error in Harrington's book?

[NN]

Harrington on Hold'em: Expert Strategy for No-Limit Tournaments, Volume I: Strategic Play. By Dan Harrington & Bill Robertie. Two Plus Two Publishing, 2004. p.64-66

"Situation: Online single-table tournament. You are the chip leader with eight players left. The players generally aggressive and most pots are contested."

Level: 50/100
Player C (MP2): $840
Hero (CO) : $1930
Player F (Button): $990

Pre-flop
Player C limps, Player D fold, Hero [8 6] limps (Harrington recomend folding), Player F raises to $200, The blinds fold, Player C and Hero call.

Flop
[9 3 2]
Pot: $750

"Player C checks. What do you do?
Answer: That's a very good flop for you. Two clubs, and only one overcard to your 8 6. You should make a move to win this hand right here, but cheaply if you can. Players C and F have $640 and $790 respectivly. A bet of $100 is too little (too easily called) but $200 to $300 looks right to shake any weak holders. This way his pot odds won't be too good in case he call."

Ok, let's say you bet $200, Player F goes all-in and Player C folds. The pot is now (750+200+790=) $1.740, and it's $590 to call. That's 3-1.

If Player F folds and Player C goes all-in, or if both push, you'll have better odds. If you bet $300, and someone pushes, you'll have even better odds.

My question is wether or not you can fold, if your opponents push (after you bet $200 or $300)? If not, why not do the pushing yourself in the first place?
Nomen Nescio

[Penneywize]

Harrington is absolutely right. You can't risk that many chips on a draw, a poor one at that. If someone were to go all-in, you've got to figure he's got a pair, two overs, or a better flush draw. Why bet them to an all-in when you have little to no information on their hand?

Of course if you get reraised all-in you'd have to call because pot odds would be slightly in your favour.

why not do the pushing yourself in the first place?

Because you're on a draw and you'd like to see another card if possible. Pot odds are pot odds, but a made hand is gold.

[Wet_DreaMer]

I dont think it can really be called an error, just a different opinion. There probably isnt a correct way to play this hand, it would depend on many other things.

Personally, Im betting about $300.

[NN]

Harrington is absolutely right. You can't risk that many chips on a draw, a poor one at that.

- That's the thing about the odds here, when you bet $200 into this pot, you are actually risking $790.

If someone were to go all-in, you've got to figure he's got a pair, two overs, or a better flush draw. Why bet them to an all-in when you have little to no information on their hand?
Of course if you get reraised all-in you'd have to call because pot odds would be slightly in your favour.

- You said it yourself, it doesn't matter what information you get from their possible all-in, you simply have to call.

So why not do the pushing yourself in the first place?

Because you're on a draw and you'd like to see another card if possible.

- If you absolutely wanted a free-card, you'd check instead. I would rater NOT like to see another card if possible. I'd like to take the pot down, right here. giving anyone on a higher flush draw, really bad odds.

Pot odds are pot odds, but a made hand is gold.

-

NN

[TylerK]

I don't like Harrington's "bet 1/2 to 3/4 of the pot if you don't have a made hand" strategy. It's way too callable too often, imho.

[Penneywize]

Penneywize wrote:
Harrington is absolutely right. You can't risk that many chips on a draw, a poor one at that.

- That's the thing about the odds here, when you bet $200 into this pot, you are actually risking $790.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting what you said, but to be perfectly honest, money you bet previously into the pot doesn't belong to you. You can't risk money that is not yours. Who is to say they'd fold if you stack off? That's just plain idiocy, you can't 'assume' they will fold.

EDIT:
Ok I reread your post and I think what you meant was you're actually risking that amount because one of the two opponents will go all-in. I couldn't possibly agree with that assumption. They've got a big bet in front of them, why call if they haven't necessarily hit anything? 200-300 is probably just as intimidating as an all-in, because they have to figure they will be called; If you were really trying to steal, wouldn't you have stacked off immediately?

If you absolutely wanted a free-card, you'd check instead.

Never said anything about a free card. Besides, checking implies one of two things, weakness or slowplay. And who would slowplay anything in that situation? So, checking would be a 'please stack off so I can fold' move. Betting a decent amount as suggested by Harrington leaves you with several scenarios, all of which are not too unfavourable for you.

1: everyone folds and you take the pot
2: you get called and see another card, so you can exit or stack off on 4 street.
3: you get reraised all-in (again, pot odds are not terrible for you in this scenario)

Stacking off is a decent move, but not the most correct move in my opinion (apparently, in Harrington's opinion as well).

Here are the scenarios if you immediately stack off:

1: everyone folds and you take the pot
2: you get called and have no way out of the hand.

I think it's pretty simple really and I'm not sure why you insist on belittleing my opinion here, especially if it's shared by a WCP like harrington...

[Penneywize]

"Situation: Online single-table tournament. You are the chip leader with eight players left. The players generally aggressive and most pots are contested."

Holy crap, 8 players left in an SnG? heck I'd have been out of the hand a long time ago! ouch. Well, even more reason to not stack off on the flop. No matter how much you think you're in control of the hand, you shouldn't be risking a huge amount of your chips that early in a tournament. What atrocious play that would be. You're already way ahead! You can practically post & fold till you read blind level 5 and start to play then.

Keep reading, I am getting to a point here.

