+1 on the point about strange all ins in an attempt to win bounties.
+1 on the point about playing with a big stack in these tournies vs playing with a small stack. so much more likely to dominate, go deep and take alot of bounties. this is the decider for me. In bounty bunters the value of having a big stack is increased. If i lose, just buy into another and do the same again!
in a deeper stacked/slower/ no bounties tourney, it'd be a much easier fold.
Easy fold, Can't believe people are even contemplating anything differently. Why take a (certain) flip when you can find a better edge later on in the tournament... Unless the level of your skill is only 50% flips. Then snap call I guess. Posted by ZD86
Sure, its high variance, but I still think its more profitable to be playing with a big stack and collect the bounties or busting over folding and grinding up a stack.
Wow... I can't believe this is even a thing, but here goes...
Do I want to enter a hand at this stage where I bust 75% of the time? If the reward is QUADRUPLING my stack and taking TWO bounties (a large portion of my entrance fee) then yes please!!! Every day of the week.
That is equity in action right there, you are being offered the perfect odds solely on chips if you had none in the pot already. With chips in the pot it swings further. With 2 bounties at stake it's a no brainer.
This doesn't even take into account the subtleties of having such a dominant chip stack when you win that you can bully people and cover almost anyone you enter a pot with, giving you a chance to tighten right up, play your premium hands, and stack people for more bounties.
The 3 in 4 times you bust REG FOR ANOTHER TOURNEY.
If it's the world series, or even a deepstack structure tourney, fold if you're insanely deep of course. You can afford to be patient and look for the perfect spot to get your chips in with no risk, and the reward of having a huge stack early stages is vastly diminished in those tourneys. But in fast BH structures a big stack early is worth a lot of risk. Some players simply ship all in every hand until they get called to either get a bounty and doubled stack early- I don't necessarily agree with that strategy, but you probably don't want to be TOO far from it either.
I've already said I think it's a call but I want to address another more general point about Bounty Hunters.
The bounties being added to the value of the call is a debatable topic. The fact is that each bounty you can claim at the start of the tournament is only worth roughly 1/3 of your buy-in. This means that the value of your own head is three times greater than the value of your opponents' heads. Just as importantly, making a call all-in risks not just your own head but the opportunities to win other heads in better spots in future. This should completely offset the apparent additional value of the bounty in any individual pot.
Therefore the value of a bounty should not turn a -cEV (Expected Chip Value) play into a +cEV play. Nor can it turn a slight +cEV play into a more +cEV play.
That's at least how I see it, meaning that the value of the bounties in this hand are irrelevant and we should concentrate solely on the cEV of the situation. I'm interested to hear arguments to the contrary, though.
@ deuceslive, i took a gander at your scope and well, it would seem taking early flips doesn't work for you does it?
I'd take the 40bb and 4 tourneys open, then one tourney with ~160bb everytime. You seem to think having ~ 5k @ bb30 is going to be significant when in reality it really isn't that important. Just watch how often an early chip leader actually goes on to FT in these things, its not often unless they are just in super godmode obv.
@ deuceslive, i took a gander at your scope and well, it would seem taking early flips doesn't work for you does it? I'd take the 40bb and 4 tourneys open, then one tourney with ~160bb everytime. You seem to think having ~ 5k @ bb30 is going to be significant when in reality it really isn't that important. Just watch how often an early chip leader actually goes on to FT in these things, its not often unless they are just in super godmode obv. Posted by NColley
You're right, I haven't got a stellar tournament record. No arguments there, I have some leaks that need fixing- namely tilt related, getting bored when I'm not getting hands and starting to play too aggressively, levelling myself into hero calls and hero bluffs against people that will never fold, etc. I'm well aware of the fundamentals and advanced level of play, I just have to get myself to follow them. I also take prolonged breaks and take a while to ease myself back in.
But by all means, take the scope graph as something relevant to advice. If that's how you want it, both BL and Ivanovic agree with the call, and they're serious winning players. So their advice must be valid.
Regarding BH head equity, I agree with you BL that it's overrated, but I think it's still relevant. You say when you lose it stops you taking any further bounties- point taken. But when you win, you have a dominant chipstack that covers almost all your opponents, which means you have a much stronger chance of taking heads. Nothing worse than getting it all in and your opponent having 50 chips left, sparking the feeding frenzy resulting in someone else profiting from you busting them.
