Poker Content
DanFan
FTOPS event. I'm not sure I buy his arguments as to how he played the hand
below.
In this particular hand, play was near the bubble. Blinds were 800/1600,
with a 200 ante, so Shannon's M was about 9.
The table was six-handed, and it folded to Shannon in the small blind. He
had $34K in his stack, the big blind had $114K. Shannon shoved with 3-3
and was called with A-J offsuit. Shannon's pair held up to win.
Shannon explained that he shoved with 21BBs because:
A) This has become a standard move as online poker has become more
aggressive
B) Raising then folding would just be dumb, and
C) His hand was "strong enough that it's not a spew to just slam it all in
there."
I get that Shannon had a made hand, but he was flipping a coin against
what was almost certainly two over cards. Given the 3:1 ratio between his
stack and the big blind, he should've known that the big blind knows his
own options are to 1) fold to any raise, or 2) be willing to play for
Shannon's whole stack.
If Shannon raises around three BBs, there's no re-raise the big blind can
make pre-flop where he won't be committing himself if Shannon moves in.
Therefore, Shannon in fact could have raised to, say, $4.5K and then
folded if the big blind comes over the top, since he knows the big blind
won't do this without a legitimate hand given their stack sizes.
You might want to counter argue that you can't always fold to a big stack
shove, especially on the bubble with a made hand, but this was a $1K
buy-in tournament online, and this deep into the tournament there probably
aren't a lot of donks hanging around. Plus, if you consider yourself to be
an above-average player (which Shannon is), why would you be willing to
get all of your chips in with a coin flip? I think raising and folding
here would have been a perfectly reasonable play.
DanFan
______________________________________________________________________�
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
Patti Beadles
Raising less invites your opponent to come over the top, and you
can't call. The BB knows you can't call, so he's going to jam with
a very wide variety of hands. Getting your chips in first is huge.
By getting his chips in first, he's only "flipping a coin against
what was almost certainly two over cards" in the rare cases when
he gets called. You seem to be assuming that he will always get
called, but in reality that will happen less than 10% of the time.
I don't think I would have called AJ from the BB there.
-Patti
--
Patti Beadles, Oakland, CA |
pattib~pattib.org | All religions are equally
http://www.pattib.org/ | ludicrous, and should be ridiculed
http://stopshootingauto.com | as often as possible. C. Bond
Raider Fan
> Shannon Shorr was writing on his blog about his recent play in the $1K
> FTOPS event. I'm not sure I buy his arguments as to how he played the hand
> below.
>
> In this particular hand, play was near the bubble. Blinds were 800/1600,
> with a 200 ante, so Shannon's M was about 9.
>
> The table was six-handed, and it folded to Shannon in the small blind. He
> had $34K in his stack, the big blind had $114K. Shannon shoved with 3-3
> and was called with A-J offsuit. Shannon's pair held up to win.
>
> Shannon explained that he shoved with 21BBs because:
>
> A) This has become a standard move as online poker has become more
> aggressive
> B) Raising then folding would just be dumb, and
> C) His hand was "strong enough that it's not a spew to just slam it all in
> there."
>
> I get that Shannon had a made hand, but he was flipping a coin against
> what was almost certainly two over cards.
He doesn't expect a call. If he gets one, he's on a coin flip. It's a
great play.
"This has got to be some sports-related crap, that's all Raiderfan gives a
fuck about." -- Paul Popinjay 2/27/09
------�
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
DanFan
Interesting. Why would you have folded AJo there? Because you want to
avoid a coinflip yourself for 1/3 of your stack?
DanFan
_____________________________________________________________________�
DanFan
You think Shorr doesn't expect a call because it would be for 1/3 of the
BB's stack and that's too much to risk on the bubble?
Why is it a great move for a player of Shorr's caliber to increase his
stack by 10% (by stealing the blinds and antes) vs. busting with a
coinflip hand? Aren't there many better places where he could get it all
in preflop as even a 60-40 favorite?
DanFan
MrBookworm
> what was almost certainly two over cards. Given the 3:1 ratio between his
> stack and the big blind, he should've known that the big blind knows his
> own options are to 1) fold to any raise, or 2) be willing to play for
> Shannon's whole stack.
>
> If Shannon raises around three BBs, there's no re-raise the big blind can
> make pre-flop where he won't be committing himself if Shannon moves in.
> Therefore, Shannon in fact could have raised to, say, $4.5K and then
> folded if the big blind comes over the top, since he knows the big blind
> won't do this without a legitimate hand given their stack sizes.
I think raising and then folding is silly. Pushing all-in is definitely
the +EV move here. Shannon's stack is large enough that he has lots of
fold equity by making this move. Putting in 15% of your stack and then
folding when you have an M of less than 9 is not optimal. I would make
this shove with a huge range of hands including JTs and other drawing
hands. The fold equity is just too great to not push in this spot.
> You might want to counter argue that you can't always fold to a big stack
> shove, especially on the bubble with a made hand, but this was a $1K
> buy-in tournament online, and this deep into the tournament there probably
> aren't a lot of donks hanging around. Plus, if you consider yourself to be
> an above-average player (which Shannon is), why would you be willing to
> get all of your chips in with a coin flip? I think raising and folding
> here would have been a perfectly reasonable play.
When an above average player has an M of 9 then the correct play is to
shove. I will gladly take the coin flip plus the fold equity in shoving.
There are even hands that beat me that will fold to a shove such as 44-77
or 89s. Why would I want to have to make a decision if the BB comes over
the top against me? Stop and go is another option but only if I have a
read that the BB will only call a standard raise.
Dean
--
"You think that's bad? Sometimes I think about RGP when I'm having sex."
- Paul Popinjay 3/16/2009
-----�
chandler
I don't mind the shove here. I'd prefer to be doing it against a stack
closer in size to my own, so it is their tournament life on the line.
Calling with AJ is easier because of the stack sizes. 9 times out of ten
you get an instafold, which is what you want. With the BBs stack size I
will come over the top of a standard raise with a lot more hands than I
will call a shove with. If BB comes over the top of the raise from SB he
has to fold. I think I even prefer a limp to a standard raise here.
Chandler
MrBookworm
> avoid a coinflip yourself for 1/3 of your stack?
Because I am either flipping coins for 1/3rd of my stack or getting it in
as a 30% dog. Here is some things to think about:
1. AJo sucks ass, though I would push with it from the SB in this
situation.
2. 53%-47% is not a coin flip, though that is how people think about it.
3. AJo is behind a TON of hands (all pairs) and is dominated by a few of
them like AK/AQ and AA-JJ.
4. AJo is only ahead of AT or lower and KX.
5. If the hand is played face up then AJo should not call any pair.
Dean
--
"You think that's bad? Sometimes I think about RGP when I'm having sex."
