Home / Community / Forum / Poker Education / Poker Education & Beginners Questions / Old Hand Analysis Section /

$109 Sunday Kickoff - Blind-on-Blind, 41BB Effective, 3Bet Shove by Active Player

 
Old
Default
$109 Sunday Kickoff - Blind-on-Blind, 41BB Effective, 3Bet Shove by Active Player - Mon Jun 06, 2011, 08:32 AM
(#1)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168
At this stage in the tournament, I had a little over an average stack. About a third of the field had been eliminated. Over 14 hands, the villain was running 29/29/40. What would you have done?

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, 109 Tournament, 75/150 Blinds 15 Ante (8 handed) - PokerStars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

CO (t6340)
Button (t4440)
Panicky (SB) (t7770)
BB (t6165)
UTG (t4464)
UTG+1 (t8705)
MP1 (t9929)
MP2 (t5461)

Preflop: Panicky is SB with 6, 6
6 folds, Panicky bets t375, BB raises to t6150 (All-In), Panicky ???
 
Old
Default
?? - Mon Jun 06, 2011, 08:40 AM
(#2)
monkeyskunk4's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,818
Villain is obv. pretty loose- yet even if he is making a move- at best you are racing against atleast 1 overcard- probably 2- i dont think im putting what is essentially my tourney life on the line with 66 there- so i fold and wait for him to do same again - when i have a premium hand-- 10 10+....

Last edited by monkeyskunk4; Mon Jun 06, 2011 at 08:42 AM..
 
Old
Default
Mon Jun 06, 2011, 10:15 AM
(#3)
joery1's Avatar
Since: Feb 2011
Posts: 5
I would do the same as monkeyskunk4. Pocket 6 are not strong enough for going all-in against an active player and wait for a better hand.
 
Old
Default
Mon Jun 06, 2011, 10:38 AM
(#4)
JWK24's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 24,857
(Super-Moderator)
BronzeStar
I think it's too early to call a shove with a low pair. You may be ahead, but are probably dominated by an overpair or at least are in a race against a big A.

With that many BB's left in your stack, you can find a better situation to get your chips into.

Later in a tourney when you don't have so many BB's left, if you think they have 2 overcards, it's ok to play it... but I think it's too early to put that many BB's at risk on at best a coin-flip.
 
Old
Default
Mon Jun 06, 2011, 12:02 PM
(#5)
brkn80's Avatar
Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 440
He probably put you on a steal.Jammed on you and put you to the test.Folding is the right thing at this point.
Personally I would limp in here,and call a raise of up to 3BB and play fit or fold on the flop.
 
Old
Default
Mon Jun 06, 2011, 01:05 PM
(#6)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168
First off, here are the thoughts I had in my head at the time:

66 is too weak to fold here. I also think it's too weak to limp. On 50BB, I'm opening any pocket pair from any position, under most circumstances. I'm constantly looking for +EV ways to add chips to my stack, because I think it's the only way to ever set myself up to have a good run at the top of the leaderboard. In order to add those chips to my stack, I constantly need to be putting them at risk. Nobody's going to fold their chips to me if I don't bet, and nobody is going to make bad calls and raises if I don't bet either. So, that's why I opened.

