"It's important to confirm that you aren't committed to all-ins"

[slapdash]

I've been reading "Winning Poker Tournaments (One Hand At A Time)" by Eric "Rizen" Lynch, Jon "Apestyles" Van Fleet, and Jon "PearlJammer" Turner. It's a good book, but there was one thing that didn't make sense to me. Van Fleet is talking about taking advantage of the bubble when he's the big stack at the table (this is Hand 131, for anybody who has the book). An opponent min-raises preflop from middle position, and his read is that the opponent isn't strong. He reraises from the hijack with a mediocre hand (76s), hoping to take it down, making a point of the fact that none of the players left to act have a small enough stack that he'll be committed to call if they shove. He says: "When making moves like this, it's important to confirm that you aren't committed to all-ins behind you." Maybe there are meta-game reasons for this (you don't want to show down a bad hand if you hope to do a lot of stealing?), but he doesn't mention that. But as far as this hand is concerned, surely you're better off if an opponent's shove does commit you? Imagine two hands where an opponent shoves, identical except that in the first hand he has a large enough stack that you can (and do) fold, but in the second hand he has a smaller stack, and you are "pot-committed". In both cases, you can fold (it's legal even if you're pot-committed, right?), in which case the results are identical. But in the second hand, if you really are pot-committed, then that means that calling is a better option than folding (that's what "pot-committed" means, isn't it?). So in the second hand, you are better off because you have an extra, and superior, option available. In fact, if you're obviously pot-committed to a shove, then you have an extra advantage: your opponent has no fold equity if he shoves, so he's less likely to shove, and you're more likely to take the pot without a showdown. Am I missing something?

[muttley]

Re: "It's important to confirm that you aren't committed to all-ins" I think what he's saying that (7,6s) isn't going to win an all in shove from one of the players still to act. So if the BB is down to five BBs in chips and has picked up a hand like (A,J) or (A,10) he might feel this is a good place to push, and the (7,6s) is folding.