In a mini tournament where there were only 3 players left. The chip leader had double the chip combined with the remaining players (I was one of the two).

In a hand the chip leader was small blind and I was big blind, and I got J6s. The chip leader raised all in and then I call. Then chip leader showed his/her hands and it was Q4o.

The board turned out to be Qc Ts 5d 3s Ac, and I lost, narrowly missed out the ITM (only the first two players can get money).

The problem is I'd had several trash hands (like offsuited non connector or small number cards). This hand was slightly better and the blind kept raising as the game went on. Should I just wait for one or few more hands or it was the optimal decision despite the result?

This depends on the stack depths at the start of the hand as well as whether you were in second or third. For example, if you were the short stack with only a few big blinds then it's possible it would be a call. However, in the majority of situations this hand is probably a fold. Try to include as many details as possible when posting about the hand (such as the stack depths of each player and the exact payout structure of the tournament).

Patience is a very important quality as a poker player and playing mediocre hands just because "they are the best hand I've seen in a while and I don't want to fold more" is a mistake. Especially in situations like this where you are on a bubble.

Thx for the reply. Here's the detail about the hand.

Seat #1 is the button
Seat 1: Player A (390 in chips)
Seat 2: Player B (1,135 in chips)
Seat 3: Hero (275 in chips)
Player B: posts small blind 50
Hero: posts big blind 100
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Player A
Dealt to Player B
Dealt to Hero [6h Jh]
Player A: folds
Player B: raises 1,035 to 1,135 and is all-in
Hero: calls 175 and is all-in
Uncalled bet (860) returned to Player B
Player B: shows [Qd 4s]
Hero: shows [6h Jh]
*** FLOP *** [Qc Ts 5d]
*** TURN *** [Qc Ts 5d] [3s]
*** RIVER *** [Qc Ts 5d 3s] [Ac]
*** SHOWDOWN ***
Player B collected 550 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 550 | Rake 0 | Jackpot 0 | Bingo 0
Board [Qc Ts 5d 3s Ac]
Seat 1: Player A (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 2: Player B (small blind) showed [Qd 4s] and won (550) with Pair of Queens
Seat 3: Hero (big blind) showed [6h Jh] and lost with Ace-High

Actually it is retrieved from the hand history from a poker site and I changed the player code to player A/B for the privacy's sake.

the call is fine. probably you should have been shoving more aggressively earlier on.

The call is probably fine assuming that SB is shoving (close to) 100% here.

To be sure we need the payout structure though. If total payouts are $100 there's a huge difference between an 80/20 and 60/40 split for the winner.

Depending on how you got to those stack sizes, this is the correct answer. Trying to fold your way into the money is rarely the correct strategy.

In general-when you are facing a guy who is shoving ATC, you want a hand that has better than 50% equity aghainst an ATC range, which is Q6o+.


In this case, though, starting the hand with 2.75 bb and being in the bb, you have absolutely no folding range here. To make this call, you need hand with greater than 30% equity. Against a loose aggressive player shoving a wide range, there is no hand that you can play that has less than 30% equity (even 72o or 32o has at least 31% equity against a 75% shoving range.

Basically, if you get below 5 bb, your folding range on the bb is very small. Below 3 bb, you have no folding range.

It’s likely a hyper turbo and OP has around starting stack. I don’t think he can be faulted for folding too much prior to this without knowing the actual hands.

J6s definitely has to be strong enough to call this short. I could be wrong but I don’t think ICM can pressure us too much when we’ll be nearly forced allin on the next BB anyway and not even enough chips to steal if we fold.

It’s definitely not true that we have no folding range in general with <3BB though. If the other short stack had 1BB this would probably be a fold, depending on the exact pay structure.

I should have clarified that my more general statement was without ICM considerations.