All In Versus Pot Committed

One of the more interesting things about poker television is getting the opportunity to hear poker experts provide commentary on other professionals playing the game. While it can be easy to be a backseat driver, or an armchair quarterback, it still provides a lot of insight into the way that expert poker players think and play the game. One comment that is often uttered by experts such as Phil Gordon or Mike Sexton goes something like, "I'm not sure why he didn't go all in there." This is referring to when a poker player makes a call or a raise that makes them pot committed, and a commentator is thinking an all in move would serve them better.

To be pot committed means you have invested so much money and have so little left that the pot odds will dictate you call any bet or raise that would put you all in. And there are times when it is okay to set yourself up to be pot committed.

If there is $500 in the pot and you have $100 left in front of you, then you are almost always pot committed on the turn or river. Say, you are holding the nut hand on the turn; you could go all in but you're trying to extract money from a timid opponent, so you bet less. If they re-raise you all in, then all the better.

Take the same situation but you are not holding the nut hand, only middle pair with an over card. You suspect your opponent is weak - any bet you make will lead him to moving all in, but if it is not aggressive enough, your opponent may call with a better pair or a draw. Rather than commit yourself to calling, you should push him with the all in move and try and take the pot down right away. When contemplating a large bet when you are short stacked, consider whether or not it would commit you to the pot and then consider pushing all in instead.