First, a couple of disclaimers: I have not played a DYM or Double Or Nothing in years. I know nothing about JockBMW's or Persephers' play, apart from that which is written in this thread. Now with that said; It seems to me that those people talking about raising against Persephers are missing the main issue in this hand and DYM play generally: If we have a big stack, we don't want to play against other big stacks. In this hand, the only issue is the short stack. Both other players, if they are experienced DYM players, are playing only against him. The moment he folds the other two would generally expect to check it down against each other and should only continue betting with the nuts or near-nuts. This is because those two players do not need to build their stacks. As long as there are players at the table who are shorter than they are, they do not want to risk playing against someone who can bust them or make them short. This means that when Persephers bets on the turn, after the shorty has folded, he should never have anything that JockBMW can beat. If Persephers is a very clued-up DYM player, he would never be putting chips into the pot here with a Ten or a draw because he would know that JockBMW would only continue in the hand against a big stack with a big hand. There is absolutely no need for either player to play against the other. For this reason, even if people are wrong about Persephers and he is not such a good player, it is still the correct fold for JockBMW. Jock has little to gain from taking a chance on doubling-up here as long as other players are significantly shorter than him. A point to make, though, is that the table seems to be five-handed so this is not the bubble. However, as long as one player at the table is limping for 150 out of a 1200 stack, we don't need to be getting ourselves in trouble against the other big stacks. We win the same payout if we finish third in chips as we do if we finish first. It seems to me that Jock is absolutely correct to switch off once the shorty is out of the hand and snap-fold to any bet. Posted by BorinLoner
Yeah, I agree that the top two stacks should not be going to war.
But I dont agree that betting 250 from that stack, in these circs, is evidence that the big stack is willing to go to war.
Folding is not necessarily "too tight". It makes a lot of sense. However, we are quite possibly folding the best hand.
Imho - nothing the big stack has done shows that he has a hand better than ours. We have not invited him to get out of our way. He has invited us to get out of his way, but with a bet size that wont hurt him if he needs to fold.
In Response to Re: Was I right to lay this down : Yeah, I agree that the top two stacks should not be going to war. But I dont agree that betting 250 from that stack, in these circs, is evidence that the big stack is willing to go to war. Folding is not necessarily "too tight". It makes a lot of sense. However, we are quite possibly folding the best hand. Imho - nothing the big stack has done shows that he has a hand better than ours. We have not invited him to get out of our way. He has invited us to get out of his way, but with a bet size that wont hurt him if he needs to fold. Posted by Padzz77
The point is that it doesn't matter. He may have the big hand, he may not. We don't need to care. If he's bluffing us, let him have the pot.
The value of the chips in the middle is less than the value of the chips in our stack in DYM's. We can just fold to the money alot of the time with a big stack but if we get involved with this pot and put more chips in, we might not be able to fold to the money.
Even if we believe it's likely that we have the best hand, it doesn't mean that making a raise or call here would be correct.
The key way to think of it is:
If I raise or call here, the chances of me winning the hand are, let's say, 70%. However...
If I fold here, the chances of me making the money are, let's say, 80%.
As long as we have a big stack, the second number is going to be quite high. Even if the first number appears to make a play correct in a particular hand, it can be incorrect long-term strategy if the second number is higher. (Obviously those numbers are just examples and aren't calculated specifically for this hand in any way)
In this DYM, it seems very likely that Jock can simply fold to the money or at least to the bubble. If that's the case, then the chances of winning this hand have to be huge, virtually 100%, to make it correct to carry on.
In Response to Re: Was I right to lay this down : The point is that it doesn't matter. He may have the big hand, he may not. We don't need to care. If he's bluffing us, let him have the pot. The value of the chips in the middle is less than the value of the chips in our stack in DYM's. We can just fold to the money alot of the time with a big stack but if we get involved with this pot and put more chips in, we might not be able to fold to the money. Even if we believe it's likely that we have the best hand, it doesn't mean that making a raise or call here would be correct. The key way to think of it is: If I raise or call here, the chances of me winning the hand are, let's say, 70%. However... If I fold here, the chances of me making the money are, let's say, 80%. As long as we have a big stack, the second number is going to be quite high. Even if the first number appears to make a play correct in a particular hand, it can be incorrect long-term strategy if the second number is higher. (Obviously those numbers are just examples and aren't calculated specifically for this hand in any way) In this DYM, it seems very likely that Jock can simply fold to the money or at least to the bubble. If that's the case, then the chances of winning this hand have to be huge, virtually 100%, to make it correct to carry on. Posted by BorinLoner
I agree with all the logic.
What I am less convinced of is that this bet is either a "bluff", or else better trips, full house or flush.
If the guy has (say) J10, then he bets like this. If he has 77, then he bets like this. For all he knows, he is ahead. The fact that he doesnt want to go to war doesnt mean that he has to let us check it down to see if we can overtake him in the river. That's the advantage he has as chip leader.
