Amateur Poker Association & Tour

Poker Forum => Strategy => Topic started by: maverick1 on January 03, 2010, 14:20:12 PM

Title: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: maverick1 on January 03, 2010, 14:20:12 PM
in a 45 player sng on full tilt last night, im sitting short stacked 9 handed on the final table after my ak suited was ripped apart by a 6 4 off lol therefore losing more than half my stack, a few hands pass no cards i have about 4 bb"s left, im aware of the nash push fold equilibrium (just learning it), i then receive 66 in middle position. it just didnt feel right, going against all my beliefs on playing short stacked on the bubble i folded. 2 hands later on the button i luckily recieved aq suited shoved and that was the end of my game.
the mathematics are telling me to shove my intuition was telling me to fold!
what would you have done and what would the reasons be?

im a new comer to poker only been playing a year more seriously learning through experience and reading books etc so your views would be much appreciated!

thanks, carl
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: noble1 on January 03, 2010, 14:42:21 PM
at 4bbs left even without antes any pair is +cEV even if all players behind are very loose callers..
A good book to read which met help a tad is Kill Everyone , you"ll find some good detailed charts that will help u in this area.
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: Swinebag on January 03, 2010, 14:52:37 PM
firstly - try copying and pasting hand histories, they are much easier to deal with and give people the best chance to give a decent reply

secondly (and I may be totally wrong here - wouldn"t be the first time) - but isn"t the nash push fold equilibrium designed for HU play where effective stacks are less than 10 BBs? If so, then this doesn"t really apply in your situation here.

thirdly, I dont understand how you can be in Mid position with 66 then 2 hands later be on the button

As for playing the 66, I"m not sure what to do because Of the lack of info. The main thing we need to know is how big the other stacks are. This is crucial especially as you are on the bubble. Is it 8 players paid in a 45 man SNG? (9 handed on the bubble i think you said). It would also be beneficial to know what the prizes are.

My quick reply is...

If you are the shortest stack then shove the 66

If there are shorter stacks than you and the bottom prize is significant in relation to buyin then folding is fine.

Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: noble1 on January 03, 2010, 15:09:19 PM
err i"ll plump for wrong Rob :P http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nash_equilibrium
although good point out on how big the other stacks are..
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: LongshanksED on January 03, 2010, 15:37:20 PM
66 is a shove if I"m 1st into the pot with your stack and hope and pray I"m not called by better.  If action before it gets to me I fold

Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: deanp27 on January 03, 2010, 18:22:17 PM
you have a pair

i don"t fold them very often
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: AMRN on January 03, 2010, 18:56:30 PM
I must be missing something in my game - how is this not a straight forward and simple shove?
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: Class on January 03, 2010, 20:19:24 PM

I must be missing something in my game - how is this not a straight forward and simple shove?


That"s what my initial thoughts were...
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: JamieCarra on January 03, 2010, 20:21:53 PM
Pretty sure 44 is near the top of my shoving range here!

I"m shoving pretty much any pair, any ace, most kings, a few queens and jacks aswell as anything suited or connected.

Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: Eck on January 03, 2010, 20:24:10 PM

I must be missing something in my game - how is this not a straight forward and simple shove?


Because it lost?
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: Swinebag on January 03, 2010, 20:25:13 PM
Does it not matter that it is the money bubble of a STT and there could be a short stack about to be allin in the BB soon?
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: JamieCarra on January 03, 2010, 20:34:06 PM

Does it not matter that it is the money bubble of a STT and there could be a short stack about to be allin in the BB soon?


Really depends on the other stack sizes and payout structure but assuming there"s no other stacks <10bb we"re going to have a difficult time outlasting them and would be better off trying to get into decent shape to go for the win.
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: Swinebag on January 03, 2010, 20:44:04 PM
I"m only playing devils advocate here (I"m shoving here) but you have to remember that a 4BB shove is definitely getting called, probably more than once, where 66 is in bad shape. So if we are one from the money and there are shorter stacks that could be all in in the blinds then surely folding is correct there??

Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: AMRN on January 03, 2010, 21:08:47 PM

I"m only playing devils advocate here (I"m shoving here) but you have to remember that a 4BB shove is definitely getting called, probably more than once, where 66 is in bad shape. So if we are one from the money and there are shorter stacks that could be all in in the blinds then surely folding is correct there??




only if min-cashing is an acceptable result. personally i would rather take my chances with the 66, even against multiple others, to try and get a stack to get to the bigger payouts.
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: Swinebag on January 03, 2010, 21:59:53 PM


I"m only playing devils advocate here (I"m shoving here) but you have to remember that a 4BB shove is definitely getting called, probably more than once, where 66 is in bad shape. So if we are one from the money and there are shorter stacks that could be all in in the blinds then surely folding is correct there??




only if min-cashing is an acceptable result. personally i would rather take my chances with the 66, even against multiple others, to try and get a stack to get to the bigger payouts.



If it was a big field tourney then min cashing is pointless so I"d be shoving regardless of any shorter stacks. I dont know the payout structure here but given its a 45 man STT then I"d imagine that bottom prize is worth a fair ammount in comparison to buyin and the other prizes as well.
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: maverick1 on January 03, 2010, 22:17:46 PM
sorry about lack of info.
rough figures from memory there was about 3 big stacks ranging from 15k-22kish, 3 medium stacks 7k-12kish and 3 shorts stacks, blinds were 400/800. 6 minute levels. mid-late table position. 

table order was to my left, big stack, medium, big, big, medium, short, medium, short.

the pay out structure was $24 buy in and the top 6 got paid not 8 so no i wasnt on the bubble my mistake.

1st place got $450 through to last place got $56.











Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: Swinebag on January 03, 2010, 22:23:05 PM

sorry about lack of info.
rough figures from memory there was about 3 big stacks ranging from 15k-22kish, 3 medium stacks 7k-12kish and 3 shorts stacks, blinds were 400/800. 6 minute levels. mid-late table position. 

table order was to my left, big stack, medium, big, big, medium, short, medium, short.

the pay out structure was $24 buy in and the top 6 got paid not 8 so no i wasnt on the bubble my mistake.

1st place got $450 through to last place got $56.














easy shove then
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: noble1 on January 03, 2010, 22:55:59 PM
if its just a ballpark range you are looking for , with 4bb and antes with 5 players to your left to act then my 1st in shove range would be 22+,A2s+,K2s+,Q3s+,J5s+,T6s+,95s+,85s+,74s+,64s+,53s+,A2o+,K5o+,Q9o+,J8o+,T8o+,98o,87o,76o
all of these are +cEV if we think that we"ll be called 80% of the time .. you could widen more if u add break even hands which would be ATC suited [so add these - J3s-J2s,T3s-T2s,93s-92s,83s-82s,73s-72s,62s,52s,42s,32s]
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: shozboy1 on January 04, 2010, 12:30:16 PM
definitely open shove, but with lots of action before me - especially if another player is all in, I fold.
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: Roscopiko on January 04, 2010, 13:25:13 PM
v easy shove here please.

also dont play $24 games until you are 100% confident of these situations, go play $5ish levels and learn this stuff
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: shozboy1 on January 04, 2010, 14:45:05 PM
I think a good guide for bankroll courtesy of SNG pros is something like 5% of your bankroll max on any one SNG. At buyins of $24 you are likely to be running into very decent players who play for a living - probably not the best competition for new starters
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: Marty719 on January 04, 2010, 15:06:30 PM

I think a good guide for bankroll courtesy of SNG pros is something like 5% of your bankroll max on any one SNG. At buyins of $24 you are likely to be running into very decent players who play for a living - probably not the best competition for new starters