- Paul Popinjay 3/16/2009
______________________________________________________________________�
MrBookworm
> stack by 10% (by stealing the blinds and antes) vs. busting with a
> coinflip hand? Aren't there many better places where he could get it all
> in preflop as even a 60-40 favorite?
The fold equity with this move makes it even better than getting it in as
a 60-40 favorite.
Dean
--
"You think that's bad? Sometimes I think about RGP when I'm having sex."
- Paul Popinjay 3/16/2009
_______________________________________________________________________�
number6
> > Why is it a great move for a player of Shorr's caliber to increase his
> > stack by 10% (by stealing the blinds and antes) vs. busting with a
> > coinflip hand? Aren't there many better places where he could get it all
> > in preflop as even a 60-40 favorite?
>
> The fold equity with this move makes it even better than getting it in as
> a 60-40 favorite.
>
The next hand you have the button ... doesn't that enter into your
thinking ??
Will in New Haven
If he raised and folded to a re-raise there, he would not be "a player
of Shorr's caliber." No one plays a very short stack (which his isn't
quite, not yet) very well but it is possible to play one badly. The
stack he has can be played well but his stack is going to be smaller
as soon as the blinds go up, without losing a chip except some antes.
If he doesn't get some chips soon, very soon, he will be in a position
where his caliber won't mean fuck-all. He has a little over twenty Big
Blinds and that is enough to really put a hurting on the guy he is
facing. His opponent will fold some hands where he is going to be
racing (95 anyone?) What is even better, his opponent might fold some
hands, like 55, where Shorr would be crushed if called. Go ahead, give
44-66 to a bunch of tournament nits and see if they would call this
all-in for one-third of their stacks. Some would fold 77-88 because
"it is at best a race." His opponent has a very good "target stack,"
a stack where the guy might think he has enough chips to fold a
borderline hand.
A good player, a "player of Shorr's caliber," has to make the right
decision NOW.
--
Will in New Haven
Will in New Haven
That might be player dependant but generally you are wrong in your
preference. A player with a live stack, but one still small enough to
be hurt by us, is the best target here. If you have, as this player
does, over sixty Big Blinds but not a huge stack, you would really not
want to risk one-third of your stack without a good incentive. A badly
played shortish stack might be worrying about his pweshus tournament
life (which term is used by people who have not been shot often
enough) when he should be saying "good, a chance to double up," so
raising him might be right. A _very_ short stack should be calling on
air here. Even someone who loves folding into the money more than he
likes his pink slippers isn't close enough to the money to do it. The
really deep stack that can afford the hit is a bad target, unless you
have cards.
--
Will in New Haven
> Calling with AJ is easier because of the stack sizes. 9 times out of ten
> you get an instafold, which is what you want. With the BBs stack size I
> will come over the top of a standard raise with a lot more hands than I
> will call a shove with. If BB comes over the top of the raise from SB he
> has to fold. I think I even prefer a limp to a standard raise here.
>
> Chandler
>
> ----
> RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader :www.recgroups.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Mistress of Tilt
wrote:
>
> That might be player dependant but generally you are wrong in your
> preference. A player with a live stack, but one still small enough to
> be ...
> --
> Will in New Haven
>
Proof positive that free advice is seldom worth the price.
Will in New Haven
Shut up you old whore. That's pretty standard and correct advice when
facing competent players. Pick on the middle-sized stacks because they
can afford to fold and can't afford to call and lose. Small stacks,
unless they are played by jello-legged internet nits, (we can
abbreviate that to Beldins) really can't afford to back down. And, of
course, big stacks can afford to call and lose. But big stacks are
bigger than the one here. Sixty Big Blinds is too small to risk twenty
on a whim.
Mistress of Tilt
wrote:
> On Dec 1, 4:46 pm, Mistress of Tilt <BeaFor...@msn.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 1, 1:43 pm, Will in New Haven <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > That might be player dependant but generally you are wrong in your
> > > preference. A player with a live stack, but one still small enough to
> > > be ...
> > > --
> > > Will in New Haven
>
> > Proof positive that free advice is seldom worth the price.
>
> Shut up you old whore. That's pretty standard and correct advice when
>
> --
> Will in New Haven
Old whore? I thought you married an old whore. Please don't get any
ideas, my heart belongs to another.
Whenever getting advice, one must consider the motive of the giver.
MrBookworm
> thinking ??
Not at all. The next hand has nothing to do with the current hand. I am
not UTG and in danger of blinding out on the next hand. The best play in
this situation is to shove. Given that it is near the bubble my shoving
range is even bigger than normal.
Dean
--
"You think that's bad? Sometimes I think about RGP when I'm having sex."
- Paul Popinjay 3/16/2009
------�
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
Patti Beadles
DanFan <a67...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>Interesting. Why would you have folded AJo there? Because you want to
>avoid a coinflip yourself for 1/3 of your stack?
By calling I have no fold equity. (Yes, duh.) I have to win
the hand at showdown. My pot odds are pretty crappy, and they're
even worse when you do the math in tournament EV.
It's not really worth risking a third of my stack for at that
point. Having a bigger stack gives me a lot of room to attack
medium stacks. Losing a third of my stack is a lot more expensive
than the value of adding an additional third to it. Doubling up
the shorter stack isn't advantageous either.
There are meta/tempo considerations that could swing the decision.
For example, if the SB has been doing that every hand, I'm calling
in that situation.
Patti Beadles
DanFan <a67...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>Why is it a great move for a player of Shorr's caliber to increase his
>stack by 10% (by stealing the blinds and antes) vs. busting with a
>coinflip hand? Aren't there many better places where he could get it all
>in preflop as even a 60-40 favorite?
You keep overlooking the key point-- fold equity.
DanFan, what percentage of the time do you think that he gets
called here?
ramashiva
> > The next hand you have the button ... doesn't that enter into your
> > thinking ??
> Not at all. The next hand has nothing to do with the current hand. I am
> not UTG and in danger of blinding out on the next hand. The best play in
> this situation is to shove. Given that it is near the bubble my shoving
> range is even bigger than normal.
Well, I disagree with everyone here. I say this is an autofold.
I guess none of you ever read Sklansky's analysis which shows clearly
that you should not make a bet with a small edge when losing that bet
will prevent you from making a later bet with a larger edge.
Near the bubble? Button next hand?
Pretty clear there will be opportunities to stack off with a bigger
edge than this situation.
William Coleman (ramashiva)
K9way
> That might be player dependant but generally you are wrong in your
> preference. A player with a live stack, but one still small enough to
> be hurt by us, is the best target here. If you have, as this player
> does, over sixty Big Blinds but not a huge stack, you would really not
> want to risk one-third of your stack without a good incentive. A badly
> played shortish stack might be worrying about his pweshus tournament
> life (which term is used by people who have not been shot often
> enough) when he should be saying "good, a chance to double up," so
> raising him might be right. A _very_ short stack should be calling on
> air here. Even someone who loves folding into the money more than he
> likes his pink slippers isn't close enough to the money to do it. The
> really deep stack that can afford the hit is a bad target, unless you
> have cards.
