1st Hand Of A Party $100 +9 Mtt

[mk 11]

Come on, you aren't seriously arguing this, are you?Early in the tourney, tc equity and prize equity are nearly identical.

[shpaget 0]

Come on, you aren't seriously arguing this, are you?Early in the tourney, tc equity and prize equity are nearly identical.

1000 player $10 tournament...5000 chips each....top 100 pay. (or $100 or $1000, or 400 people or 100 people, whatever you want)$3000$1500$700and on down the line, whatever you want the structure to be...100th place pays $10.5000000 chips.You have 0.1% of the chips.One hand in, you have 0.2% of chips.Yippee kiyay.8 other guys at your table got 0.1% of your chips.Here's the important stat.1% of the total chips are at your table. That hasn't changed....no matter the field size, your table's percentage of chips isn't any different than any other table.Your table isn't going to break, OR, you are not gonna fill that ten spot, for at least a blind level, probably two.These numbers get worse for larger tournaments.Look, I'm only telling you that stats I've read which generally say that doubling up in the first blind level is by no means a guarantee that you'll reach the money, and, all things being equal, is not a statistical indicator that you are more likely to reach the money than the other guys at your table.Let alone the guys at the other tables that are increasing their stacks at different rates.Guys who double up in the first hand are no better off than guys who double up every 3 blind levels.By all counts, the risks of busting out in the first hand with a marginal hand far outweigh any perceived benefits from doubling up.EDIT: the smaller the field, the more significant doubling up is, however, the earlier in the tournament, the less significant doubling up is.btw - I would have (probably) folded A9s pf, even from CO.

[mrdannyg 274]

1st Hand Of A Party $10+1 $40000 Guaranteed MttFolded to me in the CO.Blinds $20 $40I raise w A9s to $100Only Button calls.Flop is A9Q (2 hearts)I lead for $175.Button raises to $750WTF is my play?

now how many people say push?just sayin...

[amarillotg 0]

1000 player $10 tournament...5000 chips each....top 100 pay. (or $100 or $1000, or 400 people or 100 people, whatever you want)$3000$1500$700and on down the line, whatever you want the structure to be...100th place pays $10.5000000 chips.You have 0.1% of the chips.One hand in, you have 0.2% of chips.Yippee kiyay.8 other guys at your table got 0.1% of your chips.Here's the important stat.1% of the total chips are at your table. That hasn't changed....no matter the field size, your table's percentage of chips isn't any different than any other table.Your table isn't going to break, OR, you are not gonna fill that ten spot, for at least a blind level, probably two.These numbers get worse for larger tournaments.Look, I'm only telling you that stats I've read which generally say that doubling up in the first blind level is by no means a guarantee that you'll reach the money, and, all things being equal, is not a statistical indicator that you are more likely to reach the money than the other guys at your table.Let alone the guys at the other tables that are increasing their stacks at different rates.Guys who double up in the first hand are no better off than guys who double up every 3 blind levels.By all counts, the risks of busting out in the first hand with a marginal hand far outweigh any perceived benefits from doubling up.EDIT: the smaller the field, the more significant doubling up is, however, the earlier in the tournament, the less significant doubling up is.btw - I would have (probably) folded A9s pf, even from CO.

http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_magazine/a...5093&m_id=65576read this, i have a hunch he knows a little more than you.

[PoppinFresh 0]

I agree with pushing.To shpaget, I don't understand why you wouldn't want to go out on the first hand. It's MUCH better to go out on the first hand then to bubble or even go out after an hour, you lose the buy-in but spend much less time doing it.

[mk 11]

Here's the important stat.1% of the total chips are at your table. That hasn't changed....no matter the field size, your table's percentage of chips isn't any different than any other table.Your table isn't going to break, OR, you are not gonna fill that ten spot, for at least a blind level, probably two.

Yes, 1% of the chips are at your table, and now instead of having 10% of the chips at your table you have 20%!!!!!! For a long time now, people have been trying to estimate in a true, quantifiable way just how much you gain by having your opponents outchipped 2:1, because it means you can play a lot more aggressively against everyone at your table, and you can handle a lot more variance, i.e. going card dead for long stretches, losing coinflips, etc.The Matros article is a classic, and is an absolute must-read for anyone who plays tourneys.

[shpaget 0]

I agree with pushing.To shpaget, I don't understand why you wouldn't want to go out on the first hand. It's MUCH better to go out on the first hand then to bubble or even go out after an hour, you lose the buy-in but spend much less time doing it.

