JJ in BB what shoud I do?

[stepahead]

GAME #2555706931: Texas Hold'em NL Tournament 2009-10-06 20:44:35
Table 350501628 (Tournament: InsidePoker Freeroll Buy-In: $0+$0)
Seat 1: pmassie ($2,797.50 in chips)
Seat 2: stepahead ($1,665.00 in chips)
Seat 3: jeht11 ($1,860.00 in chips)
Seat 4: mtpage ($1,275.00 in chips)
Seat 5: apw9955 ($1,055.00 in chips)
Seat 6: a1bane ($4,202.50 in chips)
Seat 7: Yorklass74 ($3,905.00 in chips)
Seat 8: dashybear ($1,590.00 in chips)
Seat 9: strider68 ($2,365.00 in chips)
Seat 10: K9BULLDOGK9 ($1,195.00 in chips) DEALER
pmassie: Post SB $40.00
stepahead: Post BB $80.00
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to stepahead [CJ SJ]
jeht11: Fold
mtpage: Fold
apw9955: Call $80.00
a1bane: Fold
Yorklass74: Call $80.00
dashybear: Fold
strider68: Fold
K9BULLDOGK9: Fold
pmassie: Call $40.00

[fjuanl]

with only 20bbs i shove. the pot is already 20% of your stack and an iso-raise to ~400 commits you to the pot anyway

[taipan168]

with only 20bbs i shove. the pot is already 20% of your stack and an iso-raise to ~400 commits you to the pot anyway

What is an "iso-raise"?

[stepahead]

I pushed and they folded, just checking I did right.

Iso raise, I dunno.

[GatorJH]

iso = isolation raise

[hopeful]

maybe a runner runner?
raise 400 shove any flop.

[Im_new]

maybe a runner runner?
raise 400 shove any flop.

why bother with the raise?

[Arjonius]

It's a pretty straightforward shove. You only have 15bb, not 20, and you clearly have to raise. With 3 limpers in the pot, you should raise to around 6bb if not more. If you do that, can you really fold if someone shoves? It may not be completely out of the question since you'd have 9bb left, but you'd be putting yourself in shove or fold mode hoping to catch a hand to push with, and even if you do double up, you'd only be around 18bb; i.e. barely above where you are now. Better to take your shot now when you do hold a good hand

[drmcboy]

maybe a runner runner?
raise 400 shove any flop.

why bother with the raise?

It's debatable, both options have upsides.

If we shove:

we may fold coin flip hands.

We may get the whole stack of lower PPs that may have called a raise pre but will then fold on the flop.

If we raise and then shove the flop:

Coinflip hands that miss may now fold, so we prevent them from seeing all 5 cards or force them to make a mistake by calling chasing overs.

You give hands like T9 a chance to call and then a pair/draw where they would have folded to a pre flop shove.

You'll get called by low PPs on boards like 933 or 247 anyway.

Many players would be more likely to call a shove in this spot with say KQ vs a raise since a raise will look stronger.



With ~77-TT I would shove for sure. With a hand like AK/AQ I would raise instead because there even when we miss the flop we'll often still have 6 outs when we shove the flop and get called. With JJ & QQ it's pretty close which is better. Probably it depends most on what kind of hands people will decide to take a flop with.

For sure saying 'we're committed may as well shove' is under thinking, just because we're committed it doesn't mean shoving is the best play.

[Im_new]

maybe a runner runner?
raise 400 shove any flop.

why bother with the raise?

It's debatable, both options have upsides.

If we shove:

we may fold coin flip hands.

We may get the whole stack of lower PPs that may have called a raise pre but will then fold on the flop.

If we raise and then shove the flop:

Coinflip hands that miss may now fold, so we prevent them from seeing all 5 cards or force them to make a mistake by calling chasing overs.

You give hands like T9 a chance to call and then a pair/draw where they would have folded to a pre flop shove.

You'll get called by low PPs on boards like 933 or 247 anyway.

Many players would be more likely to call a shove in this spot with say KQ vs a raise since a raise will look stronger.



With ~77-TT I would shove for sure. With a hand like AK/AQ I would raise instead because there even when we miss the flop we'll often still have 6 outs when we shove the flop and get called. With JJ & QQ it's pretty close which is better. Probably it depends most on what kind of hands people will decide to take a flop with.

For sure saying 'we're committed may as well shove' is under thinking, just because we're committed it doesn't mean shoving is the best play.

+1. nice post.

[Im_new]

oh, and fwiw, if I'm 12+ tabling, I feel the shove is better for the sake of time. Otherwise, I think I prefer the raise w/ intentional flop shove because it'll potentially conserve chips. Though, I would absolutely hate when overs hit the flop, especially an ace.

