Weakt-tight or Playing Smart

[cavman]

i'm gonna give the math a shot. i think the range i put villain on is pretty conservative. Also, the win %’s are off the top of my head since I’m at work and most poker websites(odds calculators) are blocked.

10%- you are dominated (AA/KK/QQ)-17% to win
35%- coinflip-55% to win
35%- 2:1 favorite (AJ>, KJ>)- 66% to win
10%-he has lower pair- 83% to win
10%-he has crap and folds (ex. Qxs, Kx, etc.)- win 1150

(.1)(.17)(4600)+(.35)(.55)(4600)+(.35)(.66)(4600)+(.1)(.83)(4600)+(.1)(1150)
=2523.1

So you risk 2225, and come out with 2523 on average. I think you are in better shape than this calculation, but for the sake of argument, I made his range pretty conservative. Also, I think you might be more than 66% to win against the third 3rd set of hands.

whether or not this advantage is worth risking taking on the big stack is up to you, but JJ is a favorite.

[Linuxrocks]

1. He is not folding
2. Use 77+,AJo+,AJs+
3. The probability of having other hands is negligible

[cavman]

10%- you are dominated (AA/KK/QQ)-17% to win
50%- coinflip-55% to win
25%- 2:1 favorite (AJ)- 66% to win
15%-he has lower pair- 83% to win


(.1)(.17)(4600)+(.50)(.55)(4600)+(.25)(.66)(4600)+(.15)(.83)(4600)
=2674.9

actually the results were a little higher EV. but i still think that range is way too tight. the range you named is almost opening requirement range for EP/MP at a full table. This is 4 handed and in a tournament. i think there is a better chance that villain is on a steal than having a premium pair.

[Linuxrocks]

Your calculations are wrong, and I don't know why. Let the dumb computer do the calculations.

Here's what SNGPT says.

With range 66+,ATs+,AJo+, EV = -0.6%

Again, I think the range is actually tighter than this.

If you use 77+,AJs+,AJo+, EV = -1.3%

And, if you do the 'compute all' in SNGPT (which tells you the calling range for this to be +EV), it's QQ+

[bobcorn]

His caculations are wrong because he's not factoring in blinds, stack sizes, and position.

ppadala, are you putting Button on this tight a range because of his weird raise size? If I was button, my range would be much wider.

[cavman]

my calculation did factor in blinds and stack sizes. how would i factor position into the calculation. i made a range of hands for villain, and our % to win against the range. other than the ranges being debatable, what is wrong with the calculation?

does anyone else agree with me that folding JJ here seems ridiculous? it seems crazy to me, and i'd be surprised if i were the only one. if most people think its a fold, maybe its something i need to think about more often in tournaments.

[Linuxrocks]

ppadala, are you putting Button on this tight a range because of his weird raise size? If I was button, my range would be much wider.

You range might be wider, but would you raise with another big stack in the SB with crap?

[Linuxrocks]

my calculation did factor in blinds and stack sizes. how would i factor position into the calculation. i made a range of hands for villain, and our % to win against the range. other than the ranges being debatable, what is wrong with the calculation?

does anyone else agree with me that folding JJ here seems ridiculous? it seems crazy to me, and i'd be surprised if i were the only one. if most people think its a fold, maybe its something i need to think about more often in tournaments.

Here's a quick primer on ICM. That should answer your question.

[Dday44]

Hi All!

This is fun post- I actually have been thinking about bubble aggression more these days- and think it most important to be the initial aggressor- in this case there are many reasons why I really like the play P made- the calculations that should be thought about are if you reraise how often will you get called- in this case I would think you have little fold equity and you are getting called 99% of time. Now when you are called how often will you win the hand?? When you lose the hand how often will you win the tourny or even get ITM(0) and if you fold and keep your chips how often will you win or be gone and if you win the hand How often will you get ITM and win the game.

The big factors are that the button made a really big raise that he is nt backing away from and the blinds are still small relative to your stack and he is the one stack you really don't yet want to tangle with.

Now if you reraise and get called and he flips over AK or AQ or KQ and you are in a coinflip situation- are you ok with going out 5th 50% of the time??

An important concept in tourny play is that hands have relative value not absolute- you cannot just look down and see JJ and go whohoo let's rock n roll - you need to make a decsion on it's strength based on the situation and all the variables and dynamics that the current situation presents.