As soon as I opened, I took a closer look at the villain's stats. This was the first time he and I had been heads-up, and I had noticed that he had been very active at the table up to this point, even in multi-way pots. I hadn't realized that he had 29/29/40 stats, though. When I saw them, I thought to myself, this guy's never folding here. I was pretty certain that he was raising me most of the time. When I thought for a second about what he might raise me with, I decided that Ax, Kx, probably Q2s+, and all pocket pairs would raise me here. He might actually jam me with ATC. Against that range, I'll never have more than 65% equity, but I will always be a favourite to win the hand. By that logic, folding is never the highest EV play. When he jammed me, I actually snap-called.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JWK24 View Post
You may be ahead, but are probably dominated by an overpair or at least are in a race against a big A. With that many BB's left in your stack, you can find a better situation to get your chips into.
Given that we were heads-up, the statement that I was probably against a higher ace or pair would only be true against a nit. This guy was not a nit. This is a very scared money assumption to make against somebody with 29/29/40 stats. Granted, my sample size is small and these may not be his true stats, but they're highly suggestive that this guy will be jamming me wide.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JWK24 View Post
but I think it's too early to put that many BB's at risk on at best a coin-flip.
This is one of the reasons that I posted this hand. I don't know if this is a theoretically sound assumption, but I've heard that taking marginal +EV plays for all of one's chips when not in the late stages is a questionable practice. If there's a theoretical reason for this, I'd like to know it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brkn80 View Post
Personally I would limp in here,and call a raise of up to 3BB and play fit or fold on the flop.
I think that heads-up play with a pocket pair requires more aggression than that. The villain will have a hand that either flips with me, or is better than mine, roughly 37% of the time. I'll be the one with the EV edge over 96% of the time. I can see an arguement for wanting to keep the pot small, because this guy is crazy, but he should be folding here, or losing small pots here, a lot of the time. I don't think I should have to fold a premium heads-up hand just to avoid playing a big pot.

That basically sums up my thoughts for this hand. I still think calling was the correct play, at least with respect to chip EV. But I still think it was questionable. Am I'm not totally comfortable with some of the theoretical concepts involved (e.g. the soundness of getting 41BB in preflop on a non-lock hand). If anyone sees holes in my arguement, please point them out.
 
Old
Default
?? - Mon Jun 06, 2011, 01:33 PM
(#7)
monkeyskunk4's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,818
No ill will intended here PP- yet- i fail to see the logic in calling in this spot-- yet folding aces on a J hi board in the other thread- makes no sense to me at all--absolutely none-

in one instance - you are calling for what is essentially your tourney life- on at best a coin flip- and in the other- you are folding when most likely ahead in a cash game- for a really nice pot???????????????

Last edited by monkeyskunk4; Mon Jun 06, 2011 at 01:44 PM..
 
Old
Default
Mon Jun 06, 2011, 01:46 PM
(#8)
Sandtrap777's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,310
Just my 2 cents Panicky

I think that your bet was to small, a 2.5 bet tells me, he just wants to see the flop, so I'll scare him away by going all in.
I would of made a bigger bet, about 7x would scare him away or he would call, but if he goes all in then I fold.
On his all in, ask yourself, would I of made an all in bet instead of the $350, if not, than why now and if yes than why not earlier

But like the others have said, after the initial bet and the all in, I would of folded, still to early in the tournament

 
Old
Default
Mon Jun 06, 2011, 01:49 PM
(#9)
TheLangolier's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 13,517
(Head Trainer)
This is a fold for me tbh.

Now, I will say if the guy is shoving any 2, then folding would be horrible and it's a call. You're almost a 2-1 favorite over a range of any 2 and that is way too big an edge to pass up. I'm not good enough to pass up that big an edge.

But my quibble Panicky is with the ranging. 14 hands is meaningless. The guy has opened for a raise 4 out of 14 times, that isn't conclusive enough to tell you anything. He's 3b pre 40% which over this sample size is probably 2 times out of 5 opportunities. Initial impressions are that he's a bit LAGgy, but the sample size is small enough that we need to take that with a large grain of salt.

There is absolutely no way he's shoving any 2. If you assign him a 30% range you're almost a dead even coin flip. 20% and you're an equity underdog. And in this structure which (I think) is a pretty good tournament structure, I'm not looking to stack off this deep on a small dog coinflip.

Also, the 2 times that he 3b an open raiser, was it an overbet shove? We just don't have any evidence that he's making this play wide. In fact most weaker players do stupid overbets like this with good hands that are strong enough to 3b but they don't want to have to play post flop like AK, 99-JJ. Against that type of range you're almost a 2-1 dog.