I didn't say that.I said I don't want to go out the first hand with marginal holdings.The benefit:risk ratio of doubling up on a hand increases as you go along in the tournament. Or, inversely, there is much less benefit to doubling up in the first hand of the tournament vs. doubling up on the 100th hand of the tournament. There is less benefit to doubling up in the first blind level than there is in the 10th blind level.Whereas the risk is the same - you bust out, and win no money.So, inherent in that, is the position that one should be less willing to risk all their chips in the first blind level with a marginal holding.I'm not concerned about my $/hr measure...I'm more concerned about ROI.If I bubble out instead of busting out first I have the same ROI but worse $/hr. That doesn't bother me because I get entertainment value and education value when I play a tournament, even when I bust out with no earnings. It is a concern for many people, I'm not one of them (at this point).What Matros does not touch on in his article is many pros DON'T agree with his position (though he does acknowledge there is plenty of debate)...many pros who have successful tournament careers playing very tight in the early stages....as well, what Matros does not mention is the pros who do abide by the "double up early" position have alterior motives. If they bust out early they'll go play the lucrative cash games...cash games that you or I can't even afford to enter, let alone compete.As well, in B&M tournaments I do double up in more than 60% of them....in fact, of all the B&M tournaments I have entered, some freezeouts, some rebuys, I have cashed in half of them, and won 1/3 of those....maybe it's been a good run, but I'd like to think I'm doing something right. I'm nost sure what I do in online tourneys though I'd venture to guess I am doubling up in more than half of them, though I cash in a lot less. (not counting s'n'g's).Strangely, the one B&M tourney I remember where I did double up in the first blind level (my AA held up against KK), in a $1500 buyin event, with 210 players, I busted out 5 hours later still 30 places out of the money.In determining a person's ratio of double ups to success I say it is more important to determine WHY a person doubled up early. If that person doubled up by calling all-in with 66 to a AAJ9 board and hit his 6 on the river, then his double up is meaningless - either luck is with him or it's not. Because if he keeps playing like that odds are he will just give his chips away, even if he triples up on the first hand.

[HoosierAlum 0]

Jam.

[copernicus 0]

That hasn't changed....no matter the field size, your table's percentage of chips isn't any different than any other table.You still have twice the chips of anyone else at your table, and the leverage to grow them further. But even if the chip stacks just shuffle around until the table breaks, you still enter a new table with twice the chips that others at your table enter with. You can only worry about actions of players at your table, but your opponents are the entire field.Your table isn't going to break, OR, you are not gonna fill that ten spot, for at least a blind level, probably two.These numbers get worse for larger tournaments.Look, I'm only telling you that stats I've read which generally say that doubling up in the first blind level is by no means a guarantee that you'll reach the money, and, all things being equal, is not a statistical indicator that you are more likely to reach the money than the other guys at your table.Let alone the guys at the other tables that are increasing their stacks at different rates.Big difference between guarantee (which is obvious) and "not more likely" (which I dont believe).Guys who double up in the first hand are no better off than guys who double up every 3 blind levels.Again, obvious, but having double up already is better than having a chance to double up in the next three blind levels.By all counts, the risks of busting out in the first hand with a marginal hand far outweigh any perceived benefits from doubling up.EDIT: the smaller the field, the more significant doubling up is, however, the earlier in the tournament, the less significant doubling up is.btw - I would have (probably) folded A9s pf, even from CO.

The only difference between adding X chips earlier or later is when you add them later there are fewer players to get through. If you add them earlier and can maintain them to the same "later" point, they have exactly the same value.The real determining factor in the value of adding X chips at any point in time (or % of your current stack) is the steepness of the payout structure. The steeper it is, the greater the value of doubling up, to the point where if there is only 1 prize doubling up exactly doubles your prize equity. (Assuming no leverage from having a bigger stack and equal abilities, the ICM assumptions. In fact it more than doubles your prize equity if you are a good big stack player).To carry the "first table has the same % of total chips" to an extreme and show why its irrelevant, look at a rebuy tournament where every table rebuys at exactly the same rate, lets say 5 rebuys per player, so your table ends the rebuy period with 54x buy in chips, and you happen to hold 50 of them. Your table's percentage of the total chips in the tournament remains the same, but you are a helluva lot more likely to finish in the money than the guy who just survives long enough to take an add on. Yes, 2x isnt 50x, but the same ICM principles apply.

