Hand for Hand question

[S6TAV]

If they both have the same amount of chips then a break dance stand off is performed.

Dan sort of like this YouTube - Soccer Am Dance Off between Geordie Dancer and Mackem Mover

[Barnfather]

I should have highlighted that the hand was very marginal (but decent), and I would be calling a bet rather than leading out with an all-in - which indicates that there is at least one likely good hand in play.

Sure, if the other player (on the other table) stays in the tourney then you are at a disadvantage, but if he gambles you are better off holding off.

And in this particular situation - short-stacked and on the bubble, I think the 'play it to win it' argument is very flawed, although common. The difference as a short-stack you are likely to make by doubling up is not likely to affect the outcome of the overall tournament much however the difference between zero and cashing by folding a half-decent hand is - comparitively - huge.

I could gamble and get knocked out and feel very self-righteous about the 'right play', but I'm still out of it. I've limped into the FT before now on a very short stack and still managed to finish 3rd, mainly because on the bubble you are likely to receive action from good cards as everyone has tightened up, but once the bubble bursts, the action loosens up completely and people are throwing chips around with abandon on marginal hands.

Of course, trying to limp in and failing won't make you feel good, but I think its a viable strategy at times

[wilfuljoker]

I The difference as a short-stack you are likely to make by doubling up is not likely to affect the outcome of the overall tournament much .

I do not agree with this at all. A lot of the time you only need two/three double ups to be back in with a real chance. On Saturday in a live tourney I had 2500 chips when the average was 11,500 and we were only at the break. I made the (9 seat) final table as chip leader. With six left I had twice the average chip stack. I then went out 5th following three lost hands in a row. This shows that its never over until its over. With big blinds (and especially if there are antes) a couple of wins can change everything.

[Barnfather]

I do not agree with this at all. A lot of the time you only need two/three double ups to be back in with a real chance. On Saturday in a live tourney I had 2500 chips when the average was 11,500 and we were only at the break. I made the (9 seat) final table as chip leader. With six left I had twice the average chip stack. I then went out 5th following three lost hands in a row. This shows that its never over until its over. With big blinds (and especially if there are antes) a couple of wins can change everything.

I agree with all that. My point was in the context of doubling-up whilst on the bubble, with another play on the bubble with a comparable stack on another table. In H4H play

So lets say (and I'm bad at this sort of thing, so bear with me)...

Lets say, for sake of argument that the blinds are 200/400 (not that realistic, but hey its an example)

Table 1 :-
Player in MP bets 1,200
Hero (Bubbleboy1) on button has K10s and a 1,000 stack, so a call would put him all-in.

Meanwhile, on the other table :-
One player in EP bets 800, another in MP calls
Bubbleboy2 in the Small Blind calls, leaving him with 600 chips remaining

Now, Hero could call straight away here with a marginal (but promising) hand and gamble his way to doubling up, but instead chooses to wait and use his time-bank to see what happens on Table 2. If Bubbleboy2 likes the flop and goes all-in and loses then - as he had more chips to start with, I am suggesting that it would be better for Hero to fold than take the risk. If he were to double up then its fine and dandy, but if he didn't then there is a bigger difference between not-cashing and cashing which makes the play less appealing. Like I said, when the bubble burts, its a different ball game as everyone loosens up and starts playing marginal hands, because of this - doubling-up becomes the name of the game to win.

So I'm saying that in this particular situation, it makes more sense to fold a half-decent hand and hope to cash and THEN play to win, than go for glory and miss out completely. Its not a strategy for general play or indeed for general short-stack play, but for specific BUBBLE play I think it makes sense.

Hope that gives my post some degree of clarity

[Odyssey7]

On the original point - had this very thing playing live in a tourney last week.

2 tables playing hand for hand as 10 people left and top 9 places paid.

A guy then went out on the other table and everyone starts congratulating each other on reaching the money. I was however, in a hand with the short stack on our table. He decided that as he wasnt going to get far on the final table he might as well go all in seeing he was already in the money. He lost and then it took a couple of mins for everyone to realise that he was in fact the bubble as had short stack of both tables going into that hand. Going all in therefore cost him about a ton.