Question

[alexos879]

Is a +EV decision "no matter what" worth it by virtue of "being the right play" if it costs you nearly half of a buyin?

I saw John Duthie v Tom Dwan HU and Duthie made a very good fold, yet all the 2+2 guys were berating Duthie saying it was a bad

fold, just because mathematically it was +EV (I think that's why it was anyway).

[scrawnybob]

hi

yes basically the +ev makes it a "right play" / "must play" play

its the basic premise that you should snap call / must call if you have x odds or the maths and pot odds all add up that you "must" call with any hand or the hand you have etc

even if it subsquently turns out to be a "bad" call as you loose you theoretically "did the right thing"

however personally I dont agree with all the +ev must get your money in mantra 100%

IMHO the "pot committed" thing is at times more a case of being pot stupid
you can easily get yourself pot committed and into a suposedly +ev situation because you made a balls up on previous streets and didnt see the signals (or in fact previous hands thinking about it)

IF you figure out something is wrong ... even though you may have got pot committed and therefore the maths says you should just get it in anyway

then you can fold ... IMHO its called being a humble and decent player

too many of the internet geeks will proudly go kamakazee and use +ev or pot committed as an excuse to justify messing up

I remember a couple of crucial hands in the UKIPT brighton where I made "hero" folds ... which they considered "wrong" blah blah

one of them the geeks jumped all over as I folded KK or aces face up having committed alot of my chips I was technically pot committed and +ev blah blah so the internet maths geeks were wittering on like I was a retard

but I correctly folded the losing hand and survived to play on - where they would have gone out "making the right call"

later after getting in a tonne of my chips in preflop and some more on the flop, I folded QQ on a 10 J 2 flop because I put him correctly on KK but again on the whole +ev pot committed maths of it all with the additional betting on the flop I "should have got it all in" because I had "crippled myself" and therefore the rest of the money "should go in"

The table went quiet and the guy with the KK said to the guy next to him (who was out of the hand but had been on their table for a long time)

"you know what I had but HE (ie. me) was the only guy at the table who could have actually made that fold in that situation"

"damn the only one who could get away from that hand" much head shaking

now I'm not blowing my own trumpet as a genius poker player but all the +ev / pot committed maths is just that - just maths

if your head and their previous play either to you or observed towards others gives you a different range or tangable additional information that is contrary to the maths ...

USE IT

If it's a tournament you do not imho HAVE to be pot committed just because maths says so - chances are a mistake you might have made got you there

so you can get yourself out

better to have some chips than no chips

cash / ring games are different - then the +ev is important because its easy to restack and get your money in good on more hands

obviously my examples are based on post flop decisions and in those cases reasonably stacked starting out

if your short stacked and genuinely in a shove or fold situation then getting your money in a +ev situation but losing is all part of the game

BTW Duthie is a highly underated player and seems to be a thoroughly good bloke

cheers SB

ps. I guess the short version of my ramble is ...

Dont forget poker is a totally situational game

Yes its about maths but those maths DO NOT existing in a vacuum

the validity of the maths is totally reliant on the situation factoring in players / chip stacks / tells / position / table dynamics etc

[Dan Abnormal]

CLUE #1 that you are being led down ego road

yet all the 2+2 guys were berating Duthie saying it was a bad

IF its posted on 2+2 that post is -EV


HEY SB what did you do when the guy jumped up at you for folding the KK or AA. DId one of your many bodyguards take him down ( I mean you cant get your hands dirty in the middle of a game) should of took those cards and made the dude eat em. LOL except then they would say youre the bad guy

[Poker Orifice]

CLUE #1 that you are being led down ego road


IF its posted on 2+2 that post is -EV

DanAbs, why the 'hate' for 2+2? To suggest a post is -EV because it's on 2+2 is obviously nonsense. I've got a feeling (call it a hunch) that you posted on there & had some replies you weren't particularly fond of. Am I right?

imo, more often than not, you're going to not only want but you're going to 'need' to take most +ev situations in tournament play, especially in large-field online tournaments. This isn't to say you're going to take 'all' of them. It's often correct to make big folds with what you even feel might be the best hand... chips won aren't worth as much as chips lost at certain stages of a tourney. I'm not suggesting to get into the practise of making big folds though.

Also agreeing with some of what SB has written above, especially that there is other criteria to go by ... player reads being a big one.

[Dan Abnormal]

Nah just dont like the site. but I really dont like when I read their responses to people who ask questions (and not me I rarely post there) I just love ready how high and mighty they all think they are there