Am I wrong in thinking that in a tournament, when someone is all in, it's pretty much standard for any other players in the pot to check it down except in two circumstances.

1. When there's a side pot large enough to warrant stealing even if it means increased odds that the all-in player will survive.

2. When you've got a made hand and feel absolutely confident that you're good enough to beat the all-in player.


Is this just something I imagined, or have I run into a lot of players who don't realize the value of knocking a player out of a tournament?

For example...early in a tournament, it's folded to me in the button, and I raise to $150. Small blind (approximately equal stack to me) calls, and big blind pushes all in (only $300 more). I call, small blind calls. I'm holding KJo.

Flop comes 44Q. Check, check. Turn is A. SB min-bets, so I call ($30 to call $1400 on a gutshot). Now there's $60 on the side. River is another 4. Check, check.

SB flips over KT. I flip over KJ. We both play 444AK, and get our money from the turn back, and BB wins the main pot with pocket 2s.

This guy is going to MIN-BET semi-bluff, possibly knocking me out of the pot, in a tournament...where another guy is all in?

Is this just something I imagined, or have I run into a lot of players who don't realize the value of knocking a player out of a tournament?

I find the opposite to be true: I run into a lot of players, like yourself, who overestimate the value of knocking out a player.

When I've got a million chips in a tournament that pays the top ten finishers, and there are about 30 players left, then it's not very important to me whether or not the guy with one chip gets knocked out this hand, or a few hands later.

"But Bobby, if you don't knock him out, he might come roaring back and win the tournament!" Doubtful. Highly unlikely. So unlikely, I'm not going to spend time worrying about it. Certainly not worth giving an opponent free cards.

Often, I'll find myself in a side-pot with a player who agrees with you on this one. I'll bet into the dry sidepot. He'll think, "Bobby's a good player. He understands the value of knocking somebody out. His bet is telling me, 'I have a hand, you can fold, I'll take care of eliminating this guy.' I don't have anything, he obviously has something. I'll fold."

He folds, leaving me heads-up with the all-in player. The dealer tells us that both hands must be turned up (a rule I hate, but that's another topic). I turn up nothing. The player who just folded fumes, can't see the reason why I would drive him out, and concludes that I must be an idiot.

But look what I gained by driving him out: Instead of having a 33% chance of winning the hand (I have one of three random hands), I now have a 50% chance of getting the money (one of two hands). By getting an opponent to fold (an opponent with chips, who is a viable threat to me), I knock his equity down from 33% to 0%.

How much did it cost me to increase my equity in the pot, and reduce my chip-holding opponent's equity? NOTHING! My side-pot bet was returned to me.

If the all-in opponent wins, then the folder thinks it did cost me something: a chance to eliminate an opponent. But as I stated above, that's usually worth next to nothing.

If we're at the final table of the WSOP, and I lock up an extra $200,000 by eliminating somebody, then it's a much different story. But in most cases, there's not much value in knocking out an opponent.

Sometimes, there's value in keeping an opponent alive, and I've done this countless times. If we're on the bubble, and I'm stealing like crazy, and all of my opponents are letting me get away with it, then I don't want "bubble time" to end. I'll stop stealing from the smallest stack, and steal from everybody else. If the smallest stack gets it all-in, I'll bet into the dry sidepot--not to increase my equity in the pot, but to increase the equity of the all-in opponent! Or stated more simply, I'll bet to protect HIS hand.

This topic plays a big part in tournament strategy. Most people agree with Pogo on this subject...and we should take advantage of them.

The only time you should check it down when somebody is all in is when you are either already in the money or on the bubble. Early in a tournament it doesn't matter. If you think you have the best hand you should bet, even if it's just middle pair, or maybe you might even have AK on a 552 board, you should still bet. You'll win the pot a large percentage of the time, becuase the person who is still in the hand will think "he has to have a big pair if he's betting with someone all-in" and they will fold most hands. You'll also see weaker Aces and hands like KQ from the all in player a lot. And early in the tournament you are trying to accumulate chips. Late in the tournament you are trying to position yourself to win more money, and checking down is a good way to move you up the prize ladder.