Home / Community / Forum / Poker Education / Texas Hold'Em Tournament Section (MTTs & STTs) /

Calling a 3-bet Shove from a Shorter Stack - Good Idea? Too Reckless? Pt 2.

Old
Default
Calling a 3-bet Shove from a Shorter Stack - Good Idea? Too Reckless? Pt 2. - Fri Sep 13, 2013, 11:22 PM
(#1)
TrustySam's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,291
BronzeStar
Here's another spot where a villain with a shorter stack went all-in, and I wasn't sure whether to call or fold. Do people like a call or a fold in this sort of spot?


Here were the villain's HUD stats and some notes I'd made:



JKs - raised into an utg limper, 6bbs
AKo - squeeze shoved with 30bbs into 3 limpers and showed it





Thanks for the help!
 
Old
Default
Sat Sep 14, 2013, 02:39 AM
(#2)
GamblingProp's Avatar
Since: Jan 2013
Posts: 714
He seems loose enough to make the call profitable.
Snap call.
 
Old
Default
Sat Sep 14, 2013, 04:19 AM
(#3)
birdayy's Avatar
Since: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,179
99 is pretty strong vs a wide 20bb shove even with the positions.

I'd call.
 
Old
Default
Sat Sep 14, 2013, 05:57 AM
(#4)
Ovalman's Avatar
Since: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,778
I disagree.

An UTG reshove from a LAG is still usually strong and I'd take note of his 3 bet stat which is 0%. How many hands have you got on him?

I'd say he's reshoving 88+, ATo so I'd err on folding here.


Bracelet Winner
 
Old
Default
Sat Sep 14, 2013, 07:56 AM
(#5)
TrustySam's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,291
BronzeStar
Oh ... guess this hand is mostly a ranging issue, isn't it? Thought it would be more a question of stack sizes, but maybe not.

And with the ranging, maybe it's sort of hard to know? I remember hearing in like the one tourney vid I've watched that we're supposed to resteal with AQ+, 99+. But a lot of people at the entry levels know about the top 10 starting hands, and get really excited to get AJ+, 88+. so I put the villain on that, and folded, but he showed his hand again, so here's the rest of the hand:




Oh, it's not showing - he had 77. Guess maybe he was loose enough that it might have been okay to call? Although, on the other hand, maybe 77 was at the bottom of his range, in which case it would be a close fold? Although with the bigger stack, maybe that might have been reason to make it more of a close call?

Seems pretty close if there's mixed opinions - maybe this hand is more of one of those that could be played several different ways? Interesting to hear everybody's thoughts - thanks for stopping by!!
 
Old
Default
Sat Sep 14, 2013, 08:03 AM
(#6)
Ovalman's Avatar
Since: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,778
I think I was pretty close but 77 and 88 only make up a small part of his reshoving range.

Now you've given this info you could maybe put most if not all pocket pairs into his re-shoves (in this spot).

In many cases we're flipping against him but only some where we're 4/1 ahead or 4/1 behind. It's a pretty close call TBH and definitely need more info on him.


Bracelet Winner
 
Old
Default
Sat Sep 14, 2013, 08:21 AM
(#7)
TrustySam's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,291
BronzeStar
Yeah, pretty close - wish I had more info to know if he'd have shoved with other pocket pairs too ... maybe ...
 
Old
Default
Sat Sep 14, 2013, 08:58 AM
(#8)
Profess Awe's Avatar
Since: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,579
Without running ranges, I would typically fold in this spot. But if it was we open button and villain is in blinds I snap call. so there is this position factor that Birdaay mentions which is important and ofcourse related to ranging.

Worth bearing in mind that I am a wide shipper with 20+ bigs but 77 would likely be around bottom of my range here, so your 99 is often in bad shape here.
 
Old
Default
Sat Sep 14, 2013, 02:03 PM
(#9)
TheLangolier's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 13,512
(Head Trainer)
Hi all,

I think this spot is pretty close tbh, but I would also fold it.

The sample size (22 hands) is really small, but here's what I take from the info given... He seems to be loose (he has voluntarily played 10 of those hands after all), not sure about how aggressive he actually is preflop (he's raised 6 of those 10, which is not outrageous for a 6-max event... additionally 2 of those 6 spots we know were totally standard based on the notes Sam has made... neither are spots that would qualify the villain as a LAG imo... As an aside, nice job with the notes Sam! ) The 3B of 0% I can't give much weight too... it's only 22 hands and the notes indicate a lot of limping possibly, so this is one we need to look at the pop up for sample size as it may be quite small. If the 0% says (0/9) then we can start to suspect he's not an aggressive 3-bettor. If it says (0/1) then we really can't make any inference yet.