Need over 20b/i"s for 45mans imo - but yes...start lower.  Also.....shoving is fairly straight forward imo.
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: shozboy1 on January 04, 2010, 16:13:05 PM
Yeah actually for MTT SNGs 2% of your roll on any one game is a guide I"ve heard bandied about
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: Mikeyboy9361 on January 04, 2010, 17:23:30 PM
99.9% of people are shoving here! And don"t believe "em if they tell you otherwise  ;)
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: maverick1 on January 04, 2010, 18:30:50 PM
it looks like the general census says i should have shoved lol.

maybe i should read my gus hanson book again to loosen me up a tad!

is there such a thing as a intuitive fold in this position? ignoring the math to go with your gut?

to be fair i was an average stack playing really well untill i got majorly sucked out when i had AK suited against a 64 off. i didnt feel out of my depth though.
i like to practice in the higher buy in games for the reason the players are much better which should improve my game quicker, i always find the lower buy ins are full of gamblers and not poker players making it hard to learn anything.






Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: noble1 on January 04, 2010, 20:00:11 PM
at the lower buy ins u learn the basic fundamentals better , just watch all the mistakes ;D and do the opposite.
If u get sucked out on u have to keep a clear head and still make the correct decisions , keeping a control of how u feel/emotions is key to poker imho..
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: Swinebag on January 05, 2010, 08:28:49 AM

also dont play $24 games until you are 100% confident of these situations, go play $5ish levels and learn this stuff


I can see Ross"s point here but at the end of the day play within your bankroll. If you have a roll of $1500 ish then this level is fine.

You dont neccessarily learn by playing at lower level....you just lose less
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: Roscopiko on January 05, 2010, 10:08:25 AM
You dont neccessarily learn by playing at lower level....you just lose less


Have to 100% disagree with that.  These games (but a million times more so the turbo versions) are basically just ICM games where everyone will reach the push/fold stage very quickly so you are basically playing 100% mathematical game, playing "poker" as some would like to play has no place here. 

Playing at lower levels you will see and be able to take advantage of more mistakes and be more rewarded (over time and volume) for improving your shoving/calling ranges and you defo dont want to be playing better players in these games who can play 100% correctly and unexploitably imo.
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: Swinebag on January 05, 2010, 10:51:23 AM

You dont neccessarily learn by playing at lower level....you just lose less


Have to 100% disagree with that.  These games (but a million times more so the turbo versions) are basically just ICM games where everyone will reach the push/fold stage very quickly so you are basically playing 100% mathematical game, playing "poker" as some would like to play has no place here. 

Playing at lower levels you will see and be able to take advantage of more mistakes and be more rewarded (over time and volume) for improving your shoving/calling ranges and you defo dont want to be playing better players in these games who can play 100% correctly and unexploitably imo.


good point again, but a lot of poor players play at the $24 level (albeit less) as well. But you are right that people should learn the maths if they want to be profitable. By losing at this level and posting HHs then OP will improve that way also
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: Roscopiko on January 05, 2010, 11:50:33 AM

good point again, but a lot of poor players play at the $24 level (albeit less) as well. But you are right that people should learn the maths if they want to be profitable. By losing at this level and posting HHs then OP will improve that way also


True enough albeit much more expensive lessons.  I just find it baffling when people play up the levels to avoid the gamblers and play "proper" poker as in these games thats where your profits are defo coming from.

call it a draw? :)
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: Claw75 on January 05, 2010, 12:37:10 PM
I"m getting my chips in here unless there"s been a 3 bet by the time it gets to me, and maybe even then. You"ve mentioned that the AK vs 64 hand cost you over half your stack, but that you were medium stacked then, which makes me think average stack is about 10bbs?  If that"s the case getting them in first isn"t going to be easy, so I shove here with a lot worse than 66 too.
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: JamieCarra on January 05, 2010, 13:07:32 PM

is there such a thing as a intuitive fold in this position? ignoring the math to go with your gut?



Only if you"re Phil Hellmuth and can guarantee you"re going to get AA before the blinds go through you.....  ::)
Title: Re: final table short stacked folded 66 views please.
Post by: AMRN on January 05, 2010, 13:09:18 PM


is there such a thing as a intuitive fold in this position? ignoring the math to go with your gut?



No.


FYP