Hot answers tagged

5

I think this was a bad fold. You have to stick with the story you are trying to tell. You personally knew no one had the nut flush. So the two other players had to fear the ace of spades. Now the board also has a straight draw. I would have gone all in here. You had the most information possible, the nuts was not in either players hand. You would ...


4

In a paid game the immediate question would be what are the payout structure, because it can condition marginal calls into folds if it is relevant to have more chances to finish 2nd. Second it's a matter of read about how tight is UTG, but AQo is part of top 5%, so it would have to be very tight to make this unprofitable call. In a winner take all scenario,...


4

With your current position, I think it would be overly cautious to be too passive and essentially play for 7th place (while hoping for better). Being in 8th place right now, it's not guaranteed you'll make it; with 3 eliminations left for the bubble to burst and most people with 30+ bb's, you have time to really improve your standing and possible payout. TT ...


3

There used to be charts available if you didnt mind doing the data entry, but since it got shut down in the US, they dissappeared and only proprietary ICM + PB calculators were left. Also, PokerStars had banned PB tools during play so that might also explain why they're not available anymore. Edit to add: I'm sorry that I may not have been clear in my ...


3

You did an awful fold. What you should have done is push all in. The pot is already big enough for you to take it down. If you push you should have a lot of fold equity here. You have more outs than you said. I think if A comes you might win the pot also. Taking all this into consideration this is a really good spot to push, if he calls and you win this ...


2

Most people during the bubble tighten up their play for the same reason you hesitated. No one wants to get knocked out so close to the bubble, but in your situation pockets 10's was a pretty strong hand, given the position isn't good. If you would have raised, and everyone folded, you just made out and collected blinds. If a small stack went all in, you ...


2

If you have a little background in calculus, you'll notice that the dg(x)/dx line is the derivative of g(x) and then is set equal to 0 to find the critical point which in this case will be a maximum point and thus the optimal fraction of the bankroll to bet. Here is a little background/refresher on performing derivatives with log functions. Whether or not ...


1

Basically winrate is used for cash games. Your metric for tournaments is ROI (return of investment). 1) How to calculate ROI: ROI=Net Winnings / Total Investment= {(Total Winnings)-(Total Buyins incl Rake)} / (Total Buyins incl Rake) Example: So assume that you have played 100 SNGs with a buy in of $5+$0.5 and won a total of 700$. Then: Total Buyins ...


1

To calculate the whole thing, you need some input, that is: your hole cards player stacks After this, you perform a lengthy procedure that is called ICM. This will transform your stacks into real money. Then based on real money won/lost on the action of push/fold, you select the one that increases your real money. As you see, it's hard and the answer ...


1

Any other information on this player would help. Does he min bet a lot? Or does he usually make reasonable sized bets? Absent any other information, do you really think you are best here 1 out of 3 times? Any ace has you beat except A-2. Limped 4's at a passive table makes perfect sense as well. Not only that, your entire line of play pretty much puts ...


1

Since you were able to check preflop as the BB, the villain (and anyone else still in at that point) must have limped, so I'm not expecting any great hands here, let alone monsters. That betting pattern makes me think maybe villain flopped a monster though, and just min-bet the early streets to squeeze out a little value while still trying to keep people ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible