good or bad call?

[maxifle6]

Hi everyone, I've recently started playing MTT's after finishing in the money one 1 occasion, they're mainly freerolls or very low buy-ins so I can get the hang of it and learn from my mistakes.
Now this might be a stupid question but still:


There are about 60 people competing in the tournament and first 15 get a cash prize, the tournament just started and blinds are 10-20.
I've got about 2000 chips and started with 1500.
I am dealt 67o so I limp in from late position,
boards comes: 5D,TC,4D ], giving me an open end straight.
Some guy makes a pot size raise to about 150, I raise him to 450, he goes all-in to about 1500 and I call. He turns over JJ and the turn is an 8D, giving me a straight.

I was wondering, is this a good play of me?
Is limping in pre-flop good, or should I have raised?
Is it good that I trippled his bet on the flop, I actually wanted him to fold, so I was semi-bluffing I think (it's a term I just learned lol)
After he went all-in on me I thought 'well it's a freeroll so I won't lose money anyway, and I've got a pretty good chance of winning. Even if I lose I'd still have 500 chips left.'
=> Is this a correct thought?
And finally, could there be any indications as to think the other guy was bluffing with his all-in?
(like betting patterns or something, I also just read something about that)

As you can see, I got lucky, but I'd like some feedback so I can learn from my mistakes.

Thx!

[PlayToWin]

I don't play MTT's, just micro-stakes and I'm a noob.

I think it was a bad decision to play. I fold preflop. The guy bet the pot, which is a big raise, I suspect he's got a hand, whereas you have nothing, At the most, I may call to see one more card, but I don't raise. I don't like chasing str8's unless I can do it cheaply and that ain't cheap. It's definitely bad to call the AI. You got lucky, which is great, but I've learned to play tighter to win.

When you're up in chips,just be happy and wait for a better spot. Good luck.

[JKDS]

dont call the all in. You have 6 clean outs but even if you had the full 8 you are only about 32% to win. ICM wise, this is horrible too, as winning doesnt increase your chances of winning the tourney by much, but losing cripples you. Im mixed how i feel about the semi bluff though...i think its ok. I hate the limp though

[smitts187]

im still a newb, but personally depending on how many limped in before you i would have limped, if it was folded around to me, i also would have folded, on the flop i would have simply called, to see the turn card, if i didnt hit there id be done with it, unless he checked then i would also check, but i definately have learnt never to go all in on a draw,unless your shortstacked(even then its kinda dumb as you will miss it more then you will hit )iwould have folded preflop to save the trouble

[maxifle6]

Thank you very much everyone,
I now see I made a bad and got really lucky.
I'm gonna print this out so I remember this
Now another question, on the flop when he made the PSB, maybe it was better to go all-in myself?
Then he maybe would have folded?
Would this be a good alternative to just calling to see another card?

[JKDS]

calling sux. he's almost always gonna fire again on the turn, and you didnt have pot odds to call the initial bet for just the turn card. My action is semi-bluff > fold > call. The reason the semibluff is better here is fold equity + free river + chance to hit. Its likely that he'll fold to this reraise all hands that dont include or beat a ten, and he might even fold the weaker ten hands. Then if he calls anyway, you took the initiative so he's likely to check the turn and if it doesnt help you, you should know pretty well where you stand and can choose to take a free card. The rereraise kills both of these though, even implied odds that i havent been considering. i hate reraising all in though, while it does achieve maximum fold equity and guarentees we see both streets, it also makes us risk our entire stack with a weak holding when we could find much better spots throughout the tournament.

[givememyleg]

probably fold preflop

[IhaveTopTop]

I have agree with JDKS here...
- I hate the laye open limp with 67o
- I don't like the call of his allin on the flop with 6 clean outs
- Generally I like the semi-bluff, but I'm worried there aren't many hands he raised this flop with that he would fold to your semi-bluff.

[maxifle6]

I have agree with JDKS here...
- I hate the laye open limp with 67o
- I don't like the call of his allin on the flop with 6 clean outs
- Generally I like the semi-bluff, but I'm worried there aren't many hands he raised this flop with that he would fold to your semi-bluff.

Ok about the limp,
I thought it was good to limp in with these kind of hands,
"you need a lot of people and a favorable flop in order to profit from these kind of hands"

I think that's what's said in Doyle Brunson's supersystem,
It's been a long time I read it but still, why should I raise pre-flop? Isn't it better to see a flop cheaply with these kind of hands?

[IhaveTopTop]

Ok about the limp,
I thought it was good to limp in with these kind of hands,
"you need a lot of people and a favorable flop in order to profit from these kind of hands"

I think that's what's said in Doyle Brunson's supersystem,
It's been a long time I read it but still, why should I raise pre-flop? Isn't it better to see a flop cheaply with these kind of hands?

I reread your original post and it isn't clear, but when I responded I read " I am dealt 67o so I limp in from late position," as you were the first one in the pot. If there were a bunch of other limpers, then I'd be fine with the limp.

[JKDS]

doyle is talking about suited connectors like 76s not 76o. While being suited usually only gives another percent of equity vs someone's range, it completely changes how profitable they can be. The reason for this is the combo draws we can get when playing them. For instance, had you had 7d6d, you would have 15 outs to win the hand, and be a significant favorite on the flop which is completely different than the current 6 out scenario.

I don't like raising preflop, simply because i do want to see a flop with alot of people when i play a hand like 76s, however, im also willing to fold if i hit a 7 high flop. The reason for the limp is to get the right odds to play it in the first place. The chances of hitting a straight or flush draw is about the same as hitting a set with a pocket pair. So, we would like alot of people in the pot to get the right pot odds/implied odds.

i hate raising preflop, but i play as a tagg player. If your style is geared more towards loose aggressive play, then the arguement goes along with the fact that limpers usually don't have a strong enough hand to raise, by raising you gain control of the pot, and if called, you have a chance to win the pot on the flop with a cbet since most flops miss a single opponent. Of course, if we are aware that someone is limping hands as strong as JJ or if we see limps from utg we should be wary when doing this kind of play. Like i said though, i hate raising this pre.

[cowboyardee]

A few people said that they feel okay about the semi-bluff. And normally, its an okay-ish play with that hand and that board and all, but I gotta point out that in a freeroll your fold equity drops considerably (you have less chance than normal of making someone fold). As such, i don't really like the semi-bluff here too much either. Given your situation, i'd probably fold that flop to a pot sized bet. I'd definitely fold to his shove.

Which of course is why I would either fold or raise preflop.

[Thunder]

ICM wise, this is horrible too, as winning doesn't increase your chances of winning the tourney by much, but losing cripples you.

From what I have been taught, ICM doesn't apply to MTTs, certainly not until the latter money stages, the same goes for SNGs where ICM really comes into play. One of the reasons should be quite obvious: in a 60, 600, 6000 runner event, you cannot progress without doubling up time and time again yet you for 90% of the tourney you will be miles away from the cash. Ergo, you cannot get close to the money without doubling up yet each time you do you are not increasing your equity of the prize pool. Just look at the WSOP, you need to increase your starting stack of 20k but even 100k is still light years away from the payouts and the FT.

[LuckySlevin]

Interesting points an enjoyable read. Never a call IMO when he bet the flop so big that would be my cue to fold. You're going to make your OESD less than 1 time out of 3 and that's only if you've committed to going all in so you are guarnateed to see the river. So the only reason you would call or reraise here is if the pot (or implied pot) was giving you greater than 3:1 return for your money. You're not getting nowhere near the pot odds assuming he calls to make that all in commitment, and I think in this situation you HAVE to assume he's going to at least call your raise.

I see where you're coming from with the semi-bluff raise, but I don't think you can use that tactic effectively in free roll tournaments. I definately agree with cowboyardee that bluffing is a really bad idea in early stages of freerolls. Most of the players you'll meet in these from my experience, and especially in the early stages, will open with such a wide range that it's fairly safe to assume anyone that's betting has at least made a pair. By the time he's made his first pot sized bet unless you completely push over him you can be fairly sure he'll just call with any rubbish pair. Also about 20% of the players you meet in the early stages are of the mindset that they will just gamble with pretty much anything for the first few hands to build a stack and then play properly later. By playing tight early on you let these 'donkers' knock themselves out before they've had a chance to force you into a coin toss.

Also on the subject of chip preservation, I agree with Thunder that it's important that you're doubling your chips every so often. I've got a slightly different take on chip preservation in the early stages though. Wait until you have the nuts or until you have a very good read in a HU - I definately wouldn't be lead betting big on the strength of drawing the nuts, and I'd only call a big bet if I had VERY good pot odds. As soupie advocated in his mtt article Tight is right for the first hour. You will surpass half of the field usually just by playing tighter than tight for the first hour. Once the blinds start raising then you can start opening up a little, but not in the early stages IMO. Unless it's the VERY early stages like you were in 10/20 blinds then perhaps call 2/3 bb raises, or limp - with suited connectors for value. Personally I wouldn't limp with any offsuit connectors.

Thats my thoughts for what they are worth. Good Luck

[JKDS]

ldo thunder. Didnt know that, but can't believe i didnt make that connection... I gotta start thinking harder lol.

