It is a major leak if you are not treating it the same. You should not be effected by the stakes, and should not play so high that you cannot make objective decisions because of the stakes.

In general that makes sense. But, the ME is a once a year opportunity to play a 10K that is far softer than any other 10K. It is also a bucket list item for many, so they may not be playing as if it was a $55 buy in online.

Agree with Deuceblocker

Gutsy, definitely. Reckless, even moreso. I think he put himself in jeopardy of stone bubbling the Main with 70bbs, which would’ve been a complete disaster.

He certainly maximized his gains on the hand, but how sick (nauseating, not cool) would it have been if one second after he said ‘all-in’ the villain said ‘call’ and flipped over 66/76s/56s/77/55/44/33/etc.

It seems to me like OP might have felt a bit lost in the hand and kind of spazzed when the pot got really big. It’s a totally understandable feeling considering the circumstances and I’ve done it too many times to count, but I really think the CRAI was a blunder.

This is true in theory, and every video on YouTube says the same thing, but the reality is that most of us aren’t pros and nearly all of us don’t usually play $10k tournaments, but the Main Event is special and so we do fire this one when we can. Thousands of other players do the same thing. What % of players do you think are playing their normal stakes or within their comfort zone when they fire $10k to play the Main? Not many.

One other thing to note...The Stone bubble is only a '2/3' bubble. You got a $10K consolation prize for the 2022 WSOP Main event, which is very different from getting zero. Mr 1001 did get that seat, however, 1002 is the one that REALLY got the bubble.

No, this is just dumb. Most people never play a high buy in live tournament where the bubble is being decided on 100-120 tables. Most tournaments don't have two hour levels and ultra flat payouts for hundreds of spots. Most tournaments don't go hand for hand with 1000 players left. Most of the main event field is playing above their normal buyin and as non pros are taking the stakes into effect. To ignore these facts and just restating a logic theory that you should treat them the same doesn't recognize the underlying assumptions for the logic theory are not constant.

I forgot about this. Good point.

Then you should play more aggressive on the bubble to take advantage of the people playing scared and to exploit the people playing overagressive.

Putting in half your stack and than folding an overpair because it is the bubble of the ME and costing yourself like $70K in equity is really bad.

I agree with this, but why do you advocate for just calling with JJ preflop if this is your strategy?

How are you coming up with this number?

My personal take:

As a middling stack on the stone bubble, one of our primary objectives should be to not play big pots out-of-position against players who can bust us. So in this spot flatting JJ, even though it feels really nitty, makes more sense to me for a couple of reasons:

1. We're going to have to squeeze and size up our 3-bet accordingly. Even if we get one caller, we're going to create a pretty small SPR which is going to make navigating multiple streets difficult and put us in situations where we almost certainly have to risk our tournament life. Imagine if we'd gotten two callers in that spot or it somehow went call-backraise jam? (not sure if I saw what the CO stack was)

2. If we get 4-bet by the bigger stack, we almost certainly have to fold.

I'd much rather win a small to medium pot in that spot by flatting JJ and maybe x/c a couple of streets rather than trying to win a huge pot in a spot where it really doesn't matter *that* much in terms of tournament equity.

But if we're going to 3-bet in this exact spot, we need to go bigger, maybe to something like 90K+, but I'd only do that if I felt like that would get a ton of folds from stuff as strong as AQ. If we were covering the players in question even by a fairly small amount, then I think 3-betting JJ is not only fine but mandatory. We're going to get folds a ton of the time because we're putting their tournament life at risk, and may even be able to call off in certain situations if we get 4-bet.

As played, if we're taking an aggressive line with JJ we almost certainly need to bet the turn to deny equity to backdoor club draws with overcards and to get value from 88-TT. Sets and 66 are a thing but you'd expect those hands to raise flop sometimes. I'm not enamored with a jam because you never get worse to call, but 60% pot - which I would think is what we'd bet to properly deny equity - feels awkward as well.

If we bet the flop I like betting the turn as well and folding to a jam. I still think the best line is 3! preflop (I like a bigger sizing as well) and taking a more passive line post flop by starting with a check. There’s plenty of merit to just calling preflop given the circumstances.

A very interesting hand that’s sparked some debate, thanks for posting OP.

Another interesting factor that OP probably did not know is that the stone bubble of the ME gets the free seat for next year. Even if you value it at like 9k instead of the full 10k, it still limits the bubble factor if it was indeed a stone bubble spot.

More YouTube platitudes. I would also like to see your math on the 70k equity loss.

Good point. But they don't give you 10k. A pessimist might say they give you a second opportunity to play grueling tournament poker for 36 hours and make no money.

You can value the prize as you like. For someone who plays most ME's it is indeed worth 10K. For someone who sattied in, it might be worth substantially less.

Maybe less than a $70K loss. I am assuming 70K chips are worth about $10K. Building the pot with a 3! and then folding an overpair on a low wet board because you might be beat and its the bubble loses well into 5 figures equity and is really bad.

I don't want videos on youtube much, more on paid sites. Well if the videos say the same thing, they could be right. Maybe there are some videos on donktube on how to play scared on the bubble.

I made top 100. But I wish I could have gone a bit further

So my plan if he 4 bet preflop, is I would decide if I am going with it or not. Most players are not 4 betting so wide. We have a similar stack to the villain and we have been pretty tight. I don't see a huge problem with folding JJ here if I think he is not 4 betting wide. I think it's such a wet board that I have to be worried that the villain has a piece of it. There are different types of players. Not all players who call large 3 bets are going to have TT+/AQ+ , some players will have AsXs or other random junk. He might be the kind of player who has 88 or 99 and is going to be calling me down light.

Your inability to differentiate between scared play and smart play is what makes poker a great game today.

So at the start of the tournament, 60k chips (starting stack I believe) is worth $10k. As the tournament progresses each chip is worth less until you reach the end of the tournament and 350 million chips (or whatever the total was) is worth $8 million. This is different than ICM.

The stats are pretty interesting to look at because the day 3 ended with the 1000 players making the money and no more hands were played. I was surprised that the big stack only had 1.8 mill and 57 people had 1 mil +. Also, 120+ players had less than 100,000 and another 220 players with half of average stack. I can't remember if they where playing 8 or handed but you have probably around 20-30 short stacks in the blinds each hand played.

I don't see how deuces math is correct but a full double up would have given phat a top 60 stack.

I also think Deuces is stuck on what the proper decision is for what to do on the flop after the three bet as the question posted. I think the decisions to play a "trouble" hand on the bubble and three bet the hand are more risk intensive and questionable then whether you fold to a four bet against a larger stack or fold the flop.

My general maxim in bubble play is that it is far better to put someone else's tournament life at risk than your own.

A trouble hand is like QTo, offsuit mediocre high cards that makes the 2nd best hand often. JJ is the 5th best hand you can be dealt. There should not be any question whether to play it. In fact, it should at least be a call with any pp going probably 4-way to the flop.

Whether to 3! and whether to fold to a 4! are both close decisions. Folding an overpair with low SPR is really terrible, as is playing weak that way because it is the bubble.

Yeah, I think this is right. With the bubble factor, it makes a lot of sense to take lower-variance lines against stacks that can bust us, even if it means winning a smaller pot or losing the pot.

But 3-betting, putting half our stack in, and then folding is not that.

This is entire premise behind not 3-betting in the first place. We have to be cognizant of the fact that at our stack depth, bloating pots like this (especially OOP) is going to put us in tournament-life situations quite often vs. larger stacks. The fact that we can't come to a consensus on how to play this post indicates that we need to sidestep these really awkward ICM suicide spots rather than step directly into them.