I'm not saying we have to call, or that it is too tight to fold. But with about 3.4K, we cannot necessarily afford to fold every single time we're in a pot with the chip leader. Others wont be doing that. If they force him to fold in a situation like this, then we wont be second in chips for ever.
{As mentioned before, I am useless at DYMs. So maybe this is a situation where I need to tighten up a lot.}
In Response to Re: Was I right to lay this down : See this Jock? Proof that folding is correct. Posted by BorinLoner
I think a fold is bad because of the size of his turn bet.. indicates a weak 10 with maybe a club draw also.. cant see this being the nuts. we can always fold to a huge bet on the river innit
In Response to Re: Was I right to lay this down : I think a fold is bad because of the size of his turn bet.. indicates a weak 10 with maybe a club draw also.. cant see this being the nuts. we can always fold to a huge bet on the river innit Posted by GREGHOGG
I just don't see much need in getting involved. Though a full house seems unlikely, I don't think he'd bet with worse than an Ace or possibly a flush. I don't see why he'd bet against our stack with a Ten... even these tiny bets. Why would he need or want to, especially after we called on the flop? (Presuming he's a decent player)
Maybe he's using the whole DYM strategy against us, thinking we'll give up without the nuts. I don't care if he is doing that, though, I'm still only playing the shorter stacks. lol
In Response to Re: Was I right to lay this down : I just don't see much need in getting involved. Though a full house seems unlikely, I don't think he'd bet with worse than an Ace or possibly a flush. I don't see why he'd bet against our stack with a Ten... even these tiny bets. Why would he need or want to, especially after we called on the flop? (Presuming he's a decent player) Maybe he's using the whole DYM strategy against us, thinking we'll give up without the nuts. I don't care if he is doing that, though, I'm still only playing the shorter stacks. lol Posted by BorinLoner
OK ive now scoped the guy and his graph is perfect at dyms at these stakes. He is prob milking us for value then in this spot annoyingly. Still, as i am a giant plichard, even if i have seen his scope before the game, which i will have, i would call the turn just to get to a cheap showdown. We are in no immediate danger and it would be good to pick up a proper read.
I don't even understand what is going on, short stack limps so sb makes up -
really ? making up with a big ace mmmm so sb is trapping ? so may have an ace - or is just making up with w/e sooted cards
then oppo leads flop, repping what - surely if trapping oppo checks flop - i bet please short stack fold ! does oppo lead with a draw, bluff - no way oppo flopped a house :S
call turn
call river
w/e - none of it makes sense except for the flush - but is oppo known for making up in spots like this with marginal sooted rubbish )
Brilliant!! i never noticed just assumed. You may get three new pages of posts now as different scenario now. LOL. I 'retract'....my solicitors will be in touch! ;-)
In Response to Re: Was I right to lay this down : Did you only call the flop because the short stack was still to act? If not, why not lay it down on flop and save an extra 150? In Response to Re: Was I right to lay this down : Not a raise? Posted by Padzz77
Yes was happy to get it all in with the short stack with my holding
In an MTT I would have raised the flop and made him have bad oods to chase his Flush
Comments
The value of the chips in the middle is less than the value of the chips in our stack in DYM's. We can just fold to the money alot of the time with a big stack but if we get involved with this pot and put more chips in, we might not be able to fold to the money.
Even if we believe it's likely that we have the best hand, it doesn't mean that making a raise or call here would be correct.
The key way to think of it is:
If I raise or call here, the chances of me winning the hand are, let's say, 70%. However...
If I fold here, the chances of me making the money are, let's say, 80%.
As long as we have a big stack, the second number is going to be quite high. Even if the first number appears to make a play correct in a particular hand, it can be incorrect long-term strategy if the second number is higher. (Obviously those numbers are just examples and aren't calculated specifically for this hand in any way)
In this DYM, it seems very likely that Jock can simply fold to the money or at least to the bubble. If that's the case, then the chances of winning this hand have to be huge, virtually 100%, to make it correct to carry on.
Maybe he's using the whole DYM strategy against us, thinking we'll give up without the nuts. I don't care if he is doing that, though, I'm still only playing the shorter stacks. lol
really ? making up with a big ace mmmm
so sb is trapping ? so may have an ace - or is just making up with w/e sooted cards
then oppo leads flop, repping what - surely if trapping oppo checks flop - i bet please short stack fold !
does oppo lead with a draw, bluff - no way oppo flopped a house :S
call turn
call river
w/e - none of it makes sense except for the flush - but is oppo known for making up in spots like this with marginal sooted rubbish )
I vote for flush, but we house up on river anyway
Brilliant!! i never noticed just assumed. You may get three new pages of posts now as different scenario now. LOL.
I 'retract'....my solicitors will be in touch! ;-)