>
> --
> Will in New Haven
>
>
and then blow oil all over the place at the end
your first 5 lines are exactly correct. many times I have looked at the
stacks prior to raising and thought exactly what you posted ion the first
5 lines
but .. you then mention that a short stack in the Bb should be calling on
air ..NO HE WOULDNT .. because if you are sharp enough to put together
all the other logic .. you would absollutely NEVER EVER shove on a short
stack , knowing they will most likely call and you will be forced to play
for a minor amount against 2 over cards .
I would never ever push with a shorty in the BB
But then agaibn ...I WIN
Just when you think that youve been gypped ..the bearded lady comes and
does a double back flip!!! John Hiatt in "Buffalo River Home"
________________________________________________________________________�
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
K9way
Please cite Skalansk'ys earth shattering tournament record ?
Just when you think that youve been gypped ..the bearded lady comes and
does a double back flip!!! John Hiatt in "Buffalo River Home"
_____________________________________________________________________�
chandler
> > I don't mind the shove here. �I'd prefer to be doing it against a stack
> > closer in size to my own, so it is their tournament life on the line.
>
> That might be player dependant but generally you are wrong in your
> preference. A player with a live stack, but one still small enough to
> be hurt by us, is the best target here. If you have, as this player
> does, over sixty Big Blinds but not a huge stack, you would really not
> want to risk one-third of your stack without a good incentive. A badly
> played shortish stack might be worrying about his pweshus tournament
> life (which term is used by people who have not been shot often
> enough) when he should be saying "good, a chance to double up," so
> raising him might be right. A _very_ short stack should be calling on
> air here. Even someone who loves folding into the money more than he
> likes his pink slippers isn't close enough to the money to do it. The
> really deep stack that can afford the hit is a bad target, unless you
> have cards.
>
> --
> Will in New Haven
>
Had the scary end of a gun pointed at me a couple of times, but I've never
been shot. Of all the stupid, asinine, offensive shit that is posted on
RGP my choice of vocabulary would seem to be a minor complaint.
OK, so I agree that there isn't as much fold equity against a ginormous
stack. In general I would say there is less fold equity against a mini
stack, as well.
I have even begun to think that there are times in a tournament when it is
just positive expectation to gamble. Picking a spot and getting an big
edge is nice, but whether you get it in as a 60/40 favorite or a 45/55 dog
is almost besides the point. IOW, it's more important in the tournament
to win than to get your money in as a huge favorite. A little like a
blackjack tournament, really. Is 20+ bigs in the BB there in this
instance if being jammed by SB? Is he more likely to call than the stack
who still has 40+ bigs if he loses? I usually see the exact opposite...
which is not to say that it is correct.
Chandler
----�
Will in New Haven
You've never played anyone who would fold, incorrectly of course, with
only one BB behind? There was a player around here who didn't play
that badly most of the time but she would fold very short stacks when
she was leaving herself with almost no chips. Against most players
with a very, very short stack, you need a good enough hand to be a
favorite against ATC, because they will call. Against her, not so
much. She even KNEW it was wrong but she "couldn't stand playing bad
cards." She would shove on bad cards but not call, which is good
thinking, but folding when the small blind and the ante will put you
all-in on the next hand is insane.
Will in New Haven
> On Dec 1 2009 4:43 PM, Will in New Haven wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > > I don't mind the shove here. I'd prefer to be doing it against a stack
> > > closer in size to my own, so it is their tournament life on the line.
>
> > That might be player dependant but generally you are wrong in your
> > preference. A player with a live stack, but one still small enough to
> > be hurt by us, is the best target here. If you have, as this player
> > does, over sixty Big Blinds but not a huge stack, you would really not
> > want to risk one-third of your stack without a good incentive. A badly
> > played shortish stack might be worrying about his pweshus tournament
> > life (which term is used by people who have not been shot often
> > enough) when he should be saying "good, a chance to double up," so
> > raising him might be right. A _very_ short stack should be calling on
> > air here. Even someone who loves folding into the money more than he
> > likes his pink slippers isn't close enough to the money to do it. The
> > really deep stack that can afford the hit is a bad target, unless you
> > have cards.
>
> > --
> > Will in New Haven
>
> Had the scary end of a gun pointed at me a couple of times, but I've never
> been shot. Of all the stupid, asinine, offensive shit that is posted on
> RGP my choice of vocabulary would seem to be a minor complaint.
It isn't that _you_ said it; I'm just sick of hearing it.
>
> OK, so I agree that there isn't as much fold equity against a ginormous
> stack. In general I would say there is less fold equity against a mini
> stack, as well.
Except against the lady (not a terrible player in general) I mentioned
in my reply to K9. The most fold equity you have is against middle-
sized stacks.
>
> I have even begun to think that there are times in a tournament when it is
> just positive expectation to gamble. Picking a spot and getting an big
> edge is nice, but whether you get it in as a 60/40 favorite or a 45/55 dog
> is almost besides the point. IOW, it's more important in the tournament
> to win than to get your money in as a huge favorite. A little like a
> blackjack tournament, really. Is 20+ bigs in the BB there in this
> instance if being jammed by SB? Is he more likely to call than the stack
> who still has 40+ bigs if he loses? I usually see the exact opposite...
> which is not to say that it is correct.
The guy who has sixty BB has a very playable stack. If he calls and
wins, he has eighty-plus, which is nicer but doesn't mean he's going
to win anything. Forty is kinda ok. It used to be that they gave you
so few chips in CT tournaments that forty felt comfortable. Now people
around here are used to having bigger stacks and will usually fold,
rather than risk being down to forty. Twenty BB is pretty bad but not
impossible. I would think a good player would be more likely to call
with twenty than with sixty and _much_ more likely to call with a
really big stack or with ten or fifteen or less.
DanFan
If my opponent has AJo, I expect to get called every time when playing in
this online tournament, unless it's against a well-known live pro who is
capable of reaching the same conclusion you did. But if it's one of
Doggy's TVSMs, there's no way I would expect them to be able to fold that
hand.
DanFan
_______________________________________________________________________�
MrBookworm
> that you should not make a bet with a small edge when losing that bet
> will prevent you from making a later bet with a larger edge.
>
> Near the bubble? Button next hand?
>
> Pretty clear there will be opportunities to stack off with a bigger
> edge than this situation.
This is so wrong it is not even funny. Shoving here gives you as big an
edge as you can expect with such a small stack. First, you are ahead of
any random hand with your 33. Second, and more importantly, the fold
equity you have makes this spot better than just about any other you could
get it in with. You are going to win this hand probably 75% or more of the
time. You have an M of 9 so waiting around for AA or KK is stupid with
such a good opportunity to add to your stack.