[macphec 0]

The only difference between adding X chips earlier or later is when you add them later there are fewer players to get through. If you add them earlier and can maintain them to the same "later" point, they have exactly the same value.The real determining factor in the value of adding X chips at any point in time (or % of your current stack) is the steepness of the payout structure. The steeper it is, the greater the value of doubling up, to the point where if there is only 1 prize doubling up exactly doubles your prize equity. (Assuming no leverage from having a bigger stack and equal abilities, the ICM assumptions. In fact it more than doubles your prize equity if you are a good big stack player).To carry the "first table has the same % of total chips" to an extreme and show why its irrelevant, look at a rebuy tournament where every table rebuys at exactly the same rate, lets say 5 rebuys per player, so your table ends the rebuy period with 54x buy in chips, and you happen to hold 50 of them. Your table's percentage of the total chips in the tournament remains the same, but you are a helluva lot more likely to finish in the money than the guy who just survives long enough to take an add on. Yes, 2x isnt 50x, but the same ICM principles apply.

Wow, this generated more discussion than I anticipated. Good discussion guys. I've played in a good number of the $100 +$9's and find the play is not spectacular with more than enough donkeys.I really felt the only plausible hand beating me here was AQ (99 and AA are unlikely given my holding). My gut told me he was on a flush draw with his large raise. (didnt seem like he wanted a call).I jammed and he INSTACALLED w Ah4h. Heart on river and I'm done.Not sure what I'd do again but I think I'd lean toward folding as I would still have tons of chips vs th eblinds.Anyway, thanks again

[copernicus 0]

Wow, this generated more discussion than I anticipated. Good discussion guys. I've played in a good number of the $100 +$9's and find the play is not spectacular with more than enough donkeys.I really felt the only plausible hand beating me here was AQ (99 and AA are unlikely given my holding). My gut told me he was on a flush draw with his large raise. (didnt seem like he wanted a call).I jammed and he INSTACALLED w Ah4h. Heart on river and I'm done.Not sure what I'd do again but I think I'd lean toward folding as I would still have tons of chips vs th eblinds.Anyway, thanks again

When you see a raiser who you think is likely to be on a flush or straight draw and who overbet the flop in the first place, I prefer to wait till the turn to try and shut him out. You are unlikely to be able to drive him out on the flop because most donks think they are 50/50 to make their flush by the river.You can extract a bigger price from them and have less chance of a hit to your stack waiting till the turn. If he hasnt already overbet the flop, dont push, charge him the one card price (4.5 or 5:1), not the two card price (2:1).

[shpaget 0]

When you see a raiser who you think is likely to be on a flush or straight draw and who overbet the flop in the first place, I prefer to wait till the turn to try and shut him out. You are unlikely to be able to drive him out on the flop because most donks think they are 50/50 to make their flush by the river.You can extract a bigger price from them and have less chance of a hit to your stack waiting till the turn. If he hasnt already overbet the flop, dont push, charge him the one card price (4.5 or 5:1), not the two card price (2:1).

Exactly - 150% agreed.This is what I call the "will call any bet with any draw" syndrome. You aren't shutting these people out on the flop.See the turn...they're less likely to call you then, and, if he's the type to call any bet with any draw on the turn then you only have one card to dodge instead of two.The interestinq question to ask, I think, would be how would you play the hand if you "accidentally" saw his cards?

[Actuary 3]

push.but I'm no tourney expert.

hey..as it turned out, maybe I ain't no tourney dummy!*************I don't see Aces up on the flop as marginal vs a Button who likely does not put you on a made hand. Often Button made a pos call preflop and is banking on the flop missing you. that's my opinion.

[macphec 0]

Exactly - 150% agreed.This is what I call the "will call any bet with any draw" syndrome. You aren't shutting these people out on the flop.See the turn...they're less likely to call you then, and, if he's the type to call any bet with any draw on the turn then you only have one card to dodge instead of two.The interestinq question to ask, I think, would be how would you play the hand if you "accidentally" saw his cards?

very good points from you and Copernicus. I guess I fall in love with "charging them to draw". Just calling his flop raise would feel like giving him a free card to hit his flush though.Very interesting question about accidently seeing his cards. If I knew exactly what he had then a push is correct, no?The pot would be apprx $935 after his raise and I push for $2725 more obviously giving him $2150 (left in his stack) : $3660 (amt in pot after my push) or less than 2:1 odds. So a push is the only way to price him out if you will.Is this reasoning flawed?

[shpaget 0]

very good points from you and Copernicus. I guess I fall in love with "charging them to draw". Just calling his flop raise would feel like giving him a free card to hit his flush though.Very interesting question about accidently seeing his cards. If I knew exactly what he had then a push is correct, no?The pot would be apprx $935 after his raise and I push for $2725 more obviously giving him $2150 (left in his stack) : $3660 (amt in pot after my push) or less than 2:1 odds. So a push is the only way to price him out if you will.Is this reasoning flawed?

