|
|
| Author |
Message |
Ecchu
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
Posts: 139
Location: Kenosha, WI
|
 Posted: Sat Nov 08, 2008 12:41 pm Post subject: $6.50 STT Turbo - is this a bad fold? |
 |
|
Playing some more $6.50 turbos and this hand really made me go into the tank and think. I ended up folding, and SNGWiz doesn't mark it as an error but says the EqP% is 27.66 vs 27.09 for folding. In most cases I instant call with this hand, but I had played a few games with this fellow and never seen him push like this from a blind without a monster.
At best, I thought I was in a coin flip or he had AK and those aren't spots I want to be in. I felt folding here was okay because I still had a stack large enough to play with, and at this point I had only 2 games up and had a good read on my opponents. Still not sure though... this was quite difficult.
PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $6.00+$0.50 Tournament, 100/200 Blinds 25 Ante (5 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com
Button (t410)
SB (t2950)
BB (t4315)
UTG (t1990)
Hero (MP) (t3835)
Hero's M: 9.02
Preflop: Hero is MP with  , 
1 fold, Hero raises to t600, 2 folds, BB raises to t4290 (All-In), 1 fold
Total pot: t1425
Results in white below:
BB didn't show
Outcome: BB won t1425 |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
 |
Raisindye
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 353
Location: Maryland
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 08, 2008 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nope, easy insta fold. no reason for the risk at this point of the tournament |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
ciaran
ITH Support
Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 4781
Location: Alpharetta, GA
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 08, 2008 8:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Standard, for just about any villain given the stack sizes. I prefer to make it 500 pre-flop at this stage for this reason as well (and 500 is my standard raise for every hand in my range in this spot). |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
Ecchu
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
Posts: 139
Location: Kenosha, WI
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 08, 2008 8:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I still feel odd folding AQ 5 handed. Against most players I make that call... so is it really standard to lay it down? |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
ciaran
ITH Support
Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 4781
Location: Alpharetta, GA
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 08, 2008 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
At a rough first guess, you need to win somewhere around 66% of the time to make calling correct. You aren't close to that if he shoves 100%.
This is isn't a cash game, and at this stage of the game it's getting close to not being recognizable as poker. If he does this and flips over K9s, you have to fold. |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
Raisindye
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 353
Location: Maryland
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 08, 2008 11:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ecchu wrote: | | I still feel odd folding AQ 5 handed. Against most players I make that call... so is it really standard to lay it down? |
definitely take the time to read the SNG Basic Strategy Guide by Colin Moshman(sp?)
i really think a lot of basic questions will be answered, and the more in depth things are covered there as well |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
Ecchu
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
Posts: 139
Location: Kenosha, WI
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 1:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
I really don't like Moshman. I read the book and it had nothing new in it to me.
As for AQ there, I guess most of the players I am against at these levels are complete donkeys. I don't know... for me it is a call/fold based on my table read versus strict numbers. It isn't a call I'd make at higher levels with better players... but I am just not convinced this is as easy fold as many think.
In this one instance it was an easy fold, but what about someone who has a stack equal to mine or smaller? Doing straight ICM calc's do have to take into account a players wide range of hands... I wonder where equilibrium would be. |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
ciaran
ITH Support
Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 4781
Location: Alpharetta, GA
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 8:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Equilibrium shove/call ranges. This doesn't mean that shoving AQo (or worse) is correct here. If the players behind you will call too loose, they can't get an edge vs you if you do, but they can cause you to both lose equity to the other players. Still, shoving is better than raise-calling vs a sane and aggressive BB.
| Ecchu wrote: | | for me it is a call/fold based on my table read versus strict numbers |
Note that the worse the players are, and therefore the bigger your edge is, the less you should be willing to get involved in marginal spots such as this. Also, while reads are important, they can't override the math, they can just help you make decisions in the spots where the math can go either way depending on the assumptions you make.