DanFan
I'm surprised no one else came up with this as well. I can't imagine
recounting to poker-playing friends a tournament this big and explaining
that the best move for me on the bubble was to shove 21 big blinds with
3-3 hoping to increase my stack by 10%.
Patti is correct that I have enough fold equity even against the big
stack. But that doesn't prevent him from A) having a better hand than I
do, or B) Calling with two overs and hitting, no matter how strong or weak
those two overs are. I just feel I can wait for better spots.
DanFan
-----�
Will in New Haven
Do you have a last-longer bet for more than the value of the prize
money in the tournament? If you think being all-in with Threes against
AJ in this situation is so bad, I suppose you have a history of high
tournament finishes with twenty Big Blinds at this point in the
tournament. Not many people do. Being called by AJ is not a disaster.
Being called by 66 would _be_ a disaster but those same people who
call with AJ often fold with small pairs, because it is "a coinfip at
best."
No one else came up with it because it is wrong. You asked a question
and now you are picking the relatively few answers that agree with
you.
ramashiva
> On Dec 2 2009 2:39 AM, ramashiva wrote:
> > On Dec 1, 2:54 pm, "MrBookworm" <a825...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
> > > > The next hand you have the button ... doesn't that enter into your
> > > > thinking ??
> > > Not at all. The next hand has nothing to do with the current hand. I am
> > > not UTG and in danger of blinding out on the next hand. The best play in
> > > this situation is to shove. Given that it is near the bubble my shoving
> > > range is even bigger than normal.
> > Well, I disagree with everyone here. I say this is an autofold.
> > I guess none of you ever read Sklansky's analysis which shows clearly
> > that you should not make a bet with a small edge when losing that bet
> > will prevent you from making a later bet with a larger edge.
> > Near the bubble? Button next hand?
> > Pretty clear there will be opportunities to stack off with a bigger
> > edge than this situation.
> Please cite Skalansk'ys earth shattering tournament record ?
What on earth would Sklansky's tournament record have to do with
whether what he is saying is correct???
Every time you post in a strategy thread, you demonstrate once again
that you are completely clueless with respect to poker theory.
William Coleman (ramashiva)
MrBookworm
> this online tournament, unless it's against a well-known live pro who is
> capable of reaching the same conclusion you did. But if it's one of
> Doggy's TVSMs, there's no way I would expect them to be able to fold that
> hand.
You did not answer Patti's question. How about a little PokerStove
excercise on this. Let's assume that you get called by the following range
of hands: 66+,A7s+,K9s+,Q9s+,JTs,ATo+,KTo+,QJo This represents 15.8% of
hands.
So, you are going to win the blinds/antes 84.2% of the time. This is HUGE.
This represents an 84.2% chance to win 800+1600+1800-T4200. This is why it
can be correct to push with any 2 cards from the SB here against a player
that will only call with an above average hand.
When your 33 does get called you are only behind 42.7% to 57.3%. This
means that 6.75% of the time you will double up.
So, you have an 84.2%+6.75%=90.95% chance to win this pot by pushing here.
Are you sure you want to raise/fold given the value that pushing has here?
If someone told you that you have a 91% chance of either winning the
blinds or doubling up by pushing would you ever consider any other play?
Dean
--
"You think that's bad? Sometimes I think about RGP when I'm having sex."
- Paul Popinjay 3/16/2009
-----�
Will in New Haven
> On Dec 2, 12:23 am, "K9way" <ad14...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 2 2009 2:39 AM, ramashiva wrote:
> > > On Dec 1, 2:54 pm, "MrBookworm" <a825...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > The next hand you have the button ... doesn't that enter into your
> > > > > thinking ??
> > > > Not at all. The next hand has nothing to do with the current hand. I am
> > > > not UTG and in danger of blinding out on the next hand. The best play in
> > > > this situation is to shove. Given that it is near the bubble my shoving
> > > > range is even bigger than normal.
> > > Well, I disagree with everyone here. I say this is an autofold.
> > > I guess none of you ever read Sklansky's analysis which shows clearly
> > > that you should not make a bet with a small edge when losing that bet
> > > will prevent you from making a later bet with a larger edge.
> > > Near the bubble? Button next hand?
> > > Pretty clear there will be opportunities to stack off with a bigger
> > > edge than this situation.
> > Please cite Skalansk'ys earth shattering tournament record ?
>
> What on earth would Sklansky's tournament record have to do with
> whether what he is saying is correct???
Actually, Sklansky has a rather good tournament record over a long
period of time. He hasn't played that many tournaments but he has some
good finishes. One trivia question to which he is the answer: Who won
the last Draw championship at the WSoP?
> Every time you post in a strategy thread, you demonstrate once again
> that you are completely clueless with respect to poker theory.
But your still very possibly wrong here. You are not at all likely to
get a better situation with your twenty Big Blinds, depending on where
you are in the round. If it is late in the round, you are going to
have fewer than ten big blinds real soon now.
DanFan
I'm not picking anything. I'm not saying you, Patti or Bookworm are wrong.
I'm simply stating that I don't feel 21 BBs is "such a short stack" that I
have to shove here. Incidentally, if there had been a raise from the
cutoff or button and that player was known to be loose, then I probably
would shove here.
DanFan
Will in New Haven
I think stack-size perception may be part of the reason we disagree. I
remember being in tournaments where twenty Big Blinds was about all
_anyone_ had at some stage of the tournament and it seemed pretty
normal. I just don't see being able to make a normal raise with that
stack and then fold. Even a smallish raise is ten percent of your
stack. I would rather muck. Or open-limp. As the SB is about the only
position I ever open-limp in a tournament, that is possible.
Another important question that no one mentioned is when are the
blinds going up. Twenty Big Blinds is a lot better than what we will
have after that happens.
DanFan
Thanks for the Poker Stove analysis, it is helpful. I think the online
calling range would be slightly greater than you posited (maybe down to
A8o), but not enough for it to be more than 20% of the hands possible.
I agree that raise-folding or limp-folding are probably the worst plays
that could be made, so my options would be to shove or fold. Your numbers
are compelling, but I am extremely leery of playing small pairs for my
tournament life, especially when I am not technically short-stacked.
DanFan
---�
DanFan
> On Dec 2, 2:04�ｿｽpm, "DanFan" <a67c...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
> > On Dec 2 2009 12:46 PM, Will in New Haven wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Dec 2, 11:25�ｿｽam, "DanFan" <a67c...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
> > > > On Dec 2 2009 2:39 AM, ramashiva wrote:
> >
> > > > > On Dec 1, 2:54�ｿｽpm, "MrBookworm" <a825...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > The next hand you have the button ... doesn't that enter into
your
> > > > > > > thinking ??
> >
> > > > > > Not at all. The next hand has nothing to do with the current
hand.. I am
> > > > > > not UTG and in danger of blinding out on the next hand. The best
play
> > in
> > > > > > this situation is to shove. Given that it is near the bubble my
shoving
> > > > > > range is even bigger than normal.