So ultimately I don't like the call, but I think your conceptualization is good, it's a disagreement over ranging.

Dave
 
Old
Default
Mon Jun 06, 2011, 02:00 PM
(#10)
topthecat's Avatar
Since: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,962
Very good advice Sandtrap,

I know a lot go for this 2.25 raise carry on, but if you are the small blind with only the big blind to act I feel a higher raise or shove is the right move.

TC

I would not be playing the 6s either btw
 
Old
Default
Mon Jun 06, 2011, 02:21 PM
(#11)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168
Thanks for the additional comments, guys. In response to Dave, this was his first overbet shove, unless I missed one (pretty sure I would have noticed that). I know 14 hands is a weak sample, but even over 14 hands, players rarely show the level of activity that this guy did. These were the makings of semi-LAG getting hit with the deck-type stats, or maniac stats. I can't argue that trying to exploit him based on his apparent 3betting range is risky because I really don't have a lot of info yet, but there were two extra reasons that made me inclined to call:

1) This was his first heads-up 3bet. The rest were in multi-way pots, which made his likelihood to 3bet here way more likely. If he's willing to fight with a group, he's definitely going to throw punches at only one opponent who is OOP with a wide opening range.

2) He overbet-shoved. I actually took this as a sign of weakness, because it told me that he didn't want to think about the hand anymore. There is no reason whatsoever to 3bet shove the top of his range here, unless he is leveling me. It's such a non-standard play, that from a guy who is active to begin with, it looks like a weak shove. Edit: Saying that 99-JJ, AK-type hands would do this makes sense, but heads-up, I assumed that his range was significantly wider than that, i.e. as low as 22 and a whole lot of unpaired cards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandtrap777 View Post
On his all in, ask yourself, would I of made an all in bet instead of the $350, if not, than why now and if yes than why not earlier
I found this comment very interesting, because the answer is technically yes. I believe that open shoving 66 on my SB would have been an equilibrium play. The reason I didn't was because I think I would have folded out worse hands that might give me action, and opening for a regular amount would have more value.

Last edited by PanickyPoker; Mon Jun 06, 2011 at 08:31 PM..
 
Old
Default
Mon Jun 06, 2011, 06:29 PM
(#12)
TrustySam's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,291
BronzeStar
I think I know what you're getting at - like, the very hands people are only *supposed* to be willing to put at risk are hands like QQ-AA. And they're the very hands this person so obviously isn't going to waste shoving to win like 600 chips.

And it's the middle of the tournament, and it's starting to be a real grind trying to find spots to get ahead. So here comes this person, and they're willing to stack off, and they could be doing it with who knows what - possibly something where they're very behind.

So it's kind of frustrating to get a pretty good hand, and get it down to head-to-head against somebody who's a bit reckless, and then have to pass on the opportunity. Like I guess the only hands to be worried about would be then 77 to JJ. They could have 22 to 55. Everything else would likely be a coin flip, or better (like Arag).

Maybe one way to look at the situation might be, that if they were doing this with 55 and they got you to fold, they're probably going to get even more careless and try it again with even less. And then you could set them up with something even better, and get your 300+ chips back and then some - possibly the entire stack!

And if they don't do it again, then maybe that'll be a sign that they were playing 88 to even JJ that way and you dodged a bullet? And if they don't do it again, and they're a little tighter and less reckless than initially thought, then maybe there's that opportunity to steal the chips back in the subsequent orbits by continuing to keep up the pressure?

Last edited by TrustySam; Mon Jun 06, 2011 at 06:33 PM..
 
Old
Default
Mon Jun 06, 2011, 07:39 PM
(#13)
ahar010's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 614
I think raising 66 from SB vs this guy is fine. But if you think you're getting a call most of the time to a 2.5x raise you probably need to make it a bit bigger to discourage the call. I wouldn't want to play OOP with pocket 6s against a LAGgy player mid tounament. But I'm a nit.