Depends on your own style and what you know about the player.If he's the type of player to call any bet with any draw, AND, he will do so on either the turn or the flop, then why not wait to see a safe turn card?Many of these players don't care if they're priced in or not...they have 14 outs and dammit, they're gonna hit.I like betting the pot here if you're leading (or, in this specific example, calling)...see a safe turn, and then bet the pot on the turn...a pot-sized bet on the turn does price him out of the pot, so why risk all your chips for the same purpose? If you bet too much up early, then you risk pricing him in on any turn bet. Come the river, he might even then call you down even if he misses his flush. You may not get all his chips, but I think you're getting full value when you consider what you risk, everything, by pushing, and what you don't risk by betting big, but not everything.There are two components to maximizing value - maximizing wins, and minimizing losses. Against smart players, pushing on the flop doesn't maximize your win. Against bad players, pushing on the flop maximizes your losses.I don't mind jamming here, but with a lot of guys you can get the same value by waiting one card, so why dodge two cards when you can get away with just dodging one? If you push the flop and the third heart comes on the turn, you can't do anything but pray to fill your boat.

[copernicus 0]

very good points from you and Copernicus. I guess I fall in love with "charging them to draw". Just calling his flop raise would feel like giving him a free card to hit his flush though.Very interesting question about accidently seeing his cards. If I knew exactly what he had then a push is correct, no?The pot would be apprx $935 after his raise and I push for $2725 more obviously giving him $2150 (left in his stack) : $3660 (amt in pot after my push) or less than 2:1 odds. So a push is the only way to price him out if you will.Is this reasoning flawed?

It may "feel" like your giving him a free card, but you really arent. The order of the betting doesnt matter. There is no difference between you betting Pot/3 (to price out a 4.5/1 draw that would be breakeven at Pot/3.5) and him calling, or him betting Pot/3 and you calling. His money is still going in short of what he needs.It may be clearer if you look at yourself in the lead making a defensive bet. Lets say you are leading, and have a flush draw, 4.5:1 against. If you can bet say 1/4 of the pot (giving yourself 5:1 odds if he calls)and that stops him from betting 1/3 of the pot (which would only give you 4:1 odds if you call) then you have induced a +EV situation out of what would have been -EV or a fold.

[mk 11]

Like Copernicus said, if you feel confident in your read of your opponent being on a flush draw, you can often wait for a safe turn and price them out more effectively.But even in this hand, you should be perfectly comfortable getting it all in on the flop. Your opponent is only 33% to win! Why are you saying you wish you'd have folded? Paul Phillips, DN, Matros, Bloch, and many other pros don't think they're good enough to pass up that kind of edge (or even much smaller ones) on the first hand; you probably shouldn't either.

[copernicus 0]

Like Copernicus said, if you feel confident in your read of your opponent being on a flush draw, you can often wait for a safe turn and price them out more effectively.But even in this hand, you should be perfectly comfortable getting it all in on the flop.

Here are the equity numbers for pushing on the flop vs the turn:Get in all in on the flop: +1,246 +41%Wait till turn, he's guaranteed to call turn push if no heart +1,656 +55%Wait till turn, he's guaranteed to fold turn push if no heart + 865 +29%Break even probability he has to call a turn push with a blank: .543(IE if he will call a push after a blank turn card 54.3% of the time your equity is 1,246, same as getting it all in preflop, but your risk of busting out has dropped from 33% to 18%)Thats the TC equity. What about prize equity? We know that doubling up doesnt double your prize equity because of prize structure considerations. Lets say that any increase in chips is only 80% effective in increasing your prize equity (and a decrease of less than all of your chips is only 80% effective in reducing your prize equity). (80% is a SWAG, if anyone has a better number, which is really prize structure dependent, let me know). These are the increases in prize equity (its worse than 80% of the TC equity, because busting out still costs you 100% of your prize equity):All in on flop: 21.7%Wait till turn, he calls if a blank: 33.2%Wait till turn, he folds if a blank: 18.5%So the prize equity increase (11.5%) for waiting/calling is almost the same as the TC equity increase (14%), but the cost if he folds to a blank turn is only 3.2% in prize equity, vs 12% in TC equity.That makes it even clearer that waiting till the turn is the better option.

[Footballguru 0]

did it not cross anyone's mind that the villian could have something like A10, A8, AJ, etc... and be trying to define his hand?

