blonde poker forum

blinds are 2,000-4,000

UTG 50,000

Button 65,000

Small blind 27,000

Big Blind hero 65,000

payouts £1570,£880,£520,£350


folded to the small blind, who raises to 15,000 with 12,000 behind

Big blind looks down at  4c 4d

the two other players are nitty rocks. the small blind is active, far higher raise frequency that the other two


Should hero set the small blind in here?

[  ] No

Shhh, nit-roller.

It looks like a raise to induce a shove.

[ ] Don't give him what he wants.

Ante's?

We're paying 23,000 to win 54,000 in what will nearly always be a 50/50 unless he has the dream A2/A3 or the nightmare higher pair, surely an automatic shove

We never have a big enough edge to pass this surely

+1  INSTA!!!

We certainly don't have a big enough edge. well I don't.

I shoved, thanks all

[ x ] end thread.

What was the stack sizes of the other 2 tightend , for a ICM point of view...  agreed sb opening range here could be as high as 50% so with odds of 1.22 [45% equity] it is close even without knowledge of other 2 stacks.

in the initial post

50 and 65

no

your icm looks like -
fold 0.2753
call 0.3392
lose 0.2159
giving yourself a 45% chance to win -  [0.45*0.3392]+[0.55*0.2159]=0.2713 ev to call your fold ev is 0.2753 so giving yourself a 45% chance of beating his range here is a fold...

66+,A4s+,K7s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T9s,A9o+,KTo+,QTo+,JTo is the range i gave him roughly unless you think it is wider ??
55+,A2s+,K5s+,Q7s+,J8s+,T8s+,98s,A7o+,A5o,K9o+,Q9o+,J9o+,T9o is still a fold at 47%........................

Yeah, you kinda have to shove here

He might slow play the biggest pairs, so unlikely you're worse than 50% here, and being hopeful he could have A2, A3, A4

why ? the main idea is that you do not want to be taking risks and calling off your chips (note the emphasis on calling) with three other players remaining. You don't want to risk calling into races, mostly because of the small increase from fourth to third place. This is contradictory to the style of most players, who are thrilled that they just made the money, and are willing to take risks, loosely calling all-ins after playing tight in hopes of getting lucky and possibly winning first place.

It is -ev call and the increase of tightends stack is not worth the risk...

but hold on a sec, no one is doing ICMs to that detail at a live table. taking into account knowledge of player (active, loose), a view of his range and the stacks you can't tell me its a definitvely -EV shove sitting there without a lappy and an ICM programme to hand!   

is it not an idea to analyze these type of situations so that when similar ones occur your decision making will be better?
the more you use icm,equity,ranges to analyze your sngs + mtts using it to work out your bubble play and where you stand chips to prize when in the money , some of these decisions become easier and reqire no lappy or icm calc as you get used to the numbers..

because stove is so popular a lot of players now know ranges and equity by memory..It is the same with icm but less players utilise it...

that's why I posted the thread, but I think its a bit strong to describe it as a clear -EV shove situation.

As it happened mentally crunching the range/stacks/situation at the table last night for 90 seconds or so, it appeared to me like a shove, which I did 

i never said it was a CLEAR -ev situation when i 1st looked at it i thought it was close...

BUT when after crunching the numbers and looking at the pay outs it was a mathematical fold,the reason i started to do icm was i because i dabbled in sngs and the top boys know there icm/equity backwards..It is useful to know it,but is not the be all end all...i just thought you might want to see if it was actually a good shove...

thanks, my apologies


BTW he had J10 off. Which was in your range, and slap bang in mine

so equity wise 1.22 you made a good call , but it is when we take into account the pay structure that we actually needed maybe 1.5 to 1 to make it mathematically correct...

but the question is did your pair hold up ?  :) 

Rich,

Dont laugh but i would consider pass in this situation especially if the other players are playing v tight.  I feel aggression is key and the sb has made the move with at least two overs to a pair of 4s.

I would get my bb the very next hand!!!!!


Of equal importance the playoffs have been fantastic!!!! I was in the Hardrock in Tampa watching the Giant fans cry...hahahahaha

PS:  Well done on the luton result

dont larf

 but what is stove and icm?

Poker maths tools that can basically be manipulated to say anything can be mathematically correct to fold,seriously though i don't think icm is that relevant in this spot but gl to you Mr noble

www.pokerstove.com for estimating ranges, determing hand odds with respect to those ranges

ICM calculations..take a look on the Learning centre for a series of posts by Longy and others on ICM theory. Here's one example of an ICM tool

cheers will do

i didn't use a tool to manipulate the icm based on the pay structure? the only thing i calculated was villains hand ranges and then used the maths.