[GatorJH]

oh, and fwiw, if I'm 12+ tabling, I feel the shove is better for the sake of time. Otherwise, I think I prefer the raise w/ intentional flop shove because it'll potentially conserve chips. Though, I would absolutely hate when overs hit the flop, especially an ace.

IF you are making decisions based on time then you are playing too many tables at once. Each decision should be made based on the best decision for that instance, not that you have to get back to one of your other tables.

DRMC - Great post above!!!

[revolvingiris]

oh, and fwiw, if I'm 12+ tabling, I feel the shove is better for the sake of time. Otherwise, I think I prefer the raise w/ intentional flop shove because it'll potentially conserve chips. Though, I would absolutely hate when overs hit the flop, especially an ace.

IF you are making decisions based on time then you are playing too many tables at once. Each decision should be made based on the best decision for that instance, not that you have to get back to one of your other tables.

DRMC - Great post above!!!

+1

[Im_new]

oh, and fwiw, if I'm 12+ tabling, I feel the shove is better for the sake of time. Otherwise, I think I prefer the raise w/ intentional flop shove because it'll potentially conserve chips. Though, I would absolutely hate when overs hit the flop, especially an ace.

IF you are making decisions based on time then you are playing too many tables at once. Each decision should be made based on the best decision for that instance, not that you have to get back to one of your other tables.

DRMC - Great post above!!!

+1

I saw this type of response coming. lol

If making this decision easier preflop will conserve time, allowing me to play more tables, thus boosting my $/hour ratio (w/ a small decrease in ROI) I'm making it.

Here is the perfect situation to exercise this methodology. The hand can be played correctly either way, as DRMC displayed, thus the decision is marginal either way.

We do it all of the time at cash tables; what is so different here?

[stepahead]

I think I am always pushing here. Chances are good there are no bigger hands than JJ. Seeing the flop is too risky with so few chips. .A bird in the hand and her bush and all that..lol

[drmcboy]

If you have a shot at 20 birds you might reconsider.

[fjuanl]

I still think a shove is best here, but drmcboy brings up good points. I actually raised over a limp with a non-premium and 15BBs yesterday when I normally would have auto-shoved. In this hand the open limper has a 12BB stack and its a freeroll...so I kind of expect to get limp/called by T8o, etc

[revolvingiris]

I saw this type of response coming. lol

If making this decision easier preflop will conserve time, allowing me to play more tables, thus boosting my $/hour ratio (w/ a small decrease in ROI) I'm making it.

Here is the perfect situation to exercise this methodology. The hand can be played correctly either way, as DRMC displayed, thus the decision is marginal either way.

We do it all of the time at cash tables; what is so different here?

You shouldn't be laughing, that mind set is a leak. It would be "easier" to just shove AA pf every time but you don't do that because you fret losing value. Same with this exact situation. DR gave great advice but if I knew one of the players in the OP would stack off with an under pair then shoving becomes the most profitable. Think in terms of making the most money, not in terms of ease of play.

Also the hand can only be played either way because DR is short any reads on the villains. Give Dr a read and I'm sure he would be quick to illustrate the most profitable play.

[Im_new]

I saw this type of response coming. lol

If making this decision easier preflop will conserve time, allowing me to play more tables, thus boosting my $/hour ratio (w/ a small decrease in ROI) I'm making it.

Here is the perfect situation to exercise this methodology. The hand can be played correctly either way, as DRMC displayed, thus the decision is marginal either way.

We do it all of the time at cash tables; what is so different here?

You shouldn't be laughing, that mind set is a leak. It would be "easier" to just shove AA pf every time but you don't do that because you fret losing value. Same with this exact situation. DR gave great advice but if I knew one of the players in the OP would stack off with an under pair then shoving becomes the most profitable. Think in terms of making the most money, not in terms of ease of play.

Also the hand can only be played either way because DR is short any reads on the villains. Give Dr a read and I'm sure he would be quick to illustrate the most profitable play.

lol. So gullible. Do you really think that i'm ignorant of value because I'm playing this number of tables?

I have considered these points you're making. Above, I said that I agreed with drmc. I understand the pros and cons of each decision. I understand the principles or whatever of value. In this particular hand, where I have minimal reads, I shove. If I played less tables at a time, I'm 100% sure I would have a higher ROI and more reads, but I wouldn't bring in the cash as fast. I typically play 18-22 cash tables, but I only play 8-12 tournaments as I learn to play them.

beyond all of that, shoving pre gets great value and it keeps the hand less complicated. In tournaments, I'm not the greatest post flop player, so it makes more sense for me to play a much more forward PF game. If I have reads on villains, I adjust accordingly.

[revolvingiris]

lol. So gullible.

gul·li·ble (gŭl'ə-bəl)
adj. Easily deceived or duped.

I would ask you to explain this but I'm sure you would just misuse another word.

If I played less tables at a time, I'm 100% sure I would have a higher ROI and more reads, but I wouldn't bring in the cash as fast. I typically play 18-22 cash tables, but I only play 8-12 tournaments as I learn to play them.

This isn't even a matter of ROI or $ per hour as I'm 100% sure your not playing optimally...You should only add more tables if you can keep track of your villains/continue to get reads. Your missing out on a ton of spots that would make you more money then you currently are (if at all?).

beyond all of that, shoving pre gets great value and it keeps the hand less complicated. In tournaments, I'm not the greatest post flop player, so it makes more sense for me to play a much more forward PF game. If I have reads on villains, I adjust accordingly.

Idk where to even start here..."shoving pre" does have value but it is also one of the higher variance plays but it also seems to be the only trick in your bag. I would say be careful as it doesn't sound like it would be tough to put you on a range. You say you suck post flop so instead of trying to get better you add more tables to make up for it (which IMO is on the same level as moving up so the good players will fold to your raises). You can't get reads because your playing so many tables and then you convince yourself that your hourly rate is higher then it would be anyways and to top it off. Your still trying to learn MTTs.

Do you really think that i'm ignorant of value because I'm playing this number of tables?

Yes.

[fjuanl]

[Im_new]

lol. So gullible.

gul·li·ble (gŭl'ə-bəl)
adj. Easily deceived or duped.

I would ask you to explain this but I'm sure you would just misuse another word.

If I played less tables at a time, I'm 100% sure I would have a higher ROI and more reads, but I wouldn't bring in the cash as fast. I typically play 18-22 cash tables, but I only play 8-12 tournaments as I learn to play them.

This isn't even a matter of ROI or $ per hour as I'm 100% sure your not playing optimally...You should only add more tables if you can keep track of your villains/continue to get reads. Your missing out on a ton of spots that would make you more money then you currently are (if at all?).

beyond all of that, shoving pre gets great value and it keeps the hand less complicated. In tournaments, I'm not the greatest post flop player, so it makes more sense for me to play a much more forward PF game. If I have reads on villains, I adjust accordingly.

Idk where to even start here..."shoving pre" does have value but it is also one of the higher variance plays but it also seems to be the only trick in your bag. I would say be careful as it doesn't sound like it would be tough to put you on a range. You say you suck post flop so instead of trying to get better you add more tables to make up for it (which IMO is on the same level as moving up so the good players will fold to your raises). You can't get reads because your playing so many tables and then you convince yourself that your hourly rate is higher then it would be anyways and to top it off. Your still trying to learn MTTs.

Do you really think that i'm ignorant of value because I'm playing this number of tables?

Yes.

LMAO... such a heated response for no reason. You're putting far too much energy into this forum, especially this thread. But, I'll respect your devotion to this thread with a reply of my own.


Yes, you are gullible. You're the gung-ho kid around here, the one who everyone seems to have a problem with. You're the kid who leeches onto the experienced guys (who can pound the both of us in Mtts) and you repeat only what you hear. You're the 4 year old who repeats sentences without understanding the grammatical structure behind them. You are gul·li·ble.

I feel like I'm being insulted by the hall monitor. :-/

If you do not understand the concept of making moves like these, you will never learn to multi-table effectively. I sincerely hope you don't think those guys (like myself) who quite profitably play 16, 18, 20, 24 tables plays each table as though he only has one table running. If you believe this, you are both naive and gullible. (Feel free to copy and paste the definition of naive, if that's your thing nowadays.)

...actually, not the hall monitor. I feel like I'm being insulted by the asthma kid who would soon grow into a D&D prodigy.

I'm done with this thread. You should feel free to reply though. You're amusing to me.



(note: somehow you arrived at shoving preflop being the "only trick" in my bag (how cliche). I'm not sure how you got that from this one hand, but sure. Sit beside me at a table and call my shoves because I OBVIOUSLY shove every pair, every ace, and every king I pick up, regardless of blinds or stack sizes.)

(last note: You should work on your syntax. It is awful.)

[Im_new]

I wish we could. I never argue with folks beyond the felt. But this kid... this kid lacks a lot, but he thinks he knows it all. I'm not phil ivey, or you, or drmc, or renton, or tai, or anyone that damn good and respectful, but this kid seems to have a VERY skewed image of my game. I'm sure my B-roll and experience and ROI and $/hour trumps this child. I could very well take him to the cleaners in any NLHM arena, hands down.

I think because Drmc pwned his ego in another thread that he has to find another poster to bully, in order for his scrotum to be sewn back on. The kid has no idea.

[stepahead]

I love it here , it's just like home....no one gets along....