[copernicus 0]

did it not cross anyone's mind that the villian could have something like A10, A8, AJ, etc... and be trying to define his hand?

If I thought he was trying to "define his hand" with a 750 bet into a 435 pot early in a tourney where that is probably 30% or more of his stack then I would instafold, because he'll donate his chips to me when I have the nuts.That would be a horrendous bet on his part. Once it was clarified that the Ah was not on board it was obvious he had the nut flush draw.

[profxavier9 0]

Here are the equity numbers for pushing on the flop vs the turn:Get in all in on the flop: +1,246 +41%Wait till turn, he's guaranteed to call turn push if no heart +1,656 +55%Wait till turn, he's guaranteed to fold turn push if no heart + 865 +29%Break even probability he has to call a turn push with a blank: .543(IE if he will call a push after a blank turn card 54.3% of the time your equity is 1,246, same as getting it all in preflop, but your risk of busting out has dropped from 33% to 18%)Thats the TC equity. What about prize equity? We know that doubling up doesnt double your prize equity because of prize structure considerations. Lets say that any increase in chips is only 80% effective in increasing your prize equity (and a decrease of less than all of your chips is only 80% effective in reducing your prize equity). (80% is a SWAG, if anyone has a better number, which is really prize structure dependent, let me know). These are the increases in prize equity (its worse than 80% of the TC equity, because busting out still costs you 100% of your prize equity):All in on flop: 21.7%Wait till turn, he calls if a blank: 33.2%Wait till turn, he folds if a blank: 18.5%So the prize equity increase (11.5%) for waiting/calling is almost the same as the TC equity increase (14%), but the cost if he folds to a blank turn is only 3.2% in prize equity, vs 12% in TC equity.That makes it even clearer that waiting till the turn is the better option.

god is it me or do all you TAG players over think you hands take your read and go with it. You must not get much sleep at night condjuring up all these complicated quadratic equations. I probably would have mucked a9 from the get go. But i were to have had played them im moving in on the flop first hand people play like donkeys at any buy in online first few hands for that matter no one likes to lose there first hand and plsy like donks to win it. And that guy talking about doubling up bbeing a bad thing well your over tight if it were a deep stack tourny it would be foldable but anything less i doubt it unless i have some seriou notes on the guy.

[mk 11]

god is it me or do all you TAG players over think you hands take your read and go with it. You must not get much sleep at night condjuring up all these complicated quadratic equations. I probably would have mucked a9 from the get go. But i were to have had played them im moving in on the flop first hand people play like donkeys at any buy in online first few hands for that matter no one likes to lose there first hand and plsy like donks to win it. And that guy talking about doubling up bbeing a bad thing well your over tight if it were a deep stack tourny it would be foldable but anything less i doubt it unless i have some seriou notes on the guy.

Lol.

[copernicus 0]

god is it me or do all you TAG players over think you hands take your read and go with it. You must not get much sleep at night condjuring up all these complicated quadratic equations. I probably would have mucked a9 from the get go. But i were to have had played them im moving in on the flop first hand people play like donkeys at any buy in online first few hands for that matter no one likes to lose there first hand and plsy like donks to win it. And that guy talking about doubling up bbeing a bad thing well your over tight if it were a deep stack tourny it would be foldable but anything less i doubt it unless i have some seriou notes on the guy.

Sounds like a professor, who doesnt have to take his academics out to the real world. It is thinking about situations like these off line that gives you an advantage when faced with a similar situation in real play.The result of all these "quadratic equations" was very significant imo (and actually not all that difficult to calculate, taking 10 mins with a phone call in between). There are frequent questions about whether its better to push on the flop or wait till a blank hits on the turn.The math here demonstrates a big advantage to waiting. OF course since anyone who isnt you is apparently a donk, Im not surprised you didnt bother thinking more about that and would still push on the flop.

[shpaget 0]

god is it me or do all you TAG players over think you hands take your read and go with it. You must not get much sleep at night condjuring up all these complicated quadratic equations. I probably would have mucked a9 from the get go. But i were to have had played them im moving in on the flop first hand people play like donkeys at any buy in online first few hands for that matter no one likes to lose there first hand and plsy like donks to win it. And that guy talking about doubling up bbeing a bad thing well your over tight if it were a deep stack tourny it would be foldable but anything less i doubt it unless i have some seriou notes on the guy.

Try to understand basic English (and try to type in it too - one word...punctuation).No one on this thread has ever claimed that doubling up is a bad thing.