Checking it out in a tournament. |
|
Posted Fri Mar 03, 2006 12:35 am GMT by Leafs42084
Just wondering what everyones views are on checking it out when a player is all in.
I personally dont bet when there are only a few people in the tourny left and I dont have at least top pair with a good kicker. But what do you guys do? do you think this is a good strategy? is it unfair?
at what point does a hand become good enough to bet with? If the flop is 10/6/2 rainbow and you have 10/Aoffsuit, would you bet?
how do you feel about people who bet with absolutely nothing when its 3 players in the hand including yourself and one player is all in?
Did you know that participating in a poker forum can help you improve your own game? Be it by sharing experiences or simply asking for help, participation in a forum helps you focus and keep 'on topic' which will help you improve your game. You can learn from other players feedback and from their experiences. Why the THP poker forums? We offer one of the best managed texas holdem poker forums available, and the community within is far more friendly than those typicaly found on other sites. We've made a 'lurkers edition' of the poker forum available here on Holdem Poker Online, but we encourage all visitors to register and join in on the conversations on TexasHoldem-Poker.com
Posted Fri Mar 03, 2006 12:52 am GMT by Ryan231
I almost always just check it down, even if I've got top pair. Your only trying to get rid of the other person. If you don't have much left in your stack and theres a lot in the pot and say the flop comes like you said 10-6-2 and you hold A10 then I could see pushing to get rid of the other player that may be holding an overcard to increase your chance of winning here.
I never really understand why people bluff at it though, chances are the other person is holding something half decent and I'd feel like an ass if I bluffed out 1 guy with nothing and then lost in the end whereas if I'd just checked it down the short stack would have been knocked out by the other guy.
So in summary I really only bet if I hit top pair and I don't have much chips left in front of me, I'd say that I wouldn't be calling though if it was a call for most of my stack and someone else is behind me, its going to be either fold or all-in. I'd say 95% of the time I just try and check it down, I'll usually check in the dark if I'm first to act showing I have no need to bluff at it. Its fun when I check in the dark and hit a set and some ass bluffs at it though, thats a nice feeling 
Posted Fri Mar 03, 2006 2:48 am GMT by snoogins47
So very, very situational. Mostly gotta compare the amount of chips you can benefit by betting, and how much of a 'utility' benefit there is in knocking out the other guy. It's hard to go much farther than that, really. I think in general, 'etiquette' would have you checking it down more often than is really optimum for you, much of the time, in the early/middle stages of tournaments, but that doesn't mean much.
Posted Fri Mar 03, 2006 10:30 am GMT by zinn0
I will check it down if it is fairly late in the tourney even if I feel I've got the best hand, (i.e. bubble time or later), but in the early stages if I'm in a multi-way all-in pot, and I feel I have a the best hand, or a vulnerable hand, I'm betting. I like the utility approach late in the game, but it's all about me in the early stages.
Posted Fri Mar 03, 2006 11:36 am GMT by Muck
IMHO this can depend a lot on the payout structure, the number of players left and their stacks (illustrated well near the very beginning of the tourney and very end).
Harrington raises some interesting ideas too about how important cooperation is in the later stages of satellites where the top n final places all win an equally valued entry seat.
Summary: Gang up like f**k on the short stack(s).
Posted Sat Mar 04, 2006 7:06 pm GMT by Hungry4Knowledge
| Leafs42084 wrote: | If the flop is 10/6/2 rainbow and you have 10/Aoffsuit, would you bet?
|
I would bet in this situation... If a player is all-in and you feel you got the best hand, then you would be the one to beat the one all-in anyway, right? I think betting is the correct thing to do. But like i usually say, in extreme examples i would check it down, f.eks if it was a satellites and it was down too 10 players and 9 would get a ticket or something like that 
Posted Sun Mar 05, 2006 3:33 am GMT by thetank
A player may do whatever they wish with their chips.
If someone wants to bluff a dry side pot on the bubble, then that is their buisness quite frankly. Unless I feel that he is somehow in cahoots with the all-in player, I will say nothing.
If someone wants to call all-in when they're clearly drawing dead or very slim then that's teir buisness too. If everyone did everything optimally, then we wouldn't have poker tournaments.
I disagree with automatically checking everything down. The value to be gained from knocking a player out early in the tournament is negligible. Bet your hand.
On the bubble, I'll often bet with as little as 2nd pair, depending on my stack size. If, for example, I have 10k chips and the other guy has 3k chips with 1k in the main pot, I might bet with very little indeed.
It protects my hand, sure, the bubble might not burst, but with a big chip lead that isn't always such a bad thing.
So many times I've been called a moron for doing something like this in a sit n go. If I have over 50% of the chips in play though, I don't want the bubble to burst. I can win what was in the pot I lost in the next blind steal.
I suggest that instead of hard and fast TPTK rules, you weigh each situation on it's merits. Take into consideration stack sizes, the stage in the tournament, and how the betting action has gone up until that point.
|
|