| Ecchu wrote: | | I really don't like Moshman. I read the book and it had nothing new in it to me. |
Moshman's book is far from perfect, but if you can't find easily find a fold here, I'm going to submit that there are probably things in it that you can use. The sections of Kill Everyone that deal with bubble factors and HU equilibriums are very useful, too. If you don't already have SNGPT or SNGWiz, getting one of those and playing around with these kinds of spots is also valuable. |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
Raisindye
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 353
Location: Maryland
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ecchu wrote: | | I really don't like Moshman. I read the book and it had nothing new in it to me. |
| ciaran wrote: |
Moshman's book is far from perfect, but if you can't find easily find a fold here, I'm going to submit that there are probably things in it that you can use. The sections of Kill Everyone that deal with bubble factors and HU equilibriums are very useful, too. If you don't already have SNGPT or SNGWiz, getting one of those and playing around with these kinds of spots is also valuable. |
couldn't have said that better myself  |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
Ecchu
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
Posts: 139
Location: Kenosha, WI
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 11:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I guess we have different opinions on how useful Moshman's book is. He just doesn't impress me. I don't entirely believe in any ABC strategy at all, like AQ isn't always a fold. I know if I am a bigstack I will do a move very much like this as a resteal. Is that so out of a question?
This is why I don't like following ICM to a perfect tee, or book authors. I'm a solid regular SNG player and I'm working to adjust to these STT turbos. We will see how it goes after another 100 or so. |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
cowboyinexile
Joined: 28 Mar 2005
Posts: 378
Location: South Dakota
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
You lay it down here. Weird bet where you are probably ahead, or at least in a race, but you have the chips to avoid variance-better off putting them in when you know you are ahead.
Idiot move on BB's part I think. |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
Raisindye
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 353
Location: Maryland
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 1:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ecchu wrote: |
I guess we have different opinions on how useful Moshman's book is. He just doesn't impress me. I don't entirely believe in any ABC strategy at all, like AQ isn't always a fold. I know if I am a bigstack I will do a move very much like this as a resteal. Is that so out of a question?
|
absolutely not... we obviously can see this basic strategy. we are just saying in many fancy ways that your risk vs reward here is just not worth it. always a fold, as long as the day is ending in "y." if you're not ready to grasp that mid level thinking, then you may want to find another book to see if you are "impressed" with it's author
P |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
ImBetterDude
Joined: 18 Jul 2007
Posts: 747
Location: California
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 3:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Someone up there stated that we would have to fold if BB turned over K 9. I fail to see the logic in that. I guess I need to read Moshman's book.  |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
ciaran
ITH Support
Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 4781
Location: Alpharetta, GA
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 11:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ImBetterDude wrote: | | Someone up there stated that we would have to fold if BB turned over K 9. I fail to see the logic in that. I guess I need to read Moshman's book. |
Just basic math. AQo doesn't beat K9s often enough to make calling correct. There are actually other factors that could alter even that math somewhat, but they aren't likely to be a net positive in this spot (with two desperate shorties if you win) or in a $6.50 (where having an inherent edge should be making it less likely that we should call). |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
ciaran
ITH Support
Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 4781
Location: Alpharetta, GA
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 11:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ecchu wrote: | | I guess we have different opinions on how useful Moshman's book is. He just doesn't impress me. I don't entirely believe in any ABC strategy at all, like AQ isn't always a fold. I know if I am a bigstack I will do a move very much like this as a resteal. Is that so out of a question? |
There's a huge difference between shoving as the bigstack here, and calling the shove. I'm even pretty sure Moshman covers it. 
Basically, if you commit yourself to the pot without the other guy(s) being committed, you force them to make the decisions, and due to the nature of the game it's very often going to be -$EV to do anything but fold. It's the difference between open-raising AQo and having him shove and table K9s, and having him expose K9s and you shoving AQo first to act. If you both play to maximize $EV, he's not making an error in the first case, and you are if you call. In the second case you aren't making an error to shove, because he can't then profitably call.
Think of it as a big game of chicken in which it's possible for one player to guarantee he's not blinking. At that point, all you can really do in a lot of cases is guarantee you both lose. |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
|