And if you think having a huge stack early in a BH isn't relevant somehow, then... well, whatever. The reason the early chipleader busts in these tourneys is because they play like an idiot and get lucky, but then have no idea what to do with the chips. If you get a good player that gets lucky early on, good luck getting those chips from them. They will carry on accumulating and bullying the table around unless they get unlucky.
Well F Ivanovic is a cash player, and ofc hes gonna call when in another thread he advocates taking 55% flips early on in tourneys, not that I don't respect his opinion, but its going to be biased towards deep stacked cash poker, and well sure go ahead take that flip early on if you have no edge in the tourney..
As for borinloner, well he gets huge credit for posting tonnes of words often. Now don't get me wrong, alot of his posts are great for explaining exactly his thought processes, and he even often balances his posts by trying to put across the other side of his argument. However, theres no getting around the fact that he barely plays and definately not BH's regularly.
I'm well aware that as far as I can tell I'm in the minority who would fold here, I'm happy with my opinion and its based on relevant experience of these games. If these tourneys contained tough experienced players then I would have to push every cEV situation because I'd have no edge, but thankfully for me, these tourneys contain players that are very poor techinically, seem to never change or improve and so I can pass up small +EV spots early on because I can make chips where I'm a comfortable favourite in the hand.
Anyway, everyone plays differently, otherwise poker would be fairly boring.
Its good to get different opinions as you learn how others think, as stated previously this isn't a call, you should never expect to be going 3 ways with AK here and realistically this should of gone 5 ways, you will likely be running into at least one of the big hands QQ+ and then run into other aces which will reduce your outs. I don't like getting it with AK pre in the 1st 1/2 hours of a tourney anyway especially not here.
I still think this is almost guaranteed to be +cEV (if only marginally) but I have been swayed round to the fold, mostly by NColley. Basically it was the 'I'd rather have 4 MTTs still running with 40xBB in each than 1 MTT with a big stack' and I think that rings true even more so on Sky with the average standard of fields.
Bringing respective results into the debate is silly and shouldn't happen. The premise of the clinic is to debate on the strength of our arguments. Being a winning player doesn't mean that you get everything right and being a losing player doesn't mean you get everything wrong. It doesn't support your argument to say "I'm a winning player, therefore I know better than you". If your argument can't stand up to scrutiny on it's own strengths, then it's an argument that's been defeated. If it does hold up to scrutiny, then it's a solid argument. The results of the person making any particular argument are irrelevant and don't belong here.
i don't play that many tournies but i'd only be folding if it was the initial limper who shoved. as is i think its unlikely that we're going to be crushed, and i think having a big stack early in tournies is quite undervalued
The last thing I'll say here is, if you think 40xbb at the second level is going to last in a fast paced tourney, you're wrong. Within 10-15 minutes you're looking at your stack being below the 20xbb mark unless you get busy, and given how loose BH tourneys are, you can't bluff at all. So sure, if you happen to hit a big hand you'll get paid, but we all know that doesn't happen often enough. You're probably going to have to get it in a marginal spot, 40xbb (or 30/20 within ten minutes) has almost no fold equity in a BH.
That's why it's so beneficial in a BH particularly to have a big stack- it gives you appreciable fold equity and coverage of almost any player when a bounty is involved, without your head being at risk- which means people are less willing to call you light, giving you more room to chip up even on missed boards.
Comments
Why take a (certain) flip when you can find a better edge later on in the tournament... Unless the level of your skill is only 50% flips.
Then snap call I guess.
The bounties being added to the value of the call is a debatable topic. The fact is that each bounty you can claim at the start of the tournament is only worth roughly 1/3 of your buy-in. This means that the value of your own head is three times greater than the value of your opponents' heads. Just as importantly, making a call all-in risks not just your own head but the opportunities to win other heads in better spots in future. This should completely offset the apparent additional value of the bounty in any individual pot.
Therefore the value of a bounty should not turn a -cEV (Expected Chip Value) play into a +cEV play. Nor can it turn a slight +cEV play into a more +cEV play.
That's at least how I see it, meaning that the value of the bounties in this hand are irrelevant and we should concentrate solely on the cEV of the situation. I'm interested to hear arguments to the contrary, though.
I'm not going to comment further on the hand.
how much to call, how much to win and how much equity we have is the only thing we need to worry about in making the right decision.
If people opnions are that we don't have enough equity versus the two ranges then ok - fold.
When playing MTT's I would rarther have a big stack then a small one.
What about same action but we hold the nut flush draw on the flop obviously ? who is folding ?