Quote:
Originally Posted by PanickyPoker View Post
That basically sums up my thoughts for this hand. I still think calling was the correct play, at least with respect to chip EV. But I still think it was questionable. Am I'm not totally comfortable with some of the theoretical concepts involved (e.g. the soundness of getting 41BB in preflop on a non-lock hand). If anyone sees holes in my arguement, please point them out.
I definately don't call the allin here though. If your stacks weren't so large and even, you could take a shot here with your read.

Even if you are a marginal favourite (50 - 54% would be around my guess) in chip EV it's probably not +EV in $EV. My reason relates to the concepts behind ICM (which you obvioulsy can't exactly apply in this case). 80BBs is not twice as valuable in terms of final expectation as 40BBs. If you think 40BBs here might have a final expectation of $150 then 80BBs is probably only $275 or something.

So your descision becomes fold and take 100% chance of keeping you $150 expected otucome. Or call and have a 50%-54% chance at a $275 expected outcome.

Anytime two players are allin against one another, they give up a small amount of $EV to everyone else left in the tournament.

An cleaner example, If each player has $50 in expected value and equal stacks. The winner will get $95 in value and $5 in value goes to everyone else. So to increase your $EV you need a better than 53% edge.

53% * $95 = $50.35

These numbers are all just ball park estimates, they are just meant to explain the concept.

Last edited by ahar010; Mon Jun 06, 2011 at 07:41 PM..
 
Old
Default
Mon Jun 06, 2011, 09:01 PM
(#14)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrustySam View Post
So it's kind of frustrating to get a pretty good hand, and get it down to head-to-head against somebody who's a bit reckless, and then have to pass on the opportunity. Like I guess the only hands to be worried about would be then 77 to JJ. They could have 22 to 55. Everything else would likely be a coin flip, or better (like Arag).

Maybe one way to look at the situation might be, that if they were doing this with 55 and they got you to fold, they're probably going to get even more careless and try it again with even less. And then you could set them up with something even better, and get your 300+ chips back and then some - possibly the entire stack!
I like these paragraphs. The first is pretty insightful and more or less reflects my initial thoughts in the hand. The second argues for folding for metagame considerations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ahar010 View Post
Even if you are a marginal favourite (50 - 54% would be around my guess) in chip EV it's probably not +EV in $EV. My reason relates to the concepts behind ICM (which you obvioulsy can't exactly apply in this case).
My understanding of ICM is probably significantly less than yours, but as I understand it, there's virtually no difference between the impact on cEV and the impact on $EV. I've heard that as a general rule, you don't have to consider ICM at all until you get near the final table (I'm not sure if there are any ICM considerations near the bubble; suffice it to say, I was near neither in this hand). Anyway, my estimate of this guy's strongest range in this spot had me as roughly a 54% favourite to win the hand in a preflop all-in confrontation, so I think I was good there.
 
Old
Default
Mon Jun 06, 2011, 09:22 PM
(#15)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLangolier View Post
In fact most weaker players do stupid overbets like this with good hands that are strong enough to 3b but they don't want to have to play post flop like AK, 99-JJ. Against that type of range you're almost a 2-1 dog.
Now that I think about it, this is actually a strong arguement to call. If he'd do this with AK and pairs below JJ that fall within his range more often than he would with the top end of his pocket pair range, that enormously adds to my equity because I can cut hands from the bottom of his range. He'd only need to be shoving the (including QQ+) range that is 16% of hands, less QQ+, in order for my equity to be over 50%. With QQ+, he needs to be shoving 24% of hands. And that's just for me to be a favourite. I haven't even done pot odds calculations yet.

