|
mark41185
|
04-29-2009, 12:05 AM
Post subject: Agreeing to check it down
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4
|
|
this is my 1st post so not sure if this is the correct section. but either way i have a question.
recently i was playing in a no limit texas holdem tournament. i was on the final table where a player went all in for a small amount. myself and another player called. i hit the bottom pair on the flop and i was 1st to act. i pushed all in and the other person, that called preflop, became furious at me. he asked me if i realized that he didnt look at his cards. it was clear that he wanted to check it down. i understand he wanted to increase the chance to knock out the all in, however i personally do not like this kind of play. i know many people look at it as a type of "poker etiquette" to check this situation to the river. i personally think that if i have the chance to win a pot and push out a player that could beat me, then i should act on it. i have also read that agreeing to check down, when a 3rd player is all in, is unfair to the all in player. was i wrong to bet this pot? all opinions are welcome!
|
|
|
Play for FREE and practice your game at...
Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
|
|
bjsaust
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Ballarat, Australia
Posts: 5,842
|
|
I would probably just check down. The value of the other guy improving to a better hand than your opponent, is more than the value of getting HU vs the AI guy (at least most payout structures this is the case). Usually, the very best result for you is the person whos all in to get knocked out regardless of who wins, not winning a few extra chips (that you may not even do).
Money, not chips in tournaments  .
A verbal agreement to check it down is colluding and is cheating. If you both just understand this is the best way to play and do it without an actual agreement to do so, then thats just good poker.
Of course if you hit a big hand it all changes. If you flop a set or something then try to extract some value.
|
|
Just playing to improve.
|
|
mark41185
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4
|
|
thanks for your reply.
im not sure if you often play tournaments. but if you do, is this part of your every day tournament play? i understand the benifit to checking it down. i just find it difficult to sit with my hands tied waiting for the other player to catch on me. i find this difficult when i know a bet will remove this player and increase my chances of winning this pot. is my thinking incorrect? is this a black and white answer? or just a personal opinion?
|
|
|
|
FriskyPirate
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Palm Springs
Posts: 92
|
|
Generally speaking, if you have a great hand, then people usually don't mind if you bet. If you have a weaker hand and push a good hand out, then you are hurting both your chances of taking out the short stack. This is especially annoying when there is a dry side pot.
|
|
|
|
Warpe
|
|
04-29-2009, 01:48 AM
Post subject: Re: Agreeing to check it down
|
#5 (permalink)
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Canuckistan
Posts: 3,905
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mark41185
i hit the bottom pair on the flop and i was 1st to act. i pushed all in and the other person, that called preflop, became furious at me. he asked me if i realized that he didnt look at his cards. it was clear that he wanted to check it down.
|
checking down is standard here, esp. with bottom pair.
|
|
|
|
bjsaust
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Ballarat, Australia
Posts: 5,842
|
|
I used to play a heap, not many now.
Take a purely hypothetical situation. Lets say theres 9 left at the FT, 9th pays $50 and 8th pays $100. You call with 56s, shorty has 89s and 3rd guy has J2o since he didnt even look at his cards before calling. Flop is 58T. You bet and 3rd guy sees he has nothing and folds. Turn is a J, river blanks. Now if you hadnt bet, the 3rd guy improved and beat you, however the shorty was winning anyway. If he'd stayed in he would have spiked his J to beat the shorty. By knocking out the shorty the minimum you stand to win just went from $50 to $100.
Ok, purely made up situation, but you get the point. The value of getting the 3rd guy to fold when you have bottom pair is fairly small, but the value of the short guy busting out on a FT is usually fairly large. You much prefer the knockout situation. Even if the shorty doesnt have a pair and the 3rd guy improves past you, if the shorty goes out you're still happy.
Also bare in mind betting the river for value is perfectly fine. If he has a hand that beats your value bet he'll call anyway.
As to your question, yes when I play tournaments this is a central part of my late game play.
|
|
Just playing to improve.
|
|
FriskyPirate
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Palm Springs
Posts: 92
|
|
Here is a further explanation of 'implicit colusion'.
http://www.sitandgoplanet.com/sitand...he-bubble.html
|
|
|
|
KoRnholio
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,165
|
|
If it's not close to the bubble or already in the money, checking it down isn't a good play. If you have a hand that needs protection, just bet it as you normally would. Otherwise usually checking it down is fine.
|
|
Some days it feels like I've been standing forever, waiting for the bank teller to return so I can cash in all these Sklansky Bucks.
|
|
Fnord
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: I'll Do You Like A Truck
Posts: 19,336
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KoRnholio
If it's not close to the bubble or already in the money, checking it down isn't a good play. If you have a hand that needs protection, just bet it as you normally would. Otherwise usually checking it down is fine.
|
This. You also should consider exploiting your opponent to get him to fold a hand when you figure to have equity against the all in player. When they get irate at you "sorry, I play bad."
|
|
|
|
mark41185
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4
|
|
ive understood both sides of the situation from the beginning. i was just curious if what i did was on the wrong side. from your responses it seems clear that it was.
for the record he called my all in, i doubled up, and knocked the 3rd guy out. however from now on i suppose ill be checking down. thanks for the input.
EDIT: perhaps my thinking of making this play stems from my cash game play. pushing the 3rd guy out would be the correct move in a cash game to increase my odds of taking down the pot. correct?
|
|
|
|
pocketfours
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lighting sweet moneys on fire.
