You may sometimes see a player go almost all-in -- perhaps at a final table of a tournament -- but leave a chip or two behind. The strategic reason for this is that, if there’s a big pay-jump coming with the next elimination, the player who is almost all-in has the chance to fold if players behind them shove their entire stacks.
Jim Reid of our Player Advisory Board wrote a great two-part article on this very topic. ‘Going (almost) all-in’ gives this example:
You’re at a 9-handed final table with significant pay jumps for each elimination. You’re the short stack with 9 big blinds in middle position. You look down at a hand you would usually shove with. The action folds to you, and you can either jam all-in, or raise to a size that is most of your chips but not all-in, let’s say seven big blinds.
Now imagine the player to your left shoves over your raise, and another player with a similar stack size behind them calls or reshoves. Assuming you were opening with some hands that aren’t pocket aces, you can now fold your non-premium hands with a good chance of laddering up, as one of those two players will likely be eliminated or at least have their stack decimated. As the short stack, your chances of winning the tournament were lower than any other player, so the value of laddering up matters more to you.
So why do some players consider this a possible angle-shoot?
Let’s say you’re facing someone who does this, but you don’t notice they’ve left a chip behind. You assume they’re all-in, call and turn over your cards. Without realizing it, you’vevnow exposed your cards with action still to come against a player who still has a stack behind (even if it’s only one chip). At best, you’ve revealed your hole cards, giving your opponent the chance to fold an inferior hand, and at worst you could actually be penalized and your hand could be declared dead.
So what do you think: is it an angle shoot, or is it strategy?
Veteran Tournament Director Matt Savage has some thoughts.