> >
> > > > > Well, I disagree with everyone here. �ｿｽI say this is an autofold.
> >
> > > > > I guess none of you ever read Sklansky's analysis which shows clearly
> > > > > that you should not make a bet with a small edge when losing that bet
> > > > > will prevent you from making a later bet with a larger edge.
> >
> > > > > Near the bubble? �ｿｽButton next hand?
> >
> > > > > Pretty clear there will be opportunities to stack off with a bigger
> > > > > edge than this situation.
> >
> > > > > William Coleman �ｿｽ(ramashiva)
> >
> > > > I'm surprised no one else came up with this as well. I can't imagine
> > > > recounting to poker-playing friends a tournament this big and
explaining
> > > > that the best move for me on the bubble was to shove 21 big blinds with
> > > > 3-3 hoping to increase my stack by 10%.
> >
> > > > Patti is correct that I have enough fold equity even against the big
> > > > stack. But that doesn't prevent him from A) having a better hand than I
> > > > do, or B) Calling with two overs and hitting, no matter how strong or
weak
> > > > those two overs are. I just feel I can wait for better spots.
> >
> > > Do you have a last-longer bet for more than the value of the prize
> > > money in the tournament? If you think being all-in with Threes against
> > > AJ in this situation is so bad, I suppose you have a history of high
> > > tournament finishes with twenty Big Blinds at this point in the
> > > tournament. Not many people do. Being called by AJ is not a disaster.
> > > Being called by 66 would _be_ a disaster but those same people who
> > > call with AJ often fold with small pairs, because it is "a coinfip at
> > > best."
> >
> > > No one else came up with it because it is wrong. You asked a question
> > > and now you are picking the relatively few answers that agree with
> > > you.
> >
> > > --
> > > Will in New Haven
> >
> > I'm not picking anything. I'm not saying you, Patti or Bookworm are wrong..
> > I'm simply stating that I don't feel 21 BBs is "such a short stack" that I
> > have to shove here. Incidentally, if there had been a raise from the
> > cutoff or button and that player was known to be loose, then I probably
> > would shove here.
>
> I think stack-size perception may be part of the reason we disagree. I
> remember being in tournaments where twenty Big Blinds was about all
> _anyone_ had at some stage of the tournament and it seemed pretty
> normal. I just don't see being able to make a normal raise with that
> stack and then fold. Even a smallish raise is ten percent of your
> stack. I would rather muck. Or open-limp. As the SB is about the only
> position I ever open-limp in a tournament, that is possible.
>
> Another important question that no one mentioned is when are the
> blinds going up. Twenty Big Blinds is a lot better than what we will
> have after that happens.
>
> --
> Will in New Haven
Yes, this is an important consideration. They should be 1000-2000 in the
next level, which brings me from 21 BBs to just 17, or fewer, depending on
how the antes have eaten away at my stack.
DanFan
______________________________________________________________________�ｿｽ
MrBookworm
> calling range would be slightly greater than you posited (maybe down to
> A8o), but not enough for it to be more than 20% of the hands possible.
Yep, it just changes the numbers a bit but it is still the same message.
> I agree that raise-folding or limp-folding are probably the worst plays
> that could be made, so my options would be to shove or fold. Your numbers
> are compelling, but I am extremely leery of playing small pairs for my
> tournament life, especially when I am not technically short-stacked.
Ok, let's say you will only shove with AA or KK in this spot. You will
still win the blinds 84.2% of the time. The difference is that you will
now be ahead 80.2% to 19.8% when you are called. So, you will double up
12.7% of the time.
Basically, the only difference between shoving with 33 vs AA/KK here is
that you will only double up 6.74% vs 12.7% of the time. With 33 you win
the pot 91% of the time and with AA/KK you win the pot 96.9% of the time.
Heck, if you shove with any 2 cards blind here you still win the pot 89%
of the time.
Really, you need to think about this in regards to your opponent and what
they will do rather than what your 2 cards are. This is a case where your
own cards don't make that much of a difference. The tighter your opponent
is the better it is to shove with most anything.
Dean
--
"You think that's bad? Sometimes I think about RGP when I'm having sex."
- Paul Popinjay 3/16/2009
_______________________________________________________________________�
MrBookworm
> have to shove here.
And you would be wrong if you are against an opponent that will only call
with above average hands. I don't think you realize how valuable winning
the blinds and antes are at this point in a tourney. If you are not
winning the blinds then the only time you win a tourney is when you get on
a card rush at the end. Good tourney players win more often than you
because they are winning the blinds and antes in situations like these.
That gives them longer life in the tourney, more chips to bully with, and
more chips when they double up.
Dean
--
"You think that's bad? Sometimes I think about RGP when I'm having sex."
- Paul Popinjay 3/16/2009
________________________________________________________________________�
MrBookworm
> cutoff or button and that player was known to be loose, then I probably
> would shove here.
What is interesting is that you are actually incorrect to do this against
a loose raiser with 33 if you have no or very little fold equity.
If the loose player does this with the best 50% of hands you are actually
behind 51% to 49% against this range:
22+,A2s+,K2s+,Q2s+,J4s+,T6s+,96s+,86s+,76s,65s,A2o+,K5o+,Q7o+,J7o+,T8o+,98o
Dean
--
"You think that's bad? Sometimes I think about RGP when I'm having sex."
- Paul Popinjay 3/16/2009
______________________________________________________________________�
Patti Beadles
DanFan <a67...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>If my opponent has AJo, I expect to get called every time when playing in
>this online tournament,
And that's not the question I asked.
Put yourself in the situation of being the small blind in the
hand you described. You have just jammed, and the big blind has
not yet looked at his cards, so his hand is a complete unknown--
Schrodingers hand, two random cards. What percentage of the
time do you think that his hand will be good enough for him to
call you?
chandler
> On Dec 2, 9:00�am, "chandler" <a5a7...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
> > On Dec 1 2009 4:43 PM, Will in New Haven wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > > I don't mind the shove here. �I'd prefer to be doing it against a stack
> > > > closer in size to my own, so it is their tournament life on the line.
> >
> > > That might be player dependant but generally you are wrong in your
> > > preference. A player with a live stack, but one still small enough to
> > > be hurt by us, is the best target here. If you have, as this player
> > > does, over sixty Big Blinds but not a huge stack, you would really not
> > > want to risk one-third of your stack without a good incentive. A badly
> > > played shortish stack might be worrying about his pweshus tournament
> > > life (which term is used by people who have not been shot often
> > > enough) when he should be saying "good, a chance to double up," so
> > > raising him might be right. A _very_ short stack should be calling on
> > > air here. Even someone who loves folding into the money more than he
> > > likes his pink slippers isn't close enough to the money to do it. The
> > > really deep stack that can afford the hit is a bad target, unless you
> > > have cards.
