Poker Strategy 94: Calling All In With a Small Pair

15.06.2008, Lesen Sie hier den Bericht über «Poker Strategy 94: Calling All In With a Small Pair».

BY: TODD BRUNSON cardplayer.com

Fischman's Fours We recently wrapped up the NBC National Heads-Up Poker Championship. While almost every player in the tournament was a top-notch pro, I was still hopeful that I could draw a celebrity player or an online qualifier. I wasn't so lucky, as I drew Scott Fischman. As I said, most everyone there was tough, but I know that Scott is mainly an online player, which means that he most likely plays a lot of heads-up no-limit hold'em.

We started the match slowly, like two prizefighters feeling each other out (not in a homosexual way, or anything). I've never played Scott, so I wanted to get a feel for his game (again, no gay pun intended). Scott must have had the same game plan, because he was playing much the same way. We didn't have long to get comfortable, however, as the blinds were going up every 15 minutes.

I shifted up a gear in the aggression department and basically hit a brick wall. Every time I bet, he called or raised. This was pretty effective, as I hardly ever had a pair. I checked down a lot of hands that I thought I could win in a showdown, like bottom pair or a high card. I think he won every one of those. If I had king high, he had ace high. If I had made deuces, he had flopped threes.

I got this feeling that I used to get when I was 10 years old and fighting a 13-year- old. I was trying as hard as I could and just couldn't win. I don't think it was any secret to Scott that I was getting frustrated, as the entire match was going his way.

The blinds went up again just before this hand came down. I knew that I was going to have to do something to change the momentum or I was going to be anted to death, when I looked down at the Kd 9d. This was the best hand that I'd had in a while, so I raised, only to have Scott reraise me. His raise was fairly big, but not big enough that he was pot-committed, in my opinion.

Down about 3-1 in chips, this looked like a good spot to take a stand. I moved in, and Fischman went into the fish tank. He studied so long that I thought he must have been making a move with J-10 suited or something. When he finally called, I was very surprised to see pocket fours. I even said it out loud, "Fours?" Scott gave me an embarrassed smile and shrugged his shoulders.

The doorcard on the flop was a 4, and I thought it was over. But I wasn't drawing dead, as the next two cards were diamonds. A blank came on the turn and a useless 9 paired me on the river, and it was over. But what if a diamond had come? That's what I want to talk about here.

You can rarely be a sizeable favorite for not calling with the fours or any other small pairs; you can rarely be a sizeable favorite, but can be a 4.5-1 underdog. But in my mind, there are many more reasons in this spot not to call.

The main one is simple: Scott had this match well under control. He not only had a 3-1 chip lead, but also had me frustrated, and all of the momentum was going in his direction. If I had won that pot, we would have been dead even and the tide would have turned. Granted, if he wins the pot, it's over, but if I win, it's like starting over, and the second half of the match wasn't going to be as easy as the first half had been, I assure you.

I'm a big believer in momentum. How many times have you seen a football team get absolutely killed for 52 minutes, and then something like a turnover happens and it is unstoppable for the last eight minutes and comes back to win the game? I think Scott should have folded, not only for the obvious reasons, but also to deny me that key turnover that I could have used to rally and come back and win.

To be fair to Scott, I called him and offered him equal space in this column to explain his thought process. He didn't want to take the time to actually write it out (he must be lazier than I am, if that's possible), but he explained it to me and asked me to just paraphrase it for him.

What he basically said was that I am such a great player (his words, not mine), he knew that I had a read on his play by the time this hand came up, and that things weren't going to keep going his way, so he wanted to take a shot at winning it right there. He was still going to be even in chips if he lost, so he decided to gamble.

I must admit, there's a definite logic to his train of thought--especially the part about my being "such a great player."

The Situation Brunson: Kd, 9, Fishman: 4c, 4d

Turn: Qd, 5d, 4s, 7h

Über Swiss Poker:

Casinos.ch ist die Gaming & Entertainment-Plattform der Schweiz und mit über 20 Informationsportalen und rund 100 Internetnamen (Domains) das grosse News- und Pressenetzwerk der Casino- und Glücksspielszene in Europa.

Aktuelle News, Interviews, Fotos und spannende Stories - direkt und live aus den Schweizer Casinos, der Spielbankenszene Deutschlands, über das monegassische Casino von Monte Carlo. Weitere Casinos aus ganz Europa und der ganzen Welt finden Sie auf www.casinos.ch. Und last but not least natürlich auch aus der Sin City 'Las Vegas'.

Die Informationen sind unterteilt in die Bereiche Casino-Informationen, aktuelle News, Events, Jackpot und Tournament-Informationen, Fotogalerien, Live- Berichte und Interviews sowie ein täglich wechselndes Glückshoroskop.

--- Ende Artikel / Pressemitteilung Poker Strategy 94: Calling All In With a Small Pair ---


Weitere Informationen und Links:

		
 
Weitere Nachrichten der Gaming-Branche