Important whose in the blinds and their stack sizes.
it’s just lighting money on fire to shove 66 over an open in that spot.
like someone said, QQ is probably a shove and JJ is probably a fold.
Not a good ship ICMwise at all. Folding nearly everything is correct here.
ETA-I was grunching so didn’t realize everyone else said basically the same thing. My bad.
If you are playing a tournament and not going for the win you shouldn’t have bought in the the first place. Trying to eek into the money is so insanely -ev.
This is very clearly wrong. You seemingly haven’t played a large scale turbo/hyper turbo.
You can maybe justify it not being a punt in like an $11 online mtt, but it very clearly is.
1 Like
All the ev in a tournament is at the final table. Why play a $500 tournament if you are not doing everything possible to make the ft? Is the $1,000 min cash going to mean anything to TJ?
Maybe if the min cash is huge and you satted in I can an argument for passing up a chance to maximize the odds of making ft.
The $500 wsop is equivalent to a $10 online mtt.
Need a better hand to call than open. Probably folding. Especially folding if next hand gets me in the money.
It’s not that he’s there with the goal of min-cashing (based on his reasoning for choosing this tourney, he clearly wasn’t). I believe the point people are making is that once he’s in the spot he was in, the best move, with that hand and with the preceding action, was to fold.
1 Like
My point is the most +ev way to play a tournament like this is to treat a min cash the same as not cashing.
Are you really not familiar with ICM clovis?
Of course I am. I don’t care about it at this stage of a low stakes tournament.
that is terrible terrible advice and you will 100% be a losing tournament player if you play that way. “i play to win” a silly tv era mantra. you play to make the most money and the way to make money is to make the best decision based on the situation you are in. “eeking into the money” is in many many cases the right move. not caring about it because the buy-in is low is just playing bad.
12 Likes
Shipping 66 after a raise without any chance of winning the hand by getting
folds seems suboptimal even without considering the bubble pay.
You argument only makes sense if we are trying to make a living at tournaments. I assume tj plays a few a year and his winning or losing plays no role in his actual financial life. In that case a min cash is utterly meaningless. A win is massive.
Even in that state of mind, having fun is the most important aspect and bubbling is clearly the worst feeling of them all.
This isn’t even an argument, it’s just a fact. “Playing to win” is meaningless as a blank statement. Should you be taking small edges? of course. Shoving 66 in that spot isn’t chasing an edge, it’s playing wrong.
Then you shouldn’t talk about something being “+ev” when it’s very clearly not. Doubling up from 5bbs to 10bbs in a marginal spot doesn’t affect your chances of winning the tournament much compared to taking a similar spot 5 minutes later with an extra $800 in your pocket. Obviously it’s your prerogative to play how you want, but from an equity standpoint it’s not really up for debate.
Love the thread TJ, not trying to hate.
9 Likes
You’re missing the point entirely.
He simply won’t win enough chips in this spot.
You might as well suggest building a time machine and being more aggressive in a previous spot.
1 Like
Which is a decent advice by itself. @clovis8 is suggesting to not be Allen Kessler, always a good piece of advice. What he’s missing, I assume by lack of knowledge, is that making +EV decisions means that at certain situations, such as being very short on the bubble, “eeking into the money” is by far the correct the play in every equity equation.
TJ, take note - this is what happens in a TR thread when you keep eating $40 omelets and burgers.
22 Likes
Would you call there 300 from the money? If so, my point is the same. I am assigning a value of 0 to a min cash. Obviously that is not true from a pure math perspective. However, as a rec player who plans to end the year with a sample size of 5 assigning $300 profit zero value is the right play imo.
Anyway, we will agree to disagree.