> >
> > > --
> > > Will in New Haven
> >
> > Had the scary end of a gun pointed at me a couple of times, but I've never
> > been shot. �Of all the stupid, asinine, offensive shit that is posted on
> > RGP my choice of vocabulary would seem to be a minor complaint.
>
> It isn't that _you_ said it; I'm just sick of hearing it.
>
Noted, with empathy.
Chandler
-------�
ramashiva
> > I guess none of you ever read Sklansky's analysis which shows clearly
> > that you should not make a bet with a small edge when losing that bet
> > will prevent you from making a later bet with a larger edge.
> > Near the bubble? Button next hand?
> > Pretty clear there will be opportunities to stack off with a bigger
> > edge than this situation.
> This is so wrong it is not even funny.
No, what I am saying is exactly correct.
Let me ask you a question, do you agree there are times in a
tournament when a hand should be folded, even though playing the hand
is +EV?
If your answer is no, then the discussion is over, because you do not
understand tournament play.
So, we agree there are instances where a hand should be folded, even
though playing the hand is +EV.
All you and the others have established is that a shove with 33 in
this situation is +EV.
You have done nothing to establish that shoving is a better
alternative than folding, given the context of the actual tournament
situation.
> Shoving here gives you as big an
> edge as you can expect with such a small stack.
Oh bullshit. You have a 10% edge. You are frequently dealt hands
with an edge greater than 10%. You have the button next hand. You
are in no danger of being blinded off. Assuming the limits don't go
up, you can play 9 more rounds.
Let me ask you this. If you were exactly on the bubble, would you
still shove with 33 in this situation?
> First, you are ahead of
> any random hand with your 33. Second, and more importantly, the fold
> equity you have makes this spot better than just about any other you could
> get it in with.
You are full of shit and do not know what you are talking about. A
10% edge is nothing to get excited about.
> You are going to win this hand probably 75% or more of the
> time. You have an M of 9 so waiting around for AA or KK is stupid with
> such a good opportunity to add to your stack.
You don't have to wait for AA or KK. Where do you come up with this
shit?
William Coleman (ramashiva)
ramashiva
<bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
Glad to see you at least admit that I am possibly right.
The entire discussion is focused on the fact that a push gives you an
EV of +1.10. Until I brought it up, there has been no discussion of
whether this is a tournament situation where folding is the correct
play, even though shoving gives you a 10% edge.
Until you and the others make a convincing case that this is not one
of the situations where folding is the better alternative, your
arguments are irrelevant.
Let me ask you this. Suppose you are early in the current round, so
you can play nine more orbits before being blinded off. Suppose you
are exactly on the bubble. You still think stacking off is a better
play than folding?
> You are not at all likely to
> get a better situation with your twenty Big Blinds,
That is nonsense. Hands with an edge greater than 10% are common.
William Coleman (ramashiva)
Pepe Papon
wrote:
>On Dec 2 2009 2:27 AM, Patti Beadles wrote:
>
>> In article <6uagu6x...@recgroups.com>,
>> DanFan <a67...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> >Why is it a great move for a player of Shorr's caliber to increase his
>> >stack by 10% (by stealing the blinds and antes) vs. busting with a
>> >coinflip hand? Aren't there many better places where he could get it all
>> >in preflop as even a 60-40 favorite?
>>
>> You keep overlooking the key point-- fold equity.
>>
>> DanFan, what percentage of the time do you think that he gets
>> called here?
>If my opponent has AJo, I expect to get called every time when playing in
>this online tournament, unless it's against a well-known live pro who is
>capable of reaching the same conclusion you did. But if it's one of
>Doggy's TVSMs, there's no way I would expect them to be able to fold that
>hand.
But you have no idea what your opponent has when it's your turn to
act. The vast majority of the time, he has trash.
--
~ Seth Jackson
MySpace URL - http://www.myspace.com/sethjacksonsong
Songwriting and Music Business Info: http://www.sethjackson.net
Travel A
steal situation, but the stack is big enough where folding is automatic,
rather than shoving is automatic, imo. This wouldn't instinctively be a
good risk/reward situation to me; the +EV odds, calculated over 5
billion simulated hands notwithstanding.
I don't particularly like that: "being kicked in the stomach by a mule
feeling" when the all-in is called and watching five more cards come out
while holding a lousy 33; and the opponent pairs or suck-out-draws a
flush to end your tournament.
Folding and taking the button on the next hand seems a lot more
sensible. The attractive option of moving on, avoiding the 33 hand, and
taking the button isn't calculated in the 5 billion simulated hands that
gives you that +EV.
The arguments if favor of shoving here reminds me of an "800 number"
commercial: "don't miss this great oportunity! act now!" You've
convinced yourselves that if you don't make the all-in move, that you've
somehow lost something. You haven't, if you fold. However, the original
argument was whether to: go all-in v. just raise, so that would account
for the adamant nature of the replies in favor of going all-in.
I'll take my chances in position/ button/ cut-off on another hand where
I'll probably have at least a read of some sort before shoving, thanks.
Will in New Haven
> I wouldn't like 33 in this situation, either. I can see why it's a good
> steal situation, but the stack is big enough where folding is automatic,
> rather than shoving is automatic, imo. This wouldn't instinctively be a
> good risk/reward situation to me; the +EV odds, calculated over 5
> billion simulated hands notwithstanding.
>
> I don't particularly like that: "being kicked in the stomach by a mule
> feeling" when the all-in is called and watching five more cards come out
> while holding a lousy 33; and the opponent pairs or suck-out-draws a
> flush to end your tournament.
Basing your play on your feelings? We have had many disagreements but
I always respected your game more than this.
A lot depends here on how well having twenty Big Blinds figures to do
in the specific tournament and the payout structure has
to be considered. But feelings don't belong at the poker table.
--
Will in New Haven
>
K9way
> On Dec 1, 1:52�pm, Will in New Haven <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com>
> wrote:
> > On Dec 1, 4:46�pm, Mistress of Tilt <BeaFor...@msn.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Dec 1, 1:43�pm, Will in New Haven <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com>
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > > That might be player dependant but generally you are wrong in your
> > > > preference. A player with a live stack, but one still small enough to
> > > > be ...
> > > > --
> > > > Will in New Haven
> >
> > > Proof positive that free advice is seldom worth the price.
> >
> > Shut up you old whore. That's pretty standard and correct advice when
> > facing competent players. Pick on the middle-sized stacks because ... blah
blah blah.
> >
> > --
> > Will in New Haven
>
> Old whore? I thought you married an old whore. Please don't get any
> ideas, my heart belongs to another.
>
> Whenever getting advice, one must consider the motive of the giver.
THATS NOT RIGHT !! there is absolutely no evidence that she was "old"
when he married her!!
