I have a question about a problem from Harrington on Holdem III. I'll try to set this up as simply as possible. I agree with the suggested solution, up until to the last decision. So I'll eliminate the discussion of the decision points in between.

You're down to 6 players in MTT. You're in the SB with 400,000 chips. A solid player is in the BB with 100,000. The blinds are 3,000/6,000, with 500 ante.

Everyone folds to you, and you hold Q7o. You raise it to 25,000. The BB calls, and the pot is now 59,500.

Flop = A 7 4 rainbow. You bet out 25,000 with your middle pair. The BB then moves in with his remaining 75,000 chips. It's 50,000 to you to win a pot of 159,500 (a little over 3:1).

At this point, I would fold my middle pair. I would figure that I was most likely behind and had only 5 outs to improve. Since the odds of improving are approximately 4:1, and the pot is only around 3:1, I'd let the hand go.

Harrington, however, recommends calling. He feels that the pot odds are worth it, after taking into account the possibility of a bluff.

If that is the conclusion that you would draw, then why not just lead out with a push to begin with? It seems to me that the whole point of betting 25,000 is to take down the pot if the opponent doesn't have a hand, but to be able to get away from it if he comes over the top. If you are prepared to call anyway, why not just start with the push and force your opponent to fold unless he holds an ace?

as i read i was making the decisions and i'm with harrington all the way here.

no need to push the flop and induce a call by looking like a bully from 88 k7 etc. there's also a possible call and more decisions based on the turn. i'm small better relative to the pot though , so the play appeals.

easy call to his reraise for me.

I just don't understand the pre-flop raise? Well I do - there's a 12,000 pot and you're just surrendering it by folding, put the pressure on your opponent etc. The problem is with raising 3.5x the blinds , once you get called and then fire out after the flop, you've risked 50,000 chips and are OOP with a bad hand. You had an M of 33 before the hand and were cruising - why get involved?

This is one of those concepts that i really struggle with in tournamount poker. I'm sure that it is the correct play and plenty of more experienced players will be on here telling me I don't know what I'm talking about etc. Seriously though - why bother ? Just let it go and wait for a better spot.

Anyway as played - I agree with you and would just fold to the push after the flop, but then I've just defined myself as weak-tight so what do I know?

Originally Posted by Lamby100

Meldon, how long are you going to sit there surrendering your small blind everytime you get dealt something less than a premium hand?

I'm not saying always surrender your small blind and wait for just premium hands. It's just that Q7 is THE average hand (I read this somewhere and not sure if it's correct) - so why get involved risking 50,000 when it's 50-50 that he's got a stronger hand than you? I understand that you're going for first place and this could be an opportunity to eliminate a short(er) stack but why not just wait til you have an A or K, sc's, small pairs, even unsuited connectors?

I'm not saying I'm correct. I play mainly cash games and recently sit'n'go's. It could just be that I've got too much of a cash game mentality and at the levels I play (0.25c/0.50c NL) the blinds just aren't worth stealing routinely.

I read the situation and my initial thought was Fold - I genuinely would like to understand why I'm wrong here? Harrington knows more than I ever will, so I know I'm wrong I just think there are better spots.

Originally Posted by Lamby100

Is he saying it's an easy call as he doesn't believe the BB has an ace? I think it's a fair assumption as I believe most people in the BB holding an ace and short stacked faced with a raise from the big stacked SB would push back against him there (under the assumption that it was a steal). I know I would.

I think I agree with this, although I'm not sure that it would change the outcome of my decision regarding whether to call. The BB knows that, by pushing, he is offering the CL 3:1 odds to call. That leads me to believe that the BB has a real hand (i.e., at least a pair of 7s) and significantly reduces the chance that he is simply making a move. But even if you were to make a relatively broad list of the hands that he could have at this point (pocket pairs, Ax, 7x), the SB is behind most of them and has only 5 outs to improve.

But I didn't want to debate the call as much I wanted to question the first bet on the flop. If you push on the flop, the BB is getting less than 2:1 to call (pot with push = 134,500; call odds = 1.8:1). You'll still get all the same folds that you would get to a 25,000 bet, but you'll probably pick up folds from weak 7s and possibly pocket pairs up to TT.

You know that you are going to be called by anyone with the Ace, and maybe you'll still get called by other pairs that can beat a pair of 7s. But since you've already concluded that you're willing to call the BB if he comes over the top, why not push to start if it increases your fold equity to any significant extent? A fold on this flop with such a marginal holding is a great result.

I think the BB is making a mistake here. Why call the raise in the first place? If he thinks it's a steal he might just as well push.

Then postflop he goes all-in with mid pair, weak kicker on that flop, which doesn't look particularly tight to me. All aces or pairs higher than 7 are going to call.