Amateur Poker Association & Tour
Poker Forum => Strategy => Topic started by: poker_jason on November 17, 2013, 21:16:28 PM
-
Seems standard - I figure villain is playing 15% and will call 60-70% of the time. These ranges added afterwards.
Figured at time call was 50/50. Thoughts please for all /any actions.
PokerStars Hand #107134701835: Tournament #814579996, $10+$1 USD Hold'em No Limit - Level XLVI (25000/50000) - 2013/11/17 3:29:51 UTC [2013/11/16 22:29:51 ET]
Table "814579996 519" 9-max Seat #5 is the button
Seat 1: hjgkih (1866389 in chips)
Seat 2: M.Roldan (1090246 in chips)
Seat 3: liv_hbk (4498404 in chips)
Seat 5: almeida0781 (3286501 in chips)
Seat 6: nightbully (788568 in chips)
Seat 7: FatLazyMofo (1984534 in chips)
Seat 8: David_Wain (1133556 in chips)
hjgkih: posts the ante 6250
M.Roldan: posts the ante 6250
liv_hbk: posts the ante 6250
almeida0781: posts the ante 6250
nightbully: posts the ante 6250
FatLazyMofo: posts the ante 6250
David_Wain: posts the ante 6250
nightbully: posts small blind 25000
FatLazyMofo: posts big blind 50000
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to nightbully [As Ts]
David_Wain: folds
hjgkih: folds
M.Roldan: folds
liv_hbk: raises 50000 to 100000
almeida0781: folds
nightbully: raises 682318 to 782318 and is all-in
FatLazyMofo: folds
liv_hbk: calls 682318
-
I presume this is the final table? so this is a thinly veiled brag post, right? ;)
As the short stack 8 handed, with a <16bb stack, I don"t see how you can fold this hand. With the stack sizes as they are, you don"t have any obvious ICM issues to cloud your judgement. You have little enough FE as it is - another orbit, and you"ll be in trouble. Shove here and play for the win. I know that"s playing at level 1 only, and not giving much consideration to what the other guy might have.... however having got this far in a tourney, I hate to let my stack dribble away, and I feel that folding this sort of hand to a min-raise when you still have a semblance of FE would be missing an opportunity. I know you say he is opening 15%, however as the significant chip leader on the final table, he really should be opening more to put pressure on the field, and your hand should be way ahead of his opening range at this point.
-
Assuming your presumptions are correct I believe :
a) When he folds your stack will rise to approx 976K
b) when he calls and you win your stack will raise to approx 1,658K.
c) When he calls and you lose you will be left with zero chips (obv).
When he calls with 9.75% of his range (65% x 15%) with ATs you will expect to win 42% of time per pokerstove.
You expected chips will therefore be (35% x 976K) + (65% x 42% x 1,658K) = 794K. Only a very marginal increase in your chips (about 1%). Taking ICM considerations into account its a fold for me. You still have 6 orbits of chips. So not totally desperate yet IMO. Better to wait for a good shoving spot rather than reshoving and hope others get knocked out in mean time.
If your assumptions about villain"s opening/calling range change obviously the decision may change.
-
... Taking ICM considerations into account its a fold for me....
Wouldn"t the payout structure be necessary to know the ICM considerations?
Given what I"d expect the payout to be like I"d go on the side of shoving.
Your chip stack is too low and the hand is too good to open fold. And if you call then fold on the flop you"ve just lost a big chunk of chips; all the other factors mentioned before I think makes it the right move.
-
Thanks for the responses so far.
Its not a thinly veiled brag and unfortunately not a FT (14 players remaining) I"m 14th and have 3 - 5 stacks ahead from the 1m - 1.6m range.
Structure is standard stars pay jumps so 13-15 is approx., $400, 11-12 $500, 10 - $700 then up to $15k for 1st.
ICM wise - I think we can ignore as I need to at least double up before ICM becomes "significant".
F/E is interesting because I think I have some but it is going to be very player, and situational dependent (i.e. Late position raiser).
Call is definitely worst play here.
Interesting that we have two opposing views:
Standard View is we should gamble/flip here (how happy am I when I win - this thread doesn"t exists!)
Player Dependent View (and after the fact) suggest a better spot may open up - i.e. open shove into 1,2, 7, and 8.
I"m don"t think either way is entirely right/wrong, I can live with the decision - but I think the fold was marginally the better option here but only because of the player.
Further option are 3-bet call shove, 3-bet call shove flop, i.e. raise to 250K/275K?
Still interested in your thoughts.....
-
I figure villain is playing 15% and will call 60-70% of the time
going by these numbers and by cEV you need 53% equity to break even..
[above calc is on villain calling 60% of the time and the big blind behind only re-shoving with QQ+ AKs]
so cEV wise your shoving range imo would be JJ+ AKs and AQs at a push, ICM $ev would call for tighter...
right click. select image in new tab and magnify....