Just when you think that youve been gypped ..the bearded lady comes and
does a double back flip!!! John Hiatt in "Buffalo River Home"
________________________________________________________________________�
Will in New Haven
> On Dec 1 2009 5:22 PM, Mistress of Tilt wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 1, 1:52 pm, Will in New Haven <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com>
> > wrote:
> > > On Dec 1, 4:46 pm, Mistress of Tilt <BeaFor...@msn.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 1, 1:43 pm, Will in New Haven <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > That might be player dependant but generally you are wrong in your
> > > > > preference. A player with a live stack, but one still small enough to
> > > > > be ...
> > > > > --
> > > > > Will in New Haven
>
> > > > Proof positive that free advice is seldom worth the price.
>
> > > Shut up you old whore. That's pretty standard and correct advice when
> > > facing competent players. Pick on the middle-sized stacks because ... blah
> blah blah.
>
> > > --
> > > Will in New Haven
>
> > Old whore? I thought you married an old whore. Please don't get any
> > ideas, my heart belongs to another.
>
> > Whenever getting advice, one must consider the motive of the giver.
>
> THATS NOT RIGHT !! there is absolutely no evidence that she was "old"
> when he married her!!
It would be interesting to see what "evidence" either of you think you
have that I was ever married.
MrBookworm
> tournament when a hand should be folded, even though playing the hand
> is +EV?
Sure, I can think of plenty of examples of this. This situation is not one
of them.
> If your answer is no, then the discussion is over, because you do not
> understand tournament play.
>
> So, we agree there are instances where a hand should be folded, even
> though playing the hand is +EV.
>
> All you and the others have established is that a shove with 33 in
> this situation is +EV.
>
> You have done nothing to establish that shoving is a better
> alternative than folding, given the context of the actual tournament
> situation.
You have done nothing to establish that folding is better than shoving. I
have shown my Pokerstove work and you will win this pot about 90% of the
time. Where have you shown your work that folding is better due to
tournament equity?
> > Shoving here gives you as big an
> > edge as you can expect with such a small stack.
>
> Oh bullshit. You have a 10% edge. You are frequently dealt hands
> with an edge greater than 10%. You have the button next hand. You
> are in no danger of being blinded off. Assuming the limits don't go
> up, you can play 9 more rounds.
Bullshit right back at you mooncalf. I showed my work where shoving with
ATC would win the pot about 89% of the time and shoving with AA/KK would
win it about 97% of the time. While there is a difference the idea that
you are going to have a greater edge at some point in the future is simply
you pulling grey matter out of your anus.
than 10% at some point in the future is just pulling
> Let me ask you this. If you were exactly on the bubble, would you
> still shove with 33 in this situation?
If it is a standard pay-out schedule with 10-20% of the spots being paid,
then fuck YES. I also have to assume that the BB is not some huge stack
owned by a calling station. In a normal tourney with the typical mix of
players that make it to the bubble I would push with 33 here almost every
time.
> You are full of shit and do not know what you are talking about. A
> 10% edge is nothing to get excited about.
10% is your full of shit number. With the fold equity you have it is much
higher.
> You don't have to wait for AA or KK. Where do you come up with this
> shit?
Well, if you aren't going to shove here which is optimal when the fuck are
you going to shove? Or, are you going to make a standard raise from the
cut-off/button with A9 and then be put to the test when the BB shoves over
the top of you with 33? With an M of 9 you pretty much have 1 move (other
than FPS with AA or KK). Making that move from the SB with 33 is a
standard optimal play.
Dean
--
"You think that's bad? Sometimes I think about RGP when I'm having sex."
- Paul Popinjay 3/16/2009
----�
ramashiva
> > Let me ask you a question, do you agree there are times in a
> > tournament when a hand should be folded, even though playing the hand
> > is +EV?
> Sure, I can think of plenty of examples of this. This situation is not one
> of them.
Please explain how you know this.
> > If your answer is no, then the discussion is over, because you do not
> > understand tournament play.
> > So, we agree there are instances where a hand should be folded, even
> > though playing the hand is +EV.
> > All you and the others have established is that a shove with 33 in
> > this situation is +EV.
> > You have done nothing to establish that shoving is a better
> > alternative than folding, given the context of the actual tournament
> > situation.
> You have done nothing to establish that folding is better than shoving. I
> have shown my Pokerstove work and you will win this pot about 90% of the
> time. Where have you shown your work that folding is better due to
> tournament equity?
How could I? First of all, we don't know how close the bubble we
are. Second of all, we don't know how long until the blinds and antes
are raised. Even if we knew these things exactly, I am not aware of
any analytical tool which would give the answer.
> > > Shoving here gives you as big an
> > > edge as you can expect with such a small stack.
> > Oh bullshit. You have a 10% edge. You are frequently dealt hands
> > with an edge greater than 10%. You have the button next hand. You
> > are in no danger of being blinded off. Assuming the limits don't go
> > up, you can play 9 more rounds.
> Bullshit right back at you mooncalf. I showed my work where shoving with
> ATC would win the pot about 89% of the time and shoving with AA/KK would
> win it about 97% of the time.
LOL. I didn't even bother to comment on that idiocy. You assumed the
BB would only call 15% of the time. 50% would be more realistic.
Plug those numbers in and tell me there's not much difference between
AA and 33 when you shove every hand.
> While there is a difference the idea that
> you are going to have a greater edge at some point in the future is simply
> you pulling grey matter out of your anus.
You are a hopeless idiot. A 10% edge corresponds to a 55-45
situation.
EV = 2(.55) + 0(.45) = 1.1
You are telling me 55-45 or better situations are rare???
> > Let me ask you this. If you were exactly on the bubble, would you
> > still shove with 33 in this situation?
> If it is a standard pay-out schedule with 10-20% of the spots being paid,
> then fuck YES. I also have to assume that the BB is not some huge stack
> owned by a calling station. In a normal tourney with the typical mix of
> players that make it to the bubble I would push with 33 here almost every
> time.
That's because you are a clueless idiot. The correct way to play a
short stack near the bubble is NOT to start aggressively trying to
steal the blinds and antes. The correct way to play a short stack
near the bubble is to keep your head down, avoid confrontations with
stacks larger than yours except with very strong hands, and let the
large and medium stacks pick off the clueless short stacks like you
who think now is the time to start aggressively stealing.
> > You are full of shit and do not know what you are talking about. A
> > 10% edge is nothing to get excited about.
> 10% is your full of shit number. With the fold equity you have it is much
> higher.
You really are a moron. If the BB folds 100% of the time, your EV is
(34000 + 3600)/34000 = 1.106.
That is a 10.6% edge. 33 is -EV when it is called by the range of
hands you assumed. So your actual edge is less than 10.6%
So tell me again how you actual edge is MUCH higher than 10%.
> > You don't have to wait for AA or KK. Where do you come up with this shit?