Posts: 2,166
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mark41185
EDIT: perhaps my thinking of making this play stems from my cash game play. pushing the 3rd guy out would be the correct move in a cash game to increase my odds of taking down the pot. correct?
|
False
|
|
|
|
BankItDrew
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Losing Prop Bets
Posts: 2,789
|
|
If anyone mentions checking it down - it's collusion and should be prohibited.
|
Girlfriend: Why are the werewolves more important than living life?!
Girlfriend: Are you on the forums doing the werewolves again?
Girlfriend: Soo... you forgot to run that errand, but you had time to werewolf? Wtf?
|
|
oskar
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
Posts: 2,452
|
|
I actually love to bluff these spots. Say some shortie is all-in, for some reason I don't raise it up and another guy calls, and he makes it clear that he wants to check it down by checking in the dark or something... there's a good chance he'll give you a lot of credit if you bet. If it's not close to the bubble then getting it HU with the shortie for 2:1 is way better than potentially trippling up the shortie.
|
|
The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
|
|
pocketfours
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lighting sweet moneys on fire.
Posts: 2,166
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by oskar
I actually love to bluff these spots. Say some shortie is all-in, for some reason I don't raise it up and another guy calls, and he makes it clear that he wants to check it down by checking in the dark or something... there's a good chance he'll give you a lot of credit if you bet. If it's not close to the bubble then getting it HU with the shortie for 2:1 is way better than potentially trippling up the shortie.
|
A complete bluff makes very little sense.
|
|
|
|
oskar
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
Posts: 2,452
|
|
You obviously want some kind of a hand that can potentially win the pot.
|
|
The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
|
|
Lucothefish
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Cretaceous Park
Posts: 703
|
|
ldo
|
|
<@d0zer> how will you learn if I don't berate you harshly?
|
|
pocketfours
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lighting sweet moneys on fire.
Posts: 2,166
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by oskar
You obviously want some kind of a hand that can potentially win the pot.
|
If you have a hand that can potentially win the pot, then betting makes more sense as a protection bet, than as a bluff. Even a protection bet would probably show negative expectation most of the time. It is of course possible to turn your hand into a bluff if your protection bet gets called.
|
|
|
|
Monty3038
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ohio
Posts: 788
|
|
It was mentioned that the first AI was a shorty. How often and / or at what point do you consider their shove mostly meaningless... meaning that you'll take a shot a knocking them out by calling, with ATC, so basically you are playing the other large stack?
I don't know if that made sense or not... let me do a purely stupid example:
Player 1: $500 in chips
Player 2: $5000 in chips
Player 3: $5000 in chips.
Player 1 shoves pre-flop, is he a small enough risk to call just for the knockout with ATC? if his stack is $100, obviously you can call with ATC... where is that cutoff point in your estimation?
After he shoves, and both big stacks call, that is gone money... you're playing the other big stack, so think of it this way... it's a totally seperate hand... you have bottom pair against... what? The pot is empty for that hand, nothing to win... would you open bottom pair in that situation, or would you let your opponent lead out?
Ok, bunch of random thoughts their... guess my theory is that once the small stack is covered, that is that... you're playing a new hand against other big stack villian... play them seperately.
|
|
|
|
oskar
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
Posts: 2,452
|
|
I never understood why people would put a dollar sign before the chip amount when they talk about tournaments. Also what's the point in asking a question and giving stack sizes and not the blinds/ante's? The answer could be anything depending on all the other factors.
|
|
The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
|
|
oskar
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
Posts: 2,452
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by pocketfours
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by oskar
You obviously want some kind of a hand that can potentially win the pot.
|
If you have a hand that can potentially win the pot, then betting makes more sense as a protection bet, than as a bluff. Even a protection bet would probably show negative expectation most of the time. It is of course possible to turn your hand into a bluff if your protection bet gets called. |
Let's say you have 55, AK... something like that on 4TQ, and the other guy checks in the dark, I think it makes a lot of sense to bet... protection/bluff... I don't reall get the distinction. You get better hands to fold if he has the kind of mindset that many beginning players have that you should only bet with the nuts into a dead pot for some reason.
If you think he will fold JJ or worse then you don't even need that much equity against the short stack.
|
|
|
|
pocketfours
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lighting sweet moneys on fire.
Posts: 2,166
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by oskar
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by pocketfours
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by oskar
You obviously want some kind of a hand that can potentially win the pot.
|
If you have a hand that can potentially win the pot, then betting makes more sense as a protection bet, than as a bluff. Even a protection bet would probably show negative expectation most of the time. It is of course possible to turn your hand into a bluff if your protection bet gets called. |
Let's say you have 55, AK... something like that on 4TQ, and the other guy checks in the dark, I think it makes a lot of sense to bet... protection/bluff... I don't reall get the distinction. You get better hands to fold if he has the kind of mindset that many beginning players have that you should only bet with the nuts into a dead pot for some reason.
If you think he will fold JJ or worse then you don't even need that much equity against the short stack. |
It's a very marginal play that won't get you friends at the tables. Just don't bet a low high card hand as a semibluff.
|
|
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Pусский
Svenska
06-01-2012, 11:03 AM White House Responds to Poker Players Alliance's Petition
Linear Mode