[Im_new]

I love it here , it's just like home....no one gets along....

lol, i know right.

[DarkHorse83]

A fairly interesting thread has turned into a 'who has a bigger dick contest'.

If it helps either of you feel better I am sure I have a bigger one than both of you

[Im_new]

A fairly interesting thread has turned into a 'who has a bigger dick contest'.

If it helps either of you feel better I am sure I have a bigger one than both of you

[slicky111]

In that situation I would push all-in. U wasalready behind in the blinds. U really didnt have no other choice. But u could of tried to slow play it, if more people were in the pot.

[revolvingiris]

I think because Drmc pwned his ego in another thread that he has to find another poster to bully, in order for his scrotum to be sewn back on. The kid has no idea.

You continue to make reference to you and Dr as if your on some team against me? And where did Dr "pwn my ego"? My ideas are neither right nor wrong as this is creative game with a mathematical spine. I also respect the hell out of everything Dr has ever said to me and I am sure it was for my own good. I would be careful when speaking on other peoples behalf. Which I think is just a good life lesson.

Let me analyze this sentence and see if I missed something:

lol. So gullible. Do you really think that i'm ignorant of value because I'm playing this number of tables?

What exactly about your above sentence am I so gullible (easily deceived or duped) about? Did you trick me into thinking you don't understand value? Did I trick myself into it? And if I did, how is that going to benefit me? Apparently I made the mistake of trying to help you correct an error in your thinking. Gator made a very good point and instead of taking in what he had to say you laughed at his post and then puked your justification.

final thoughts

Everyones problem with me

Most people in this forum are adults. If they have an issue with me they can talk to me directly in any number of ways. I'm not very confrontational and over all just want to please the people I interact with (which anyone who has spoken to me outside the forums will agree with). Which I have always been right there to answer any question that have come my way.

My thoughts differ from many of the posters in this forum but that doesn't make me the "stupid" one nor does that make me the annoying one who just doesn't agree. I tend to be one of the more clean posters and my insults are pretty few and far in between. I may say some incorrect things here and there but I would rather blurt out "wrong or stupid" remarks and have them corrected (thats what FTR is for). You learn from your mistakes, not from your successes. I am 100% fine with the joke ALWAYS being on me as long as I am learning.

I have never been a hall monitor nor have I ever had asthma nor am I a kid (Just in case you were wondering). You also say that I am a bandwagon whore who just regurgitates other more experienced players words. Yet, this thread is filled with you quoting other players in a "yeah what he said" fashion. I don't care about "bullying" any one but apparently your super sensitive (noted) and lastly.

I'm sure my B-roll and experience and ROI and $/hour trumps this child. I could very well take him to the cleaners in any NLHM arena, hands down.

This is just sad. Mainly because its an assumption (proven by the bold) and no respectable poker player is interested in bringing this type of self destructive ego into their game...And if your going to be done with a post, be done with it. Don't slam the door and then continue to dance around like a cheerleader.

[Penneywize]

Iris, I'm pretty sure that had you phrased your criticism about his rationale behind his decision to push in a less condescending way, we'd probably have avoided this whole pissing contest.

At any rate, I'm pretty much of the mindset that any time you're making a decision based on a time constraint and opportunity cost (i.e. "if I spend x number of seconds at this table, I am missing out on y opportunities at other tables") rather than poker strategy, you are not playing optimally.

But, that does not preclude the possibility that making such decisions is actually +EV long-term.

Consider this: all else being equal, it is evident that playing one table at a time allows for the greatest amount of focus and attention to detail to the game at hand. Any number of tables being played greater than 1 means you are dividing your attention and are, at least theoretically, not playing as optimally as you could be.

But people still multi-table all the time, and a majority of those who do are profitable players. That's because they do not need to have 100% focus to play well enough to win money. So increasing the number of tables played is a fairly straightforward way to sweeten a given player's bottom line.

There's more to it than what I just said, namely the consideration of the quality of the opposition (as in, better to play 10 tables of 10$ NL rather than 1 table of 100$ NL due to the amount of fish), but what I'm basically driving at is this: making "marginally sub-optimal" plays like those ImNew is referring to is implicit to multi-tabling in general. And since the situation in question is definitely an edge-case, he really can't be faulted.

[Penneywize]

-- Just realized that I was posting in a thread that is a week old and want to point out that I'm not trying to resurrect the argument between you two. I was just reflecting after reading through the last few posts and thought I touched on a rather interesting bit of poker theory.

[Im_new]

-- Just realized that I was posting in a thread that is a week old and want to point out that I'm not trying to resurrect the argument between you two. I was just reflecting after reading through the last few posts and thought I touched on a rather interesting bit of poker theory.

No resurrecting here lol.

thanks for presenting my side more clearly than I could because of my frustration.