The goal in an SnG is to make it to the final 3 and a payoff. Intelligent poker theory suggests that you should play EXTREMELY tight for the first 3 rounds or until there are 6-7 players left at the table. I would not touch a hand like 68s even if I were in the blinds or on the button. I have folded hands like AT or KJ in these positions before in SnGs even in favourable position if I've got a raise or two in front of me.

Anyway this is obviously a 'scenario', so there is no disputing how to avoid that hand (you mentioned harrington would fold that hand, thank god), but everything I just said should reinforce the notion that you should NOT risk all those chips on a semi-bluff, no matter what the pot odds.

[zenbitz]

This is a very wacky scenario... although I guess it could be a 2-3 table SNG.

The blinds are 50/100, and the two villains have already invested 20% of their stack in this hand, and get a crap flop. Given the pre-flop action, it's unlikely that either has an overpair to the board - most likely overcards, or possibly a mid-small pocket (I assume they are competent). So, really the only dangerous things they could be holding are AXclubs or a set of 9/3/2.

The big deal here is that you easily cover these guys. You can throw away a hand, and still be in the tourrnament. While unless you check-fold, they are likely to be playing for all their chips.

It's highly unlikley they both have clubs - so unless 1 guy has a set, and the other clubs (or either is a moron) one is going to fold to anything bigger than a min bet (unless 1 bluffs). So I really doubt you are getting 3:1 on your all in.

I think you have to bet at least the pot here - represent driving out draws. You don't have to put them all in, but any bet above 300 basically pot commits them if they call. 200 into 750 is a pretty seriously weak bet, probably not enough to shake a better draw. Probably would shake unsuited overcards, or underpair to the 9.

It's pretty close

[NN]

"You can't risk that many chips on a draw" & "you'd like to see another card if possible" Penneywize

If you absolutely wanted a free-card, you'd check instead. NN

Never said anything about a free card Penneywize

You don't want to risk chips, but you want to see cards...but not a free card. ok then

2: you get called and see another card, so you can exit or stack off on 4 street Penneywize

"so you can exit"? how do you plan to do this

you should NOT risk all those chips on a semi-bluff, no matter what the pot odds

BUT you ARE risking $790 when you bet $200. You bet $200, one player push, and yu have to call... unless you are serious about "no matter what the pot odds"-statement.

NN

[Penneywize]

NN I think I'm done replying to you.. I've tried to give you my best constructive criticism and you insist on dismissing it out of hand. What's worse is that you obviously don't understand some of the points I'm trying to make.

You don't want to risk chips, but you want to see cards...but not a free card. ok then

Because checking almost certainly guarantees that you will not get another card.. Am I talking to a wall here. I never said stacking off was outright wrong, it just probably isn't the best move.

"so you can exit"? how do you plan to do this

Allow me to introduce you to a concept in poker; it is called knowing when you are beat and folding.

Perhaps you should apply that concept to your performance in this thread!

BUT you ARE risking $790 when you bet $200. You bet $200, one player push, and yu have to call... unless you are serious about "no matter what the pot odds"-statement.

Are you psychic? how do you know someone will push behind your bet? I mean, come on, sometimes we have pretty good reads, pretty good feelings, but who can ever be sure someone will push behind a big bet like that?

And bro maybe you should save your bitching for harrington..

[FyrFytr998]

Odds or not I'm out of that hand that early in the SNG.

And let's not get testy here fella's. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

[LeFou]

I'd like to take the pot down, right here. giving anyone on a higher flush draw, really bad odds.

But one of the stipulations is that "most pots are contested" b/c of the table style. I assume this means you should just about neglect the possibility of taking it down here.

Going in now tells you nothing about their hands. 300 is sufficient -- considering their stacks are now 640 and 790 -- that they'll give it up if they missed. And they'll push if they've got a piece (and you're beat).

At this point you'll have drawing odds for your flush. So you'd like to know whether the push is with a better flush. Plus there's always the possible bluff.

MOST importantly, you've got some info to make that decision.

[dalecooper]

bleh.

[LeFou]

bleh.

Glad you could join us.

[Sed]

bleh.

post whore

[SteveO]

The AI play is hyper-aggressive but not incorrect.

Player F raised preflop. Unless he has a huge overpair you can easily get him off 2 overcards with an AI on that flop, which probably didn't help him.

I don't think you necessarily get any information from a 2-300 bet. However, if you push, you can just take the pot down right there; you have outs to snap off any overpair or flopped set; and assuming you lose you have plenty of ammo left to continue in the game. Only 2 things you have to worry about 1. he has a better flush draw (ooops) or 2. He calls and yoiu miss. That's poker.

The AI is obviously a risk but nothing wrong with gambling it up in a SNG b/c you gotta get a hold of those chips. I personally would not make that play unless i was very short stacked with nothing to lose or I had overcards and the flush draw like a KQs or J10s.

[dalecooper]

bleh.

Glad you could join us.

Ha! Sorry. I typed up this long, in-depth analysis of Harrington's bet size choices (1/2 to 2/3 of the pot in most situations) and then realized I had misconstrued the post I was responding to. It turned into... "bleh."

[elipsesjeff]

bleh.

Glad you could join us.

Ha! Sorry. I typed up this long, in-depth analysis of Harrington's bet size choices (1/2 to 2/3 of the pot in most situations) and then realized I had misconstrued the post I was responding to. It turned into... "bleh."

My personal favorite, and i do it all the time, is bet 5/16 to 11/16 of the pot depending on the hand.....

[rorix]

It's really simple. Don't bet more than you can afford to lose.