A scenario from the big tournament at the mansion this November.

After playing for nearly four hours I had allowed my stack to dwindle to the point of having almost no playing room.  The blinds were 400 800 (I think, but it seems like it was more) with a 100 ante my stack was 5900 and I was in pretty late position, two away from the button with AJ off suit and one limper in front of me. I raised to 2000 straight and it was folded around to the big blind (Joe). He then announced all in for around 7000. The limper folded, and action was on me. Joe had been my table all night and had once raised all in over the top of someone and after they folded, he showed pocket lives or something very close to that. I asked Joe if he had pocket eights. He seemed very disturbed as if I had called it exactly and he knew that I had better. Easy call, right? It would seem so with more than one-third of my stack in the pot, and with the blinds and Antes I would get 9900 to my 3900. However, after investing 200 dollars (which is a lot for me) I didn't want to go out against a hand like AK or a high pocket pair (I was too concerned about the money to make a good decision with a clear conscience). After considering whether to call or fold for quite some time, I talked myself out of the call. Joe then showed pocket twos. I then proceeded to slap myself repetitively on the hand. Approximately seven minutes later after an early position limper I raised all in with Queen Jack. Was I on tilt Tilt? Absolutely. Several solutions to my problem came to mind. First I had been sitting waiting for a hand for a couple of rounds without doing anything. With the blinds and antes so high it cost me considerable amount of chips. If I had not played so extremely tight I might not have had to make an all in decision so soon. The second possibility would have been to raise all in and steal the blinds and antes, or possibly be called by the limper with a slightly interior hand. The third option would be to not commit so many chips, limp and see a flop.

I obviously should have called, but what about before the flop?

WHAT DO YOU THINK? Let me know.

Your friend Jeremy

I just read an e-mail from full tilt and it gave me something to think about. If I'm not willing to risk being eliminated as opposed to being crippled (those of you who know me, know that I already am. lol) I probably shouldn't be playing tournaments.

Here is that article. hope to see you next month.

 

Taking Your Hands Off the Wheel

Barny Boatman

November 21st 2007

There's no question that poker includes an element of gamble. Any time you risk something of value on an event with an uncertain outcome, you're gambling. But there is a way in which poker is the exact opposite of gambling, because poker is all about making intelligent decisions. It's all about control.

Gambling, in its purest form - buying a lottery ticket or backing a number on roulette - is to deliberately relinquish control of your money and leave the outcome to fate. If it's your day, if the Gods so wish it, you will get lucky. In poker, on the other hand, you're always striving to leave as little to chance as possible.

So how do you achieve control in tournament poker? Is it by avoiding gambles? By only playing strong starting cards? Only betting made hands and never bluffing or drawing? Of course not.

If you sit and wait for good hands all the way through a tournament then, like the roulette player keeping faith with their favorite number, you're leaving the outcome to chance. The great paradox of tournament poker is that in order to stay in control you have, amongst other things, to choose the right moments to gamble.

If you're doing 75 on the freeway and are just a few feet from the car in front of you, then even if you're the world's best driver, you're out of control because if the car ahead suddenly brakes, you can't avoid a crash. So it is with a stack which is too short to make opponents pass for a re-raise. Any time an opponent applies the brakes, your stacks will collide - at a time of their choosing – and you will need luck to survive.

In order to stay in control, you must strive to maintain a playable stack, which can mean pushing over the top of a late raise with the worst hand when you have a good chance of making your opponent fold. You don't want to have to make this play, but you have to recognize when it's the right time to put your chips in the pot. Too soon and it's a reckless unnecessary risk. Too late, and it's transparent and unlikely to work. Too often and you develop a credibility problem.

Sometimes your stack has gotten so low that you know you'll be in a showdown the next time you enter a pot. The only control you have left is the choice of when to push, and even there you are running out of room to maneuver. Don't just wait until you're all-in on the big blind. Instead, look for situations where you'll be in a showdown with the best possible ratio of chips to opponents, and where your cards are liable to be live. A well-timed gamble will give you a shot at regaining a playable stack.

Some very good tournament players deliberately seek early gambles in big pots; happy to get all their chips in at the first level with a flush draw against two pair, because they feel the edge and extra control a big stack would give them is worth that early risk. That wouldn't be my approach in a deep stack event, but I understand the reasoning behind that style of play.

In tournament poker the balance between gamble and control is constantly changing. Recognizing where you and your opponents are in this shifting landscape will help you make good decisions and give you a vital edge.