| Author |
Message |
citytom
High Card
Joined: 25 Aug 2005
Posts: 3
Location: florida
|
 Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2005 6:21 pm Post subject: My heartbreaker at the WSOP |
 |
|
My heartbreaker was getting eliminated at 45 when the payout of $10,000 was to 42 places in a $1K WSOP event this year. And it was on a bad beat! I felt like going up to the 30th floor of the RIO, and jumping out a closed window, onto a pile cactus! Want the story??? Can I tell it here?!!.
The table is playing tight as we are down to the bubble. I'm short stack, having about about 2 1/2 times the blind in chips. I'm in early position and go all-in w/ KJ suited hoping to take the blinds. As I expected the table folds around to the blind, who is healthy with chips. He say, "If I don't call, the table will beat me up." and show his T2 off suit. The flop is three rags. The turn is a rag. The river is a 2. Son of a ****! He won with a 2 2, and I went looking for the 30th floor of the RIO. Then I remembered I had another game the next day and saw a show instead.
Citytom
www.pokerchipsvideo.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Funkay Flex
Straight Flush
Joined: 22 Oct 2005
Posts: 487
Location: VA
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 10:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| that guy is a dumbazz... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BOYNAMEDSUE
Moderator
Joined: 27 Jun 2005
Posts: 7402
Location: Toronto
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 11:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Not if he had lots of chips. If he had 10x citytom's stack than calling is correct. I made a similar call last night with 73o.
Last edited by BOYNAMEDSUE on Mon Oct 24, 2005 12:09 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
greg-redux
Pair
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 12:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This is not a bad beat.
10/2 offsuit is an unbeatable hand, and if it is suited, well, then it is God. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jbrennen
Straight Flush
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 422
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 12:36 pm Post subject: Re: |
|
|
| Funkay Flex wrote: |
| that guy is a dumbazz... |
No, the guy had the pot odds to make that call.
Assuming that the pot had small blind (1/2 BB), big blind (1 BB), plus the poster's 2 1/2 BB, that's 4 BBs.
The big blind had to put in 1 1/2 BBs to call, on a 4 BB pot. He only needs to win 3 out of 11 times (27%) to make the call a +EV move. Given the range of hands that citytom might have had, it was a smart call. Somebody with 2 1/2 BBs who is in early position (meaning that they will be the big blind soon) is generally going to push all-in with any two high cards, or with any Ace, or suited connectors, or... You get the picture.
It sucks for citytom, but that's the reality of playing the short stack. Once your stack gets that small, it's impossible to price a big stack out of the pot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Funkay Flex
Straight Flush
Joined: 22 Oct 2005
Posts: 487
Location: VA
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 1:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| i guess he was getting odds. nvm my previous post then, i guess i didnt even think about the odds as i read it |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
luvdoinit
Straight Flush
Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 353
Location: California
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 5:27 pm Post subject: Re: |
|
|
[quote="jbrennen"] No, the guy had the pot odds to make that call.
Come on jb give me a break with your constant argument of correct pot odds to call. Is there EVER a situation that you dont say this?! Man I would love to have you at my table making this call all the time. The only problem is you wouldnt be very long in the game.
Think about it jb. Why do you see pro after pro folding in this same situation.
There's such a thing as common sense to you know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
luvdoinit
Straight Flush
Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 353
Location: California
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 5:40 pm Post subject: Re: |
|
|
[quote="jbrennen"] [quote]No, the guy had the pot odds to make that call. He only needs to win 3 out of 11 times (27%) to make the call a +EV move.[quote]
I find it interesting jb that you used this exact same number of times needed to win 3 out of 11 and percentage 27 as you have in almost all of your arguments about pot odds.
Pot odds[cough] [cough] I mean the odds, would change for each situation and not be your constant 3 out of 11 times/27% as you always like to quote. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jaconda78
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 4177
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 7:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ok, here's the math, all laid out in (fairly) easy to read format:
Odds that the caller was getting: 4:1.5, or 2.6666667:1. Hence, in order to be getting correct pot odds, the caller would have to win 1 out of every 3.6666667 times, or 27.272727273% of the time. Brennen happens to be right in this case - I do not know about what he posted elsewhere, since I have not noticed such a trend in his posts. Add to the 27.272727% the added equity of knocking out a player, and the big stack was indeed correct to call. If the big stack had over 10x the chips that the small stack had, he would be correct to call with pretty much any hand, as Harrington explains in HOH Volume 2.
*edit: just a few typos* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
luvdoinit
Straight Flush
Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 353
Location: California
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2005 12:25 am Post subject: Re: |
|
|
| Jaconda78 wrote: |
Ok, here's the math, all laid out in (fairly) easy to read format:
Odds that the caller was getting: 4:1.5, or 2.6666667:1. Hence, in order to be getting correct pot odds, the caller would have to win 1 out of every 3.6666667 times, or 27.272727273% of the time. Brennen happens to be right in this case - I do not know about what he posted elsewhere, since I have not noticed such a trend in his posts. Add to the 27.272727% the added equity of knocking out a player, and the big stack was indeed correct to call. If the big stack had over 10x the chips that the small stack had, he would be correct to call with pretty much any hand, as Harrington explains in HOH Volume 2.
*edit: just a few typos* |
FYI Jaconda he used this exact same argument with the exact same numbers 3 in 11 etc when I told of a guy calling my raise of 4x's the bb after six others had also called but he had 84. It's the one where you said, "thats not a long shot thats trying to hit the moon with a sling shot."
I remember this one because it was my own post. The other time jb used it was on someone else's post and I dont remember which. I guess what also bugs me about it is with jb it's always the same argument, implied pot odds. He's like a broken record. Implied pot odds, implied pot odds, implied pot odds............ Man I'm gonna vomit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kei
Two Pair
Joined: 28 Aug 2005
Posts: 69
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2005 12:28 am Post subject: Re: |
|
|
[quote="luvdoinit"]
| Jaconda78 wrote: |
Ok, here's the math, all laid out in (fairly) easy to read format:
Odds that the caller was getting: 4:1.5, or 2.6666667:1. Hence, in order to be getting correct pot odds, the caller would have to win 1 out of every 3.6666667 times, or 27.272727273% of the time. Brennen happens to be right in this case - I do not know about what he posted elsewhere, since I have not noticed such a trend in his posts. Add to the 27.272727% the added equity of knocking out a player, and the big stack was indeed correct to call. If the big stack had over 10x the chips that the small stack had, he would be correct to call with pretty much any hand, as Harrington explains in HOH Volume 2.
*edit: just a few typos* |
I could be wrong, but I think he said 3 in 28 times or so. Not 11.
Last edited by Kei on Tue Nov 01, 2005 4:55 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gibbygib
Four of a Kind
Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Posts: 278
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2005 12:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The hell was that post for, Kei?
Anyway, I would've called on 10-2, easily. It was the right call. luvdoinit, just admit you are wrong in every way about this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jaconda78
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 4177
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 29, 2005 2:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Luv, as I said, maybe he's said that in others (I remember the post you're speaking of, but I do not remember the exact numbers used and am too lazy to go search for it). However, in this case he's correct. In that one, I disagreed with his advice, but not here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lividlemur
Pair
Joined: 25 Oct 2005
Posts: 24
Location: above sea level
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| What were the antes (and the blinds) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DevilfishFan
Royal Flush
Joined: 09 Sep 2005
Posts: 906
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 4:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Even without the math it's easy to see that it's the right play. A chance to knock someone out for a good price. That's what it's all about.You were a 7:3 favorite. That's not a lock by any stretch of the imagination. It's a shame you had to lose on the river though. I prefer my deaths quick. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
