Hear Hear Shade.

My most imprtant reason for calling here: My goal is to try and win, not just cash out. If we are down to 3 players, and all get paid substantially, Then there is no reason not to call. in my mind. If I bust out, so be it, I got paid. But I'm trying to win this sucker, and folding AA to 2 players aint gonna get me there.

__________________

HAHAHA!!! I screwed the pooch. I thought Bonch fucked up and forgot to put the "K" in front of 100.

I say fold. You're not winning or finishing second in any way OTHER than folding every hand. Even if you scoop, you only have 1.5 BB's. Blind yourself away. It's done. The guy with 12K has to be retarded to call if he's insured 2nd by folding. Calling is a risk at finishing 3rd while folding is a guaranteed second, at the least.

If I have 300, I fold with the 40-50% chance that B loses and I win 2nd place prize money. If I call and win, I still can't compete for anything more than 3rd.

__________________

Maybe the numbers weren't quite as extreme to make it obvious. Alex seems to get it though.

__________________
“There's no sense in being precise when you don't even know what you're talking about.” - John von Neumann

I think mathmatically it's a fold.

But given that B called I'd put him ahead which may change the odds to a call.

Given that I'd have been watching these guys for the last hour at least that would be the deciding factor.

But I get where you are going with it Bonch. The payout structure would be another key in deciding the right $EV move in the long run

I get the point you're trying to make bonch...just maybe being a bit nitpicky on whether the case you laid out falls into the principle you're hitting at.

Add a zero to A and B's chip counts and I'll fold in a heartbeat

__________________
:cool:

To be successful in business, surround yourself with professionals. To be successful in poker, surround yourself with idiots.

I would like to see how someone actually does the math on this.


Worst case you are facing two pairs you win 65% of the time.

If you fold, player B will get knocked out what 30% of the time?

Of the 60% of the time you call and win the main pot, player B wins the side pot 70% of the time. You have 1500 in chips player A has 2000 in chips. Now what are your odds of getting second? 45-55? Another 30% of the time you win and player A gets knocked out, and you make second.
I say calling gets you second about 40% of the time. =65%*((70%*45%)+30%)

You fold, you get second 30% of the time.

Also, folding give you 0 equity for first where calling gives you at least 5% equity.

Anyone else?

I dont like the fold here in the large buy-in, large field environment. !-3 usually pays well enough to be content with third, but should strive for first. The best thing I got out of TJ's bookm was the fact that he sits on his heels until it gets 3 way, then he explodes, because the downside to busting out is almost Nill.

Now, If we're in a large buy-in (honestly buy-in doesnt really matter), 6 man SNG, where 3 doesnt pay, then I fold. Or Even where 3 is minimal money and 2 is good money.

Beav, I didnt really check your math, but Totally agree on the premise and theory. And those numbers do seem close enough for me at least.

And not to be a nit (dammit bonch, I hate that word lol) We're really not folding the NUTS, just the best starting hand. You need 5 cards to have the nuts.

__________________

You are folding the current nuts.

By definition its the best possible hand at the time.

__________________
“There's no sense in being precise when you don't even know what you're talking about.” - John von Neumann

I don't understand why someone would call here. The only way that you move up in the money is by folding. So, maybe you scoop on this hand, maybe just win the hi half, but you're given a great shot at 2nd by folding.

__________________

The_alex its fucking holdem there is no hi hand! This isnt PLO.

__________________
“There's no sense in being precise when you don't even know what you're talking about.” - John von Neumann