I think the biggest thing that seperates all of you who think that this is a fold from me, who still thinks this is a call, is an emphasis on survival. Maybe I'm wrong and you guys think that this spot is -EV. I'm only guessing the spot is +EV. At the very worst, it should be marginally bad. But at this stage of an MTT, I have 100% of my sights set on chip accumulation, and survival kicks in later when money's actually in sight. That's because I play under the impression that shying away from +cEV spots early in MTT's is usually just as (if not more) detrimental to your ROI as it is to your stack. If there is a theoretical concept that dictates otherwise, I'd love to hear it.
 
Old
Default
Mon Jun 06, 2011, 11:25 PM
(#16)
TrustySam's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,291
BronzeStar
JD made an argument in favor of taking more risks based on the monetary consideration - like he pointed out that there's more money to be made by playing a tournament twice and doing a coin flip in each game, where a loss in one will bust you out, but a win in the other will allow you to go farther into the money. And in doing that, he showed that there's oftentimes more money to be made that way than by making the money both times, but just barely.

Actually I think it might have been with respect to multi-way pots (on the bubble) rather than coin flips, but in terms of the concept of risk-taking to maximize profit, that idea would seem like it might apply?
 
Old
Default
Tue Jun 07, 2011, 04:52 AM
(#17)
jf70's Avatar
Since: Feb 2009
Posts: 88
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanickyPoker View Post
Now that I think about it, this is actually a strong arguement to call. If he'd do this with AK and pairs below JJ that fall within his range more often than he would with the top end of his pocket pair range, that enormously adds to my equity because I can cut hands from the bottom of his range. He'd only need to be shoving the (including QQ+) range that is 16% of hands, less QQ+, in order for my equity to be over 50%. With QQ+, he needs to be shoving 24% of hands. And that's just for me to be a favourite. I haven't even done pot odds calculations yet.

I think the biggest thing that seperates all of you who think that this is a fold from me, who still thinks this is a call, is an emphasis on survival. Maybe I'm wrong and you guys think that this spot is -EV. I'm only guessing the spot is +EV. At the very worst, it should be marginally bad. But at this stage of an MTT, I have 100% of my sights set on chip accumulation, and survival kicks in later when money's actually in sight. That's because I play under the impression that shying away from +cEV spots early in MTT's is usually just as (if not more) detrimental to your ROI as it is to your stack. If there is a theoretical concept that dictates otherwise, I'd love to hear it.
Just my two cents - when it comes to an MTT,+cEV isn't all that important. Imagine you have JJ three times in a row, and all three times you go all in against AKs. Each time you have something like a 56% chance of winning, so +cEV, particularly if the blinds are high. But the probability that you win all three hands is only 18%. If you go all in on each hand, and are called by AKs from a larger stack each time, you're almost bound to lose.
So 66 is really a much better early-tourney than late-tourney hand. Early on you can afford to make speculative preflop calls and have your set pay off; late, your best odds (unless an idiot moves with 22-66) are going to be around 50%. In the long run, in an MTT, that's simply not acceptable. And your sample on the guy was tiny, you shouldn't be making any real decisions based on that!!

EDIT (a few more thoughts after re-reading the thread): Late in the tournament it makes sense to go all with 66 and other pseudo-strong hands because there's very little freedom for post-flop play. The blinds get prohibitively high; it no longer makes sense to call in late position with marginal hands like 9Ts or 33, knowing these can pay off very well later on. As the tournament progresses, blinds move faster than stacks, so it becomes increasingly a question of preflop play, until you get to the final stages where you start getting to a shove/fold situation (or if your stack gets small). But most players assume they are better than average players, and playing post-flop is where you can outwit your opponent, profit off donks who will go all in on top pair with low kicker. This may be anecdotal, but Phil Ivey apparently folded a straight flush once, claiming there would "be better opportunities to gain chips later on". He's right. The higher the tournament buy-in the slower the levels and the larger the starting stacks: leaving more time for post-flop play. That's where good players distinguish themselves, where the effects of luck are eliminated as far as possible. Shoving in this position is like accepting that your best means of winning chips is by shoving with marginal advantages preflop, and the more you expose yourself to the risk of losing all your chips, the less likely you are to make it to the top.