(http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/7231/6fdw.jpg)
-
Villain is never calling 60%-70% of the time though surely? I think that"s way off, need more reads though. We have plenty of fold equity and we want to gun for the top few spots.
He should be opening really wide given his stack size and people will be nitting up trying to get to the final table.
Unless we think he has been especially nitty, we need to take these spots and shove. Would need to be a maniac to feel comfortable 3b calling though.
-
Villain is never calling 60%-70% of the time though surely? I think that"s way off, need more reads though. We have plenty of fold equity and we want to gun for the top few spots.
He should be opening really wide given his stack size and people will be nitting up trying to get to the final table.
Unless we think he has been especially nitty, we need to take these spots and shove. Would need to be a maniac to feel comfortable 3b calling though.
Appreciate the comments.
You"d think! 15% seemed generous for this player (FT big pay day mentality) possible playing tighter but probably not much. I can"t say for certain as I don"t use tracking software. And of course if his range is tighter his calling percentage should increase also.
Thanks for the info Noble1.
I like the shove here against Seat 1 - 100% of the time as his range was much wider. However I think I should have folded rather than the "standard" shove in this spot.
Good luck all and hope this gives pause for thought..... even after 8 hours play.
-
Sorry I misread the OP - if we really do think he is only opening 15% then its a fold. Would have to be really certain of this though.
I was working to the assumption that villain would be opening Ax, K10+, all pairs, some suited connectors. That would be my standard range in this sort of spot as a chip leader.
Tending towards aggression in these sorts of spots can never be bad. Nice score anyway.
-
15% is pretty tight given that stack sizes and tournament situation, and to make me fold this hand in this spot, I would need to be very sure that he really is opening that tight.
A 15% range would look something like { 77+, A7s+, K9s+, QTs+, JTs, ATo+, KTo+, QJo }, however if he is playing his stack and situation well, I would expect to see something more like { 22+,A2s+,K8s+,Q8s+,J9s+,A2o+,K9o+,Q9o+,JTo }, which is around 30%.
ATs has approx 50% against the 15% range, and 58% against the 30% range. Noble"s calculator indicates that 54% is required to make the call against the narrower range..... we aren"t that far off.
Given that a double up is urgently required if we are to have a realistic chance at the $15k for the win, I just don"t think we should be ignoring spots like this.
-
15% is pretty tight given that stack sizes and tournament situation, and to make me fold this hand in this spot, I would need to be very sure that he really is opening that tight.
A 15% range would look something like { 77+, A7s+, K9s+, QTs+, JTs, ATo+, KTo+, QJo }, however if he is playing his stack and situation well, I would expect to see something more like { 22+,A2s+,K8s+,Q8s+,J9s+,A2o+,K9o+,Q9o+,JTo }, which is around 30%.
ATs has approx 50% against the 15% range, and 58% against the 30% range. Noble"s calculator indicates that 54% is required to make the call against the narrower range..... we aren"t that far off.
Given that a double up is urgently required if we are to have a realistic chance at the $15k for the win, I just don"t think we should be ignoring spots like this.
I think this is most likely close enough to not matter too much either way, think what you might do with AJs in this spot.
As for having 58%, yes we do have that versus a 30% opening range but villains calling range will not be 30%.
-
15% is pretty tight given that stack sizes and tournament situation, and to make me fold this hand in this spot, I would need to be very sure that he really is opening that tight.
A 15% range would look something like { 77+, A7s+, K9s+, QTs+, JTs, ATo+, KTo+, QJo }, however if he is playing his stack and situation well, I would expect to see something more like { 22+,A2s+,K8s+,Q8s+,J9s+,A2o+,K9o+,Q9o+,JTo }, which is around 30%.
ATs has approx 50% against the 15% range, and 58% against the 30% range. Noble"s calculator indicates that 54% is required to make the call against the narrower range..... we aren"t that far off.
Given that a double up is urgently required if we are to have a realistic chance at the $15k for the win, I just don"t think we should be ignoring spots like this.
I think this is most likely close enough to not matter too much either way, think what you might do with AJs in this spot.
As for having 58%, yes we do have that versus a 30% opening range but villains calling range will not be 30%.
This is what"s important - people are really keen to show exact precise figures a lot of time but all of this theory is just a model of how the game works; it"s not a precise interpretation.
Game theory maths only works precisely in a theoretical model using assumptions - once you put in variables like not actually knowing what the villains raising or calling range really is it is much more appropriate to be thinking of it all in terms of "about", "approximately" and "close enough".
-
I think this is most likely close enough to not matter too much either way, think what you might do with AJs in this spot.
As I understand AJs does so much better against villain"s range than A10 - less chance of JJ, Dominates all J combinations, overpair to 10"s.
Great response all - thanks.
-
I think this is most likely close enough to not matter too much either way, think what you might do with AJs in this spot.
As I understand AJs does so much better against villain"s range than A10 - less chance of JJ, Dominates all J combinations, overpair to 10"s.
