View Plans & Pricing

If you are signed in and are seeing this message, please be sure you have selected a user name in My Profile. The forum requires it.
A A A
Search

— Forum Scope —




— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

Topic Rating: 0 Topic Rating: 0 Topic Rating: 0 Topic Rating: 0 Topic Rating: 0 Topic Rating: 0 (0 votes) 
sp_TopicIcon
Chicago Poker Classic - hand review
madpenguin12
Home Game Champ
Members
Forum Posts: 31
Member Since:
February 5, 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
1
March 14, 2015 - 1:05 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory
0
Hey guys – First of all, I'm a big TPE fan.  I'm glad to be a member.  
 
Earlier today I got knocked out of the Chicago Poker Classic Main event, 2k buy-in (I won a seat through a satellite).  
Here is the hand:

200/400/25 and I have 30k chips (75 BB) Late position with KK.  UTG +1 makes it $1,025, Chip leader at table calls
 next to act (he has raised or called the last ~8-10 hands).  I make it $3900 since chip leader is a calling station.  
They both call.  983 rainbow flop, action checked to me.  I bet 11,000 (~13k in the pot).  UTG+1 folds.  Chip leader 
thinks a bit and then calls.  6 on the turn.  No flush draw.  He checks after tanking a bit.  I shove the rest of my 
15k stack and he calls with 10 9 os.  He hits a 10 on the river.  Background here is I hadnt played a hand in 
about 15+ hands getting absolute garbage/carddead.  With ~35k in the pot, and my shove for 15k, i suppose he was
pretty pot committed. 
 
Could I have played this better or did i just get unlucky?  
 
This was pretty early in the tournament….but seems pretty unlucky here.   I suppose i could have played some pot control
but he would have rivered me anyway, but I could have saved my tournament life.  Let me know what you all think.
Tommleach
Guppy
Members
Forum Posts: 2
Member Since:
March 11, 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
2
March 15, 2015 - 12:35 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print
0

If they are huge stations and dont really care much for bet sizing, theres an argument for making the raise pre a little bigger.. Whats the UTG raisers range here?

As played hes gone too far with TPNK, unless he thinks you have AK etc… Unlucky how it works out though…

 

RE checking behind riv, meh, maybe if you think you can get extra value by doing that, but if hes a station i would just milk him dry, although the tank check is a bit weird? maybe he figures you have missed flop there and is contemplating a check jam? Its hard to say without knowing the competency of the player…

PokerGoals
Playing Freerolls
Members
Forum Posts: 18
Member Since:
March 14, 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
3
March 15, 2015 - 2:54 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print
0

Sorry very unlucky, every street seems a little big to me.

Foucault

TPE Pro
Members
Forum Posts: 2067
Member Since:
December 6, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
4
March 15, 2015 - 2:56 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print
0

Sorry to be harsh, but this is the problem with playing tournaments you aren't bankrolled for. You get overly invested in the outcome and it prevents you from taking the appropriate risks. The answer to your question is no, you should not have passed up the opportunity to put your money in as a 80:20 favorite for fear of going broke 20% of the time.

You are going to lose most tournaments you enter. Your goal is to put yourself in the best possible position to take advantage of those rare occasions when luck favors you. Playing to not-lose rather than to win is the best way to guarantee that you won't win.

Really, the best advice I can give you is to stop playing satellites into these tournaments. That money would be much better invested in a cash game or a tournament that pays out cash, rather than a tournament that pays out something worth much less than cash to you (ie a seat into another tournament that you wouldn't otherwise play).

huge
Seattle
Grinding Micros
Members
Forum Posts: 65
Member Since:
July 10, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
5
March 16, 2015 - 5:29 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory
0

Foucault said:

Sorry to be harsh, but this is the problem with playing tournaments you aren't bankrolled for. You get overly invested in the outcome and it prevents you from taking the appropriate risks. The answer to your question is no, you should not have passed up the opportunity to put your money in as a 80:20 favorite for fear of going broke 20% of the time.

You are going to lose most tournaments you enter. Your goal is to put yourself in the best possible position to take advantage of those rare occasions when luck favors you. Playing to not-lose rather than to win is the best way to guarantee that you won't win.

Really, the best advice I can give you is to stop playing satellites into these tournaments. That money would be much better invested in a cash game or a tournament that pays out cash, rather than a tournament that pays out something worth much less than cash to you (ie a seat into another tournament that you wouldn't otherwise play).

Agree & disagree with parts of this. Agreed that if you're not going to play well in the bigger tournament because of the stakes involved then you should just stick to lower buyin (and lower prize pool) tournaments.  Agreed that OP is not writing/thinking about the hand in a way that will help to make better decisions in the future.  And agreed that playing a lot of satellites to tournaments that are too big for you to buy into directly is very poor bankroll management.

 

Having said all that … as I am The Poker Player Formerly Known as Satellite Larry, I feel some need to speak generally in satellites' defence (though perhaps not so much for OP's sake).

 

–  The level of play in satellites (especially live) is often much worse than in freezeouts.  This is especially true if you devote some time to learning the freakishly different beast that is satellite endgame strategy.  The level of horrifically bad blunders that happen in satellites is orders of magnitude worse than the worst mistake I've ever seen anyone make in a freezeout.  I've watched multiple players with big stacks on WSOP satellite bubbles (nearly literally) take $10,200 out of their own pockets and set it on fire, thereby distributing it to the short stacks at the table, often including me.