Last edited by jf70; Tue Jun 07, 2011 at 11:46 AM..
 
Old
Default
?? - Tue Jun 07, 2011, 12:06 PM
(#18)
monkeyskunk4's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,818
Hey PP-- ive read this several times- and i get the feeling you believe this guy was just shuvvin ATC- and making a stand -- like-- Dont raise my BB - in a blind vs. blind scenario-- which could certainly justify a call-- until i look at the numbers- with 66 you are dominating very few hands-- 55 44 33 22 65 64 63 62 54 53 52 43 42 32 -- so tourney life on the line (almost- ude be crippled) with over 150 starting hands that either dominate you- or at best you are flipping-- am i wrong here- or is this an auto fold--

if my assumption is correct- and the guy was doing as i said above-- being macho-- isnt this a great note to make on that player-- and set him up next time the situation arises-- when you have premium holdings?- and stack him-? me thinks the 375- which is less than 5% of ure stack - was a worthy investment here- to learn this info-- yet perhaps i am wrong--- thoughts?

Last edited by monkeyskunk4; Tue Jun 07, 2011 at 12:56 PM..
 
Old
Default
Tue Jun 07, 2011, 01:41 PM
(#19)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168
@monk - Calling w/ 66 here is mathematically correct in a vaccuum if this guy is 3betting with ATC, with 40% of hands, with 24% of hands, or with 16% of hands if he'd 3bet smaller or just flat call with QQ+. Mathematcally correct plays are ones that earn me chips in the long run, and that's all I was concerned with at the time. I don't wait for premium hands to enter a hand. I pick much weaker hands and simply try to play them well.

@jf70 - That's an interesting arguement. Here's the counterarguement: for every time I bust for all of my chips in this situation, there's roughly one other time in which I double up, which roughly doubles my chances of cashing (I think), and my chances of winning the tournament. Those should, to some extent, balance the times I lose, if I'm any good as an MTT player.

Alright, so I think I've boiled this call down to three criteria for it to be +$EV:

1) The call must be +cEV (I think it was)
2) My tracked stats over 14 hands need to be accurate enough for me to guess that my call was +cEV (harder to determine this)
3) Calling off most of my stack here in a +cEV spot must be theoretically sound.

I'm going to do some searching for information on 3). So far, that hasn't been answered conclusively, and I kinda want an answer for that.
 
Old
Default
?? - Tue Jun 07, 2011, 02:00 PM
(#20)
monkeyskunk4's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,818
Hey pp-- but its not a vaccuum - when tourney life on the line- i will leave it-- yet i feel -- you didnt look at the math i described above-- you are dominating only 10% of all starting hands-- gl man-- monk---
now this is just a a thought-- so dont hell on me-- perhaps the volume of cash play- versus tournament play is skewing your call/fold range??

especially when you consider that in that other thread- you proposed to fold AA on a J high board --some how knowing the hero was against a set------- to a push-- food 4 thot only man-- you contribute to this forum in a way that no one else does-- hope you run good-- monk...

Last edited by monkeyskunk4; Tue Jun 07, 2011 at 02:08 PM..
 

Getting PokerStars is easy: download and install the PokerStars game software, create your free player account, and validate your email address. Clicking on the download poker button will lead to the installation of compatible poker software on your PC of 51.7 MB, which will enable you to register and play poker on the PokerStars platform. To uninstall PokerStars use the Windows uninstaller: click Start > Control Panel and then select Add or Remove programs > Select PokerStars and click Uninstall or Remove.

Copyright (c) PokerSchoolOnline.com. All rights reserved, Rational Group, Douglas Bay Complex, King Edward Road, Onchan, Isle of Man, IM3 1DZ. You can email us on support@pokerschoolonline.com