Gambling In Tournaments

Things you will learn:

• When it's a good idea to take a risk in a tournament

It's the first hand of a tournament and you're the big blind. Everybody folds around to the small blind, who pushes all-in for $10,000. As he does so, he catches his unprotected cards with his sleeve and they flip over, revealing the A♥ K♠. It's $9,950 to call and you look down to see the Q♦ Q♣.

This situation is a controversial one in the poker world. In fact, it has created some of the most heated discussions I've ever witnessed on internet forums. One side of the fence argues that you should call, because you have the best hand and because you need to build up chips to have any chance of winning a tournament. These are the people who play to win - or so they say. The other side of the fence argues that by calling you're taking an unnecessary risk and that you should fold and wait for a better opportunity.

So who's right? Well, as is often the case in controversial situations, the answer is somewhere in between the two extremes. Essentially, the argument revolves around expected value, or 'EV' for short. The EV of a decision is the amount of money you would win or lose on average if you could somehow make it many times.

The starting point for the argument is in David Sklansky's 2002 book, Tournament Poker for Advanced Players, which extended ideas he had introduced in his seminal Theory of Poker. In that book, Sklansky explains that your primary goal in a tournament is not to go broke, and this means that you should avoid close gambles for large portions of your chips when possible. Let's examine our example and apply Sklansky's theory.

With the queens, you're a 57% favourite over your opponent - that is, if you call, you can expect to win 57% of the pot on average. This works out like this: 0.57 x $20,000 = $11,400.

At the end of the hand on average, you'll have $11,400. If you fold, you have $9,950. The difference in the EV of the two decisions is $1,450 - that is, you win $1,450 more by calling than you do by folding. Clearly, in a cash game or rebuy tournament, you should make this call.

The problem with calling is that 43% of the time, you're out of the tournament. That means you have no further opportunities to make profitable bets and use your skill to make money. If you make just a few such calls, you're a favourite to have been eliminated from the tournament.

The exponents of the 'conservation' theory argue that folding is the correct play, even though it's the least profitable, because you can wait for a bigger edge to push in your chips later in the tournament. In technical terms, the decision with the highest EV may not be the correct decision if its variance is high.

Recently, however, more people have argued in favour of gambling in this situation. Indeed, there are many arguments for calling. The call is the more profitable alternative. On average, it adds nearly 15% to your stack - a significant profit and not to be sniffed at. You're also a favourite to win. Many players argue that a 57-43 shot isn't a 'coin flip', but is actually quite a significant edge.

The prize structure in most tournaments is so top-heavy that you can't afford to give up any edge. If you win the pot, you'll have a significant chip lead on your opponents that will allow you to play more aggressively and take chances to build up chips. Your chip lead will also give you a cushion with which to absorb defeats, whether they be outdraws or not, and plenty of time to wait for big hands if necessary.

However, poker is rarely this simple, and whether you would call or fold with the queens should depend on several other factors. First, what's the structure of the tournament? In a tournament where first place gets a substantially bigger prize than second, the only correct strategy is to gamble. To put it simply, every time you pass up a profitable opportunity, you reduce your chances of winning that prize.

Again, many of the short-handed tournaments we're used to are crapshoots, where the stacks are short and the blinds increase very quickly so that the tournament ends before teatime. In a competition such as this, you may never find a better opportunity to push your chips to the middle and so you should call without much thought.

In a typical single-table online tournament, however, your primary goal isn't to win, but to finish in the money as often as possible. As such, you should be more inclined to pass up marginally profitable, high-variance gambles.

Second, you need to assess your opponent's skill level. Sklansky's theory of eschewing close gambles assumes that you're one of the best players in the tournament. If you feel that you can outmanoeuvre opponents, you should be less inclined to make a call such as this.

In summary, before you shove your chips into the pot with a strong hand such as pocket queens, consider just how likely it is that you're risking your entire tournament on a gamble. Then consider whether you'll have a chance to outplay your opponents later on. If not, take the gamble. However, if you're one of the best players and there's plenty of room left to play, you may be better off biding your time and waiting for a better spot.

What would you do in the following situations?

It's the bubble stage of a multi-table tournament and with blinds of 1,000-2,000, it's folded around to the player on the button, who makes it 6,000 to play. You look down at A-6 in the small blind and decide to raise to 16,000 in an attempt to defend against the button's probable steal. Whoops, bad timing!

The big blind, with 17,500 in chips, moves all-in over the top and the button folds. What do you do?

It's the middle stage of a tournament and you're second in chips at the table with 40,000. The blinds are still only 100-200, and you're under the gun with a hand of A-K. You raise to 600 and the only caller is the chip leader, who's sitting behind a stack of 40,025. Every other player at the table has less than 5,000 in chips. The flop comes A-7-2. You lead out for 1,000, and the chip leader raises all-in! In a rather convenient misunderstanding, the chip leader shows his cards - Q-J. Do you call or fold?

You've ended up in the situation where you're playing heads-up at the end of a tournament and you have 500,000 in chips. Your opponent, who plays just as well as you, has only 100,000 in chips and is on the 10,000 small blind. She moves all-in for her entire stack and you squeeze the 2-2. It's 80,000 more to you - should you call?

You may notice that we've excluded a lot of information from this example, such as how many chips you have, the playing styles of your opponents and other such factors. That's because none of that matters, as this call is absolutely automatic. There's 39,500 in the pot, and it costs just 1,500 more for you to call. There's no chance you have the best hand, but you're getting more than 26/1 on the call, and there's no hand against which you're that big an underdog.

Again, this decision is automatic. You fold, knowing that you're folding the best hand. The key to this is that you're playing the pot against the only player who can eliminate you, and the other players are short stacked. If you fold, you can pick off the shorter stacks with ease and coast into a high-money finish. If you call, you're going to be eliminated from the tournament about 38% of the time. This fold is so clear cut you should even consider folding pocket aces with the same board.

Yes, you should call. There are three key factors at work here. The first is that your shorter-stacked opponent is getting a little desperate, and you're more likely to be up against two overcards than an overpair. The second thing to take into account is that you have a pretty dominating chip lead over your opponent. If you lose this hand, you'll still have a 2/1 lead over her, and will be about a 67% favourite to win the match. The last factor is that your opponent is equally skilled. If your opponent was a fool, you would probably fold and wait for a better situation, knowing that you didn't have to take close gambles to beat them.