> Well, if you aren't going to shove here which is optimal when the fuck are
> you going to shove? Or, are you going to make a standard raise from the
> cut-off/button with A9 and then be put to the test when the BB shoves over
> the top of you with 33? With an M of 9 you pretty much have 1 move (other
> than FPS with AA or KK).
Not according to Harrington. But what does he know?
> Making that move from the SB with 33 is a standard optimal play.
You have not demonstrated that, given the actual tournament situation,
shoving is a better play than folding.
Given Sklansky's conclusion that you should not make a bet with a
small edge if losing that bet will prevent you from making a bet with
a larger edge in the future, it is pretty clear to me that folding is
the correct play.
William Coleman (ramashiva)
Mistress of Tilt
Evidence? We don't need no stinking evidence! I told you I was
thinking of becoming Republican.
You're right though. Technically you were married in only four
states. And technically 'she' had to be breathing. And technically a
hideous banned in 30 countries pay per view live streaming
pornographic crime-against-nature event is not a marriage. So
technically you weren't married.
But it still doesn't change the point of this thread, and that is,
Why would such an a-hole such as yourself be giving up free poker
advice if not for self-centered motives?
MrBookworm
By reading the fucking OP and using my brain.
> How could I? First of all, we don't know how close the bubble we
> are. Second of all, we don't know how long until the blinds and antes
> are raised. Even if we knew these things exactly, I am not aware of
> any analytical tool which would give the answer.
Ah, but you can say that I am wrong. The bak o my sak is dry, you should
lik it.
> LOL. I didn't even bother to comment on that idiocy. You assumed the
> BB would only call 15% of the time. 50% would be more realistic.
> Plug those numbers in and tell me there's not much difference between
> AA and 33 when you shove every hand.
Really? The BB is going to call with the top 50% of hands here? No fucking
way. Maybe 20%, and in that case it does not change my numbers by much.
> > While there is a difference the idea that
> > you are going to have a greater edge at some point in the future is simply
> > you pulling grey matter out of your anus.
>
> You are a hopeless idiot. A 10% edge corresponds to a 55-45
> situation.
>
> EV = 2(.55) + 0(.45) = 1.1
>
> You are telling me 55-45 or better situations are rare???
Nope dumbfuck, I'm telling you that this is not a 55-45 situation. Of
course, you have no basis for saying it is a 10% edge other than the
ability for your anus to actually work the letters on a keyboard.
> That's because you are a clueless idiot. The correct way to play a
> short stack near the bubble is NOT to start aggressively trying to
> steal the blinds and antes. The correct way to play a short stack
> near the bubble is to keep your head down, avoid confrontations with
> stacks larger than yours except with very strong hands, and let the
> large and medium stacks pick off the clueless short stacks like you
> who think now is the time to start aggressively stealing.
You are correct if you want to sneak into the money and minimize your
profit. Your method will win you the minimum. There is very little value
in making the money versus actually winning a tourney.
It is obvious that you don't know how to win a touney except in the rare
instances that you turn into a card rack at the very end. Good luck with
that piece of shit strategy.
Dean
--
"You think that's bad? Sometimes I think about RGP when I'm having sex."
- Paul Popinjay 3/16/2009
________________________________________________________________________�
ramashiva
> > Please explain how you know this.
> By reading the fucking OP and using my brain.
In other words, you've got nothing.
> > How could I? First of all, we don't know how close the bubble we
> > are. Second of all, we don't know how long until the blinds and antes
> > are raised. Even if we knew these things exactly, I am not aware of
> > any analytical tool which would give the answer.
> Ah, but you can say that I am wrong. The bak o my sak is dry, you should
> lik it.
> > LOL. I didn't even bother to comment on that idiocy. You assumed the
> > BB would only call 15% of the time. 50% would be more realistic.
> > Plug those numbers in and tell me there's not much difference between
> > AA and 33 when you shove every hand.
> Really? The BB is going to call with the top 50% of hands here? No fucking
> way. Maybe 20%, and in that case it does not change my numbers by much.
I am not going to argue with you here. If you fold your BB 80% of the
time in a steal situation, you are an extremely weak player.
> > > While there is a difference the idea that
> > > you are going to have a greater edge at some point in the future is simply
> > > you pulling grey matter out of your anus.
> > You are a hopeless idiot. A 10% edge corresponds to a 55-45
> > situation.
> > EV = 2(.55) + 0(.45) = 1.1
> > You are telling me 55-45 or better situations are rare???
> Nope dumbfuck, I'm telling you that this is not a 55-45 situation.
I didn't say it was. I said it corresponds to a 55-45 situation.
> Of course, you have no basis for saying it is a 10% edge other than the
> ability for your anus to actually work the letters on a keyboard.
Gee, I proved to you that 10% is correct, but you snipped what I said,
because it shows you are completely clueless. Here, I will repeat it
for you --
> 10% is your full of shit number. With the fold equity you have it is much higher.
You really are a moron. If the BB folds 100% of the time, your EV is
(34000 + 3600)/34000 = 1.106.
That is a 10.6% edge. 33 is -EV when it is called by the range of
hands you assumed. So your actual edge is less than 10.6%.
So tell me again how you actual edge is MUCH higher than 10%.
Now you stand exposed as an intellectual fraud who snipped the part of
my post which proved you are wrong.
You are a joke. What a fucking joke.
I prove you wrong and you snip my proof.
How do you live with yourself???
William Coleman (ramashiva)
Travel A
I wrote:
I wouldn't like 33 in this situation, either. I can see why it's a good
steal situation, but the stack is big enough where folding is automatic,
rather than shoving is automatic, imo. This wouldn't instinctively be a
good risk/reward situation to me; the +EV odds, calculated over 5
billion simulated hands notwithstanding.
I don't particularly like that: "being kicked in the stomach by a mule
feeling" when the all-in is called and watching five more cards come out
while holding a lousy 33; and the opponent pairs or suck-out-draws a
flush to end your tournament.
Will In New Haven wrote:
Basing your play on your feelings? We have had many disagreements but I
always respected your game more than this. A lot depends here on how
well having twenty Big Blinds figures to do in the specific tournament
and the payout structure has to be considered. But feelings don't belong
at the poker table.
I wrote:
I'm not basing it on "feelings", I'm basing it on a crap cards 33 hand
in this situation.
The only time I mentioned "feelings" was with regard to how easily
beaten 33 can be, and the feeling of holding crap cards when five more
cards come out. Why don't you get a cortisone injection for your brain?
Also, basing it on how many big blinds I have for a stack is exactly how
I'm basing my anaysis of how to play the hand. I stated this clearly,
yet you ranted on about big blinds figuring into the specific tournament
and payout structure, anyway.
I guess I've given you too much respect for not only your ability to
read, but your integrity in representing what someone else wrote in
plain black and white.
Funny you glossed over what you didn't want to hear, because it ruins
the basis of your comments, but only addressed one segment of my
comments where you thought you could get away with a fabrcated
criticism.
Feel free to reread.