Great response all - thanks.
How much better ? would you consider it a marginal decision to jam AJs in this same spot?
-
I think this is most likely close enough to not matter too much either way, think what you might do with AJs in this spot.
As I understand AJs does so much better against villain"s range than A10 - less chance of JJ, Dominates all J combinations, overpair to 10"s.
Great response all - thanks.
How much better ? would you consider it a marginal decision to jam AJs in this same spot?
lol - can I retract the "so much"? I can"t really quantify this mathematically without poker stoving it or something - I think from experience/general maths the AJ is an easier Jam generally in this type of spot - especially when we get a villian with much looser calling tendencies as we dominate/flip more hands. This shifts odds in our favour against many hand match up"s which I can only conclude is positive??
I don"t usually discuss or work on a lot of strategy stuff especially ranges/maths so I may have some serious deficiencies in this area of my game. As the general pool of players gets stronger these marginal decisions will be the difference.
Against this particular villain in this particular hand AJ & A10 were probably not much different relatively- just the experience of the player. Was hoping for bad call, fold or flip when called.
Would love to be corrected on my understanding of AJ/A10 differences here if I"m wide of the mark here.
For fun, this is how to bust the same tourney the following night when trapping an Aggressive Player:
PokerStars Hand #107187998484: Tournament #814579997, $10+$1 USD Hold'em No Limit - Level XXVIII (2000/4000) - 2013/11/18 1:23:11 UTC [2013/11/17 20:23:11 ET] Table "814579997 814" 9-max Seat #7 is the button Seat 1: victorfrutal (217908 in chips) Seat 2: nightbully (129621 in chips) Seat 3: Simuk1 (158913 in chips) Seat 4: RaVeN_cs (242560 in chips) Seat 5: ZaraNorbi (162501 in chips) Seat 6: liv_hbk (75874 in chips) Seat 7: Akifart (168022 in chips) Seat 8: J_Sniper11 (162965 in chips) Seat 9: MrMo19 (228258 in chips)
victorfrutal: posts the ante 500
nightbully: posts the ante 500
Simuk1: posts the ante 500
RaVeN_cs: posts the ante 500
ZaraNorbi: posts the ante 500
liv_hbk: posts the ante 500
Akifart: posts the ante 500
J_Sniper11: posts the ante 500
MrMo19: posts the ante 500
J_Sniper11: posts small blind 2000
MrMo19: posts big blind 4000
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to nightbully [Qc As]
victorfrutal: folds
nightbully: raises 4500 to 8500
Simuk1: folds
RaVeN_cs: folds
ZaraNorbi: folds
liv_hbk: folds
Akifart: raises 11399 to 19899
J_Sniper11: folds
MrMo19: folds
nightbully: calls 11399
*** FLOP *** [2d 9s Qh]
nightbully: checks
Akifart: bets 16598
nightbully: calls 16598
*** TURN *** [2d 9s Qh] [2h]
nightbully: checks
Akifart: checks
*** RIVER *** [2d 9s Qh 2h] [8h]
nightbully: bets 24000
Akifart: raises 107025 to 131025 and is all-in
nightbully: calls 68624 and is all-in
Uncalled bet (38401) returned to Akifart
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Akifart: shows [5h 7h] (a flush, Queen high)
nightbully: shows [Qc As] (two pair, Queens and Deuces) Akifart collected 268742 from pot nightbully finished the tournament in 330th place
-
Interesting discussion. I can see some people don"t agree but in my opinion the maths is very important.
Yes assumptions will need to be made. But I think it is very useful to prove without doubt, given the villains raising/calling ranges, that it is marginal at best to push with AQs in this situation (as shown by Noble1). From other responses I don"t think correct pushing range is immediately obvious. I think by considering pushing/calling ranges using these tools off the table we are more likely to make better decisions at the table.
The other issue is ICM. As I understand it when making decisions which are likely to put your tournament at risk there are always at least some ICM considerations unless all the remaining prize money will go to the winner - i.e you are playing heads-up or in satellite with only one seat.
So IMO any all- in decision will always be less ev in a tournament situation than in a cash game. In other words you correct calling requirements in any one given situation will always be tighter than in a cash game. It is only the extent to which you should tighten up will depend on the tournament prize structure, how close you are to the prize money and your chip stacks compared to other competitors.
That"s my understanding but happy to be proved wrong
-
lol - can I retract the "so much"? I can"t really quantify this mathematically without poker stoving it or something - I think from experience/general maths the AJ is an easier Jam generally in this type of spot - especially when we get a villian with much looser calling tendencies as we dominate/flip more hands. This shifts odds in our favour against many hand match up"s which I can only conclude is positive??
Fair play, most would dig in deeper in your spot, kudos for dropping the shovel.
The exercise though is about comparing action with the next hand up on the hand strength ladder. I find it helps to identify when spots are close enough to be indifferent or marginally plus EV.