This next bit is a little bit of a leap, but it's something I look at. He has entered pots liberally, but his AF is low. When you see lots of flops with marginal hands, you flop a lot of medium strength, weak strength, and air holdings... your range on the flop is weighted towards weak holdings. When such a player's AF is high, that means they necessarily must be bluffing a lot. When it's low, it means they're playing those weaker holdings more true to form and not bluffing a lot. Again this is a stretch here because the sample is so small yet, but it's a mild indicator that he may not be a big bluffer in general, which if it's the case, he is not likely to 3B light too much either.

So the situation here is he's facing an UTG raise from Sam (who I assume he has not observed doing anything wild in their 22 hands together), and he is 3b jamming a 26bb stack over it. I would expect this range to be largely mid pairs+, AJs+, AQo+. If we make the pairs 77+ then we are a 55-45 dog to that range. With the price we're getting we need 44% equity to break even. So in terms of chip EV it is super close. (Change the pairs to 88+ and we drop to 42%... change it to 66+ and we increase to 47.5%).

So since it's so close vs. his range here, I would look to other considerations. We can afford to take the stack hit if we lose, we'd still have 32bb's left which is enough to work with... that being said, we would lose the table chip lead as well, while giving it to a loose player on our left and perhaps creating a situation where he feels empowered or confident at the same time. It's a pretty big blow to our favorable table dynamic. Right now we are the chip leader at a table of passive/weak players, a dream scenario. If we call and bust him, that dream scenario doesn't change UNLESS it causes the table to be broken (which is possible). If we fold that scenario doesn't change. If we call and lose, it changes drastically. I prefer to preserve this juicy situation as long as it's not leading to large EV error, which by my best guess above, it's not.

Again, it's close, no big quibbles with those who prefer to call off here. If the villain where a known wide 3-bettor such that we could add in all pocket pairs, more flip combos like AT/KJ/etc, and some garbage resteals like Q2s, then it's a snap call imo (now folding IS a large EV error). If he were shorter than 26bb's deep, like under 20, I'd call.


Head Live Trainer
Check out my Videos

4 Time Bracelet Winner



 
Old
Default
Sat Sep 14, 2013, 04:35 PM
(#10)
TrustySam's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,291
BronzeStar
Wow, such detailed help - thanks so much Dave!!

The villain's pop-up said he was 0/3 with the 3-bets - guess the AK didn't count as a 3-bet because everybody had limped in?

The analysis of his AF and how it means he's probably honest is great - guess that's what I was thinking when he showed us all his AK, that he seemed like more of an honest player?

And the poker-stoving to see what a difference a 66+ vs 88+ range makes is pretty eye-opening.

Ahhh ... forgot to apply what you *just* told me about in the last hand - about thinking about like, what if I call and win? What if I call and lose? What if I fold? And the table dynamics thingie - it sure seems to be a lot easier to pick up chips as the big stack than as the little. Think I'm *starting* to get a better feel for stack considerations, after getting to see the types of things Dave thinks about when faced with a call/fold decision Think it's going to take a more practice to remember to think about more than just ranges when it comes to playing tourneys - and getting help from HA too

Lots to think about and remember - thanks Dave, and thanks everybody for sharing your thoughts - lots of other interesting factors, like table position
 
Old
Default
Sat Sep 14, 2013, 08:58 PM
(#11)
TheLangolier's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 13,512
(Head Trainer)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrustySam View Post
guess the AK didn't count as a 3-bet because everybody had limped in?
Right, he has to be facing a raise in order for it to be a 3-bet. His raise over the limpers was only the 2nd bet.


Head Live Trainer
Check out my Videos

4 Time Bracelet Winner



 
Old
Default
Mon Sep 16, 2013, 03:33 PM
(#12)
TrustySam's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,291
BronzeStar
Okay, cool - thanks again Dave for all the help!!


NOTES:

Stack management - when entertaining the idea of doing a big AIPF, think first about what our stack'll be like (1) if we call and win, (2) if we call and lose, (3) if we just fold. And then when we're thinking about stacks, consider the result in two ways:

1. In terms of how big/small our stack'll be relative to the other stacks at the table, and
2. In terms of bbs - since it seems like we need 35-40bbs to be able to steal blinds and do resteals, etc?
 

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