 

–  Playing a satellite (if you know how to play it) is not generally worse for bankroll management than playing a very large-field tournament with the same buyin.  In both cases you run the “risk” of getting so deep that the money involved could cause you to play scared, and/or being overmatched by superior and better bankrolled opponents, and in both cases you need to play a shit-ton of events (and play them well or just run super hot in one of them) to have any reasonable hope of overcoming variance.  So if you're going to avoid satellites to better manage BR, you probably should also avoid big-field tournaments in general (and I think that's a reasonable choice to make).

 

–  Depending on your overall poker life-goal, taking some shots at satellites (again, especially live ones) can be, I maintain, perfectly fine and viable.  I'm not really disagreeing with Andrew here – maybe I'm saying they can be ++LifeUtilityEV even if they're –PerfectBankrollMgmtEV, and the latter can be mitigated if not reversed by studying up on sat strat and finding sats that are likely to be very soft.  

 

And, having said ALL THAT … even though I'm being a nitpicking devil's advocate, Andrew's advice is more important than my dissenting voice and will be helpful to more people.  There are way more people who approach satellites badly, both from a poker strategy and bankroll strategy standpoint, than there are people who study them enough to find their value and milk it.

 

There are two classic 2+2 posts, written a year apart by Adanthar, that are still relevant for learning the ways in which satellites do not remotely resemble freezeouts, and the ways in which people suck at them.  If you play satellites without reading them or somehow otherwise getting a decent grounding from another source, you are likely pouring money down the drain, both in the satellite itself and in the target event you're not rolled for.

 

-TPPFKaLL

madpenguin12
Home Game Champ
Members
Forum Posts: 31
Member Since:
February 5, 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
6
March 16, 2015 - 9:57 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory
0

Thanks for the responses guys, I appreciate it.

 

Just a few comments:

 

1) I was not afraid to play this event since I won the seat through a pretty high value satellite ($250, 1/6 get a $2000 seat wiht the seats Horseshoe added).

 

2) I didn't say I was regretting the hand.  After reflecting on it, I think that I played it the best that I could given the table dynamics / players involved.  That guy ended up with over 100k chips at 200/400 level after that hand, but did not make day 2.  In fact, he played the next event one table away from me and  busted in the first 10 hands.  I wrote this post to discuss the hand itself, and see if it was worth playing small ball poker given that I had 75  BB preflop and it involved a player that was running really hot and was the only person that could bust me at that point, but in hindsight, I think that was a great spot to position myself to make a deep run (Would have had ~155 BB if I won that hand).

 

3) I don't gamble anything I cannot afford to lose.  I was up over $8k grinding low entry tournaments online and $1/2NL cash february and was able to cover all of my tournament fees for this (this was my original plan).  Poker is not currently my only job, but I really enjoy and it feeds my competitive nature.  I love the game, I hate how cruel variance can be, but I understand it.  The Mental Game of Poker has really helped with dealing with variance and improving my game personally.

 

4) With regards to satellites, I play them quite a bit online more than live.  For example, I play on bovada and am batting 40-50% on the $7.70 satellite for the $55 daily 30k tournament.  I was able to satellite into that tournament and win it for $6.8k score so I think that satellites can be quite rewarding.  To your point though, I can afford to buy into the $55 tournament directly, but since I have a high success rate with the satellite for a daily tournament that I play every chance that I get (and have time to do so), it's worth it to me to play this satellite and many satellites in general.  It's true I normally would not have paid $2k to play the main event, but I do relatively well in satellites and for $250, it was worth it for me to take a shot at a main event seat.   

 

Overall, after 2 weekends of play, some bad variance, and 2 bubbles, I'm still very happy that I played in all of these tournaments.  $250, $360 buy-ins and the main event that I earned a ticket for.  After Chicago Poker Classic's last 2 events today, it will be back to the grind.  

 

Cheers, 

Madpenguin12

madpenguin12
Home Game Champ
Members
Forum Posts: 31
Member Since:
February 5, 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
7
March 16, 2015 - 10:01 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print
0

Re: Comment not playing well because of the stakes, I actually played some of my best poker I have ever played that day.  It just didn't end well for me.  I walked away, ate some food and proceeded to crush a $1/2 NL table for a solid $1,200 profit in 6 hours so it wasn't a wasted day.  I would do it all over again every time!

Forum Timezone: America/New_York

Most Users Ever Online: 2780

Currently Online:
71 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

bennymacca: 2616

Foucault: 2067

folding_aces_pre_yo: 1133

praetor: 1033

theginger45: 924

P-aire 146: 832

Turbulence: 768

The Riceman: 731

duggs: 591

florianm1: 588

Newest Members:

Tillery999

sdmathis89

ne0x00

adrianvaida2525

Anteeater

Laggro

Forum Stats:

Groups: 4

Forums: 24

Topics: 12705

Posts: 75003

 

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 1063

Members: 12008

Moderators: 2

Admins: 5

Administrators: RonFezBuddy, Killingbird, Tournament Poker Edge Staff, ttwist, Carlos

Moderators: sitelock, sitelock_1