[animal_chin]

ICM wise, this is horrible too, as winning doesn't increase your chances of winning the tourney by much, but losing cripples you.

From what I have been taught, ICM doesn't apply to MTTs, certainly not until the latter money stages, the same goes for SNGs where ICM really comes into play. One of the reasons should be quite obvious: in a 60, 600, 6000 runner event, you cannot progress without doubling up time and time again yet you for 90% of the tourney you will be miles away from the cash. Ergo, you cannot get close to the money without doubling up yet each time you do you are not increasing your equity of the prize pool. Just look at the WSOP, you need to increase your starting stack of 20k but even 100k is still light years away from the payouts and the FT.

Yeah but the chips early on are muy importante (at least in sitngoes, not sure how it applies in mtt). Here is an article that illustrates my point i think... (I'm not really sure if it does because I read it about a year ago and I don't want to read it again but here it is anyways.)

[Stacks]

Yeah but the chips early on are muy importante (at least in sitngoes, not sure how it applies in mtt). Here is an article that illustrates my point i think... (I'm not really sure if it does because I read it about a year ago and I don't want to read it again but here it is anyways.)

This is like the opposite of how things work in SNGs. I didn't read the article as I was being lazy, but the main concept with SNGs is: chips lost are more important than chips won. So if I assume correctly that you mean in SNGs it's important to accumulate a stack early, then you are heading in the wrong direction. If you mean chips are more important so you play tighter and keept them then you are right.

Jus to elaborate on that concept (chips lost are more....) a bit. In the beginning of a SNG the blinds are low in relation to the stacks so you aren't pressed for chips. Also stealing blinds is rather useless for the same reason. Also SNGs payout structure awards survivors. You survive 7 players in a SNG and you get an immediate 20% of the prize pool. However, in an MTT you survive alot of players and only get a very small % of the prize pool as it's more heavily weights to the top players. So in essence, you are trying to survive in a SNG, whereas, you need to get chips in a MTT to have any shot at any real money. In a SNG it's totally normal to not play a hand till the blinds are 50/100 and then immediately turn into push/fold poker.

[LuckySlevin]

Thing is in mtt's even if you stack every single person at your table you will still have no where near enough to be a contender in the later stages. This is why it doesn't make sense to play aggressive at the start you're risking too much for too little.

In that first hour you will generally find people risking 150 chips to take 25 chips in blinds for example. What lunacy. Calling those same bets with J-9. Hello? Every poker hand has to be evaluated with an estimation of risk and reward along with consideration of the ultimate goal. You can not win a MTT in the first hour. It simply can not be done. Even if you could bust every person on the table you still would not have near enough chips to be competitive at the final table.

So thought number one is tight is right in the first hour of a MTT.

http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...ker-t3027.html

[animal_chin]

Yeah but the chips early on are muy importante (at least in sitngoes, not sure how it applies in mtt). Here is an article that illustrates my point i think... (I'm not really sure if it does because I read it about a year ago and I don't want to read it again but here it is anyways.)

This is like the opposite of how things work in SNGs. I didn't read the article as I was being lazy, but the main concept with SNGs is: chips lost are more important than chips won. So if I assume correctly that you mean in SNGs it's important to accumulate a stack early, then you are heading in the wrong direction. If you mean chips are more important so you play tighter and keept them then you are right.

Jus to elaborate on that concept (chips lost are more....) a bit. In the beginning of a SNG the blinds are low in relation to the stacks so you aren't pressed for chips. Also stealing blinds is rather useless for the same reason. Also SNGs payout structure awards survivors. You survive 7 players in a SNG and you get an immediate 20% of the prize pool. However, in an MTT you survive alot of players and only get a very small % of the prize pool as it's more heavily weights to the top players. So in essence, you are trying to survive in a SNG, whereas, you need to get chips in a MTT to have any shot at any real money. In a SNG it's totally normal to not play a hand till the blinds are 50/100 and then immediately turn into push/fold poker.

Yeah this is what I meant. I should have said your chips are important so don't donk them off on loose calls and breakeven/slightly profitable plays. The reason you don't want to make slightly breakeven plays is because if your opponents are worse then you (which they should be, wtf are you playing against better people???) they will make more profitable mistakes later in the tournament that you can take advantage of if you have a nice stack. I think the article explains this.

In SNGs I can feel the table starting to "turn." Like one min everyone will be playing T7s and when you do play a hand (which should be rarely) you're getting called by 2+ people. Then the tables turns. And you can raise light, take blinds and stuff like that because people won't call you as they now want to protect their stack and make the money. But now you are playing for first rather, unlike your opponents which are playing to barely make the money.