I say fold

[Bubba83 0]

As it is, hero is in a guessing game.

I agree that I played the hand poorly up until the river.But...Would you call on the river if you had played it this way? I did invite him to bluff as you said, which I don't think is necessarily a bad thing. As I said before, I didn't expect him to be moving in whether he was trying for value or a bluff.What would you do if the theoreticals I described before happened?

[copernicus 0]

I agree that I played the hand poorly up until the river.But...Would you call on the river if you had played it this way? I did invite him to bluff as you said, which I don't think is necessarily a bad thing. As I said before, I didn't expect him to be moving in whether he was trying for value or a bluff.What would you do if the theoreticals I described before happened?

As played Id probably be inclined to call, putting him on a missed draw and smelling weakness. I dont love it, but I have a hard time putting him on hands that call preflop and then beat youIn the hypotheticals I think they are both folds, showing strength despite your betting.

[Bubba83 0]

Results:Hero calls. Villain turns over 8 8 for a flopped boat and eliminates Hero from the tournament.How he makes this ridiculous overbet and ever expects me to call with how I played the hand, just like the tootsie pop question...The world may never know...

[ChrisRichey 1]

Seriously, overbets = the nuts now. Don't ask me why.

[tskillz187 0]

I love overbetting. People need to stop doing it too, it's becoming less successful and I don't like having to improve my game in the slightest. Very surprised to see this move in a 5.50. I call everytime in a 5.50, in a $55 or higher I lean towards folding.

[tskillz187 0]

Results:Hero calls. Villain turns over 8 8 for a flopped boat and eliminates Hero from the tournament.How he makes this ridiculous overbet and ever expects me to call with how I played the hand, just like the tootsie pop question...The world may never know...

I figure you are venting here, but if not I'll give you some reasons. A TON of players decide whether they are ahead or behind and then decide to call and fold based on those factors. It doesn't matter what the bet is, the math doesn't matter, the difference between calling 800 and an all in on the river would be no different. He gives you as little information on his hand as possible, how can you gather anything he has here? Check call, check check, open shove. What kind of line is that? It's fishy, he can get callers with as weak as AK high here. He also may get calls from 77, 99 etc. Overbetting works really well if you think you are up against a fish that will call off his entire stack with just top pair or someting of the like. It also works extremely well if you are up against someone that you think is very solid and won't be pushed around. If you overbet into an extremely confident player they try to make hero calls.

[Bubba83 0]

Villain has no reads on me, so I don't see how he'd think 99 77 or AK ever call a shove, and he can't put me on QQ/KK/AA/AJ the way I played the hand.I'm not really venting over the hand, just thought it was time to post results and bring up discussion to see what might have been going through his head to make that bet... I still think calling was the correct play based on the weirdo way I played the hand. I just really don't understand why villains play is ever good when ive shown so much weakness, unless he's bluffing of course.

[rogerwilco 0]

I figure you are venting here, but if not I'll give you some reasons. A TON of players decide whether they are ahead or behind and then decide to call and fold based on those factors. It doesn't matter what the bet is, the math doesn't matter, the difference between calling 800 and an all in on the river would be no different. He gives you as little information on his hand as possible, how can you gather anything he has here? Check call, check check, open shove. What kind of line is that? It's fishy, he can get callers with as weak as AK high here. He also may get calls from 77, 99 etc. Overbetting works really well if you think you are up against a fish that will call off his entire stack with just top pair or someting of the like. It also works extremely well if you are up against someone that you think is very solid and won't be pushed around. If you overbet into an extremely confident player they try to make hero calls.

I think you are giving villain way too much credit here, this is a $5 s&g after all. He played his full house as slowly as he could, and after hero didn't show much interest in the pot he probably thought "frack it" and just pushed believing that's the way to get the most value from his hand, which will be wrong 9/10 of the time after the action so far, imo.That said, I actually like the overbet on the river with his hand here, because it looks sooo much like a bluff, and it doesn't seem like hero has a hand he can call a bet with anyway.What would you think about checking again on the river if you are villain - maybe hero would take another stab at the pot more often than he can call a bet with?

[copernicus 0]

Villain has no reads on me, so I don't see how he'd think 99 77 or AK ever call a shove, and he can't put me on QQ/KK/AA/AJ the way I played the hand.I'm not really venting over the hand, just thought it was time to post results and bring up discussion to see what might have been going through his head to make that bet... I still think calling was the correct play based on the weirdo way I played the hand. I just really don't understand why villains play is ever good when ive shown so much weakness, unless he's bluffing of course.

mmmm....you called right? Theres 1900 in the pot. Lets say you would auto-call a $1200 bet. Instead he bets $4000. He only needs the overbet to work 30% of the time for it to be a good play. given the confusion we had over what his hand could possibly be, and the responses were 6-2 in favor of calling (including your actual call) 30% doesnt seem like an unreasonable calling percentage!

[tskillz187 0]

I think you are giving villain way too much credit here, this is a $5 s&g after all. He played his full house as slowly as he could, and after hero didn't show much interest in the pot he probably thought "frack it" and just pushed believing that's the way to get the most value from his hand, which will be wrong 9/10 of the time after the action so far, imo.That said, I actually like the overbet on the river with his hand here, because it looks sooo much like a bluff, and it doesn't seem like hero has a hand he can call a bet with anyway.What would you think about checking again on the river if you are villain - maybe hero would take another stab at the pot more often than he can call a bet with?

Oh, I don't care what this villain is thinking, I already said I'd call because it was a $5.50. I was just giving general reasons why overbetting useful. Copernicus also gave some good ones.

[Bubba83 0]

Getting called 30% of the time just doesn't happen here. I'm not calling off my tournament life for a twice the pot sized bet with much other than exactly what I had here. I would never have played the way I did with QQ/KK/AA here. If I have JJ he's beat, which is certainly a reasonable holding for me given the prior-river action. I would have folded TT 99 here for my tournament life, he is not getting a call 30% of the time.

[tskillz187 0]

Getting called 30% of the time just doesn't happen here. I'm not calling off my tournament life for a twice the pot sized bet with much other than exactly what I had here. I would never have played the way I did with QQ/KK/AA here. If I have JJ he's beat, which is certainly a reasonable holding for me given the prior-river action. I would have folded TT 99 here for my tournament life, he is not getting a call 30% of the time.

He only needs it to work 30% of the time that you would call a 1200 bet. It's not a bad play, it's just unorthodox.