When might paying for an all-in with an average hand be the best decision?

I've seen players pay all-ins with hands that many would consider weak, and even then, the decision seemed correct.

In what situations do you think it's worth paying for an all-in with just an average hand?

When you have more chips in your headsup

When we have a short stack, our fold equity is often more valuable to us than our post-flop equity. Shoving pre with 99 or A8s is often the best move when under 20bb or certainly under 10bb.

When a short stack tries to play pre, we have them ouststacked 5 to 1, 6 to 1, 8 to 1 or more etc, we can consider putting Villain all-in with a moderate hand provided that we are confident of getting isolation.

When we are short-stacked with a moderate jam hand like 66 or A4s, etc, we want to be mindful of position before jamming. We really want to be on the blinds (or maybe the BT in a 9-ring game) so that we can see the action before we commit to pulling the trigger. If we shove A4s from UtG we're only going to get called by dominating hands (like AK, AT, etc). However if we are on the BB and see 2 limps and a bunch of folds, A4s is very good against 2 weak Villains. We could easily steal, and if we do get called, Villain doesn't have much Ax in a capped limp-call range, so our A4s is very likely ahead.

Of course we give up post-flop position by playing from the blinds, but if we are shoving pre, post-flop position is irrelevant (there will be no post-flop action). ; ) So the blinds are perfect for us to watch all of the pre-flop action before we commit our jam.

If there are 3 or 4 or 5 limpers, just fold because our middling hand likely won't win a multiway pot. Absolute maximum that we want is 2 Villains calling our shove.
If someone opens before us, just fold because they have a hand that easily competes with our middler and very likely is ahead of it.

But if we have 9bb on the SB and a A-rag or a low pocket pair and we see 1 or 2 limpers only, let it rip!

When you are getting the right odds to do so and closing the action. If UTG jam in their last 2.7BB, and it folds to you in BB, you have to pay 1,7BB to win a pot of 2 x 2.7BB + 1,5BB = 6,9BB assuming a 1BB ante. So you only need 25% equity for this to be a profitable call, and even the worst possible hand has that against their showing range. Its exactly the same as calling a river bet. We do that, not when we expect to always win or win more than half the time, but when we expect to win often enough given the pot odds.

leomarinho said:

I've seen players pay all-ins with hands that many would consider weak, and even then, the decision seemed correct.

In what situations do you think it's worth paying for an all-in with just an average hand?

Click to expand...

When your wife is standing in the doorway with her hands on her hips at bed time.

SPANKYSN said:

When your wife is standing in the doorway with her hands on her hips at bed time.

Click to expand...

You mean 'right now'? (looks at clock and sees it is almost 2am)

... on the verge of winning or just before the prize increases, and you see that all the players at the table are afraid to play ahead of the prize growth...

It's not so much about the strength of your hand as it is about the context. There are situations in which an average hand becomes a good candidate for going all-in: when you have a chance of retiring, when the stacks of chips are small or when tournament pressure forces your opponents to retire with a large part of their rank. If I wait to have a premium hand every time, I end up missing out on a lot of opportunities. In poker, sometimes the right moment is more valuable than the cards themselves.

I think it's worth calling with an average hand when the situation makes it profitable, not just because of the cards. Stack sizes, pot odds, bounty value in PKOs, your opponent's shoving range, and ICM all matter.
For example, if a short stack shoves from late position with a very wide range, calling with a hand like A9, KQ, or 66 can be the right play. The decision should be based on the opponent's range and the math, not just the strength of your own hand.

SergioV said:

For example, if a short stack shoves from late position with a very wide range, calling with a hand like A9, KQ, or 66 can be the right play. The decision should be based on the opponent's range and the math, not just the strength of your own hand.

Click to expand...

Absolutely, but you'll want isolation with that too.

Depends, a shove from a tight player's range, is, immediate fold.
You can call lighter against the wider range of a loose player if you read his bet as a bluff.
Short stacks desperate for chips, shove lighter, but may have something that beats tour calling range. This could damage your stack. If a call is only a small percentage of your stack a call would be appropriate.

SPANKYSN said:

When your wife is standing in the doorway with her hands on her hips at bed time.

Click to expand...

That would also depend on whether the wife is wearing lingerie or a onesie.

Calling an all-in with an average hand is correct when the pot odds are favorable and your opponent's range contains enough bluffs or weaker hands. The decision should be based on expected value, stack dynamics, and your reads on the opponent.

let icm be your guide

Zorba said:

That would also depend on whether the wife is wearing lingerie or a onesie.

Click to expand...

So true.

It really depends on the situation. If my opponent is capable of shoving a wide range, or I'm getting great pot odds, I'm happy to call with what looks like an average hand. It's less about the absolute strength of your cards and more about how they perform against your opponent's range.