4th is £350 to 3rd £520 is it worth racing.
interesting spot...
           ICM Equity
rock1 - 24.5147  50000 chips
rock2 - 27.5318  65000 chips
villain  - 20.3807  33000 chips if tightend folds
tight  - 27.5318  65000 chips if he does not call or go all in

The only calculation I'd be interested in here is....best hand+fold=nit.

TY - just thought that seeming icm works well 2 to 5 players left , that if we saw if it was +ev or -ev we might learn something,my mistake it seems..

ps
i am not a nit  lmao

Nah, I'm not suggesting you are. Just trying to keep my posts shorter is all :)

I don't like these calculations in short handed poker. You see they only really take account of this one hand in isolation, but this is about winning a tournament. If you jam with 4-4 and win, the dynamics of the tournament shift dramatically in your favour. From this point on when you raise your oppos will be reluctant to play back at you...cos they know you call jams and win races...so they will fold. That is good for you short-handed. When the villains finally wake up you would have already set sail for home and they'll be battling for 2nd place. So the chip power and psychological edge you get from winning this pot is pretty big. Certainly big enough to swing -EV to +EV imo anyways.

Alternatively, if you fold your wired pair on your blind in a short-handed format you will make winning the game more difficult. The villains will see you have a hand and yet still take the cautious route, so they will be more inclined to play back at you and raise your blind in future hands. This is bad for you. Also the whole mindset you get from folding what is very likely to be the best hand will be more sinking than swimming, and this is also bad in a format where aggression is king. I would fold to some oppos but not standard villains because the complexity of the game changes thereafter and there isn't a calculation that can show that. Tournament poker concerns winning the game rather than winning one hand. Suppose this theory works better live though.

I don't think you're ever going to get in to these sort of situations often enough for ICM to ever apply here.

ICM is great for sngs because you play thousands of games so eventually the maths will work in your favour.

In live tournaments the cards matter much more than the maths so this is a shove. If you get in a race so be it.

Erm...... Wait, What?

ICM is as relevant whether it was over 1 hand, 1 tournament or 1000 tournament, What is +ev or -ev will remain so, variance has no impact whether ICM is right or wrong.

The cards and the maths of poker are the same thing, I don't see the difference. Live tourneys are different from other formats but for none of the reasons you have stated.

Fair point

when in a mtt or sng and you are down to 2 , icm goes out the window and calculating with chips/equity works just as well in that situation. But when it is 3 to 5 left ICM is the most accurate, if there are anymore players than that in a mtt it becomes more difficult to predict the actual outcome because the number of variables that come into play in tournaments make it that ICM doesn't capture them very easily and is difficult to model in general.

When you use it daily though a lot of these ranges/payouts +EV -EV decisions become easier as you have analyzed similar before.ICM takes into account the actual payouts, and because of this, it tends to be more accurate than estimating using only chips/pot odds..

after all that i'd still called with 44 it is close but i'd examine it afterwards to see if it was a correct call ..

how does he not have small pairs in his range?

because tightend had 44 so i discounted 22,33 but that makes a difference of about 0.5% ....opps sry 0.44% ;D

I insta especially being you tighty.

It's all very well using the tools to calculate after the event - but it is purely math and fails to take into account human psychology. Just because the math tells you it is the right thing to do - does not automatically mean that it is correct in every situation.

Your image is such that the call would be made unwillingly IMO - and some - although i doubt many - may even find a fold purely because they don't expect you to play back at them with small pairs and their range for you will be much select and definitive.

There is also the fact that the others in your opinion are "nits" - even more nitty than you. Therefore he has more chance of making them fold with a push of half their stack than possibly heading into a pot with you in which he believes you are more than likely to win. Take into account the money and remaining alive seems a far more interesting prospect.

Furthermore should you win a flip then, as has been previously stated, rather eloquently IMO, the momentum and future of the table are yours to control.

Snap man - your image is priceless

when did people forget that ICM assumes equal skill levels between participants.

ICM assumes nothing , you yourself guess villains hand range...icm just works out the rest to see which option fold or call is the most profitable.
Personally, I don't put a lot of value into ICM, but regardless of what I think, it's good to know. In short, ICM is the concept of putting a real money value on your current stack, relative to your opponents and the total payout in the tournament.

It is still based on the fact that everyone is of equal ability, as you current equity is based on your chip stack and how that relates to the prize structure. Nothing to do with your ability compared to the rest of the field.

Where does the skill argument come in when using interpolation when the calculation is not a raise but