Once again, I hope that my 2 cents have helped to further confuse the issue.

All the best, Dave

p.s. In that situation if I was button, that is one of the ways I would consider playing AA or KK.


p.s.s. P has developed into a very good and thoughtful NL Sng player - one whose thoughts I would weigh heavily.

[Linuxrocks]

p.s.s. P has developed into a very good and thoughtful NL Sng player - one whose thoughts I would weigh heavily.

Whoa ! Thanks boss !

[classic]

you are right to fold here!! you are in the chiplead and have no reason to get involved in this pot! why should you risk your stack on this single hand.better you wait for a better chance and let them kill eachader.

[tightpoker]

Adding to a dead post I guess, but I would want to push back here if I don't have any reads in particular.

Button is making a 7x push for T1000 vs SB with chip lead and BB on small stack. Button doesn't want a call here, meaning button is weak or doesn't want to be played back. AA or KK I see goading big stack to play back on a re-steal by putting just at 600, by making it look like steal attempt. Most likely, range is on 22+, Ax+ or two paints.

JJ vs this range dominates a majority range, with exception of AK, AQ, AA, KK and QQ. 5 of about 30ish hands.

Fold equity is low, but in the realm of possibility. Read dependent, but would put in the 15% or so range if no reads. Given 2nd big stack stealing from small stack, more chances of outright steal taking place.

Lastly, one of the reasons I don't really put faith in ICM, is game conditions. Dominate this hand the majority of the time and you come out chip lead with 5000 vs 1700 (aka P1) vs 1000 (aka P2) vs 400 (aka P3) with the shortstack to your left.

This has bubble abuse written all over it with extreme prejudice.

Small stack is on a crippling stack, which means you steal outright any two everyhand small stack is there. When P3 is in BB and you are in SB, P1 and P2 most likely folded to you, which you fold to P3 and keep P3 alive by donating SB and BB back to P3. You repeat and abuse P1 and P2 by forcing them to fold in bubble game situation since P3 is on the cusp of being knocked out with 2BB. Comes back to you, you fold SB to P3 in BB.

Repeated abuse of this system will cripple P1 and P2, forcing two or three way small stack bubble condition. Thus, stacks forced into extreme tight mode, for even more abuse. Downward spiral for them, chip building whirlwind for you.

Finally, with 3 stacks drained low, you go and just pummel them all out easily.

Of course, you face risks of opponents waking up on a hand and suck outs, etc, but the gain of chiplead in this game condition with the shorty to your left is so +EV on the chance of placing 1st that it's ridiculous.

Then again, I'm thinking higher buy-in train of thought, so this may not necessarily apply to a $10 or $30 game when opponents don't understand bubble or are plain idiots...

PS: After re-reading my post, I realize I might not have made it perfectly clear, but the English translation is: You are in the optimal situation to artificially extend the bubble condition and exploit it. By keeping the small stack alive by folding to him, you open a door to attack the other two stacks, who will be forced to play tight while they wait for the small stack to bust out. However, by keeping the small alive, eventually you will wear those stacks down and force all stacks to play super-tight in the hopes another will bust out.

[darinvg]

Nice MJ.
Could you elaborate on why you don't like ICM.
I don't fully understand ICM but I believe the math behind it. I spent the $80 on SNGPT so I hope it has some merit.

BTW, thanks for the shirt.

[Linuxrocks]

Nice MJ.
Could you elaborate on why you don't like ICM.
I don't fully understand ICM but I believe the math behind it. I spent the $80 on SNGPT so I hope it has some merit.

MJ, interesting thoughts, especially about keeping the shorties alive.

Darin, though I am not as qualified as MJ, I will blurt out my thoughts on ICM. It works quite well, when you have 4-handed, 3-handed games with high blinds, because there are very few other factors in play other than calling/pushing ranges, and folding equity. However, at a little smaller blinds (say 75/150, 100/200) with 5, or 6 people, there are many other factors in play like

1. Is someone desperate to call your next push hand?
2. Does keeping the shortie alive good or bad?
3. Is the chip leader correctly stealing from the medium-sized stackss
4. Is the chip leader overly aggressive
5. How does your push effect your image?
6. Are you losing future +EV situations by pushing/calling now?

I have found this empirically quite painfully. Even though some hands are >+0.5 EV according to SNGPT, you cannot just push them from MP when it is 5 or 6 handed.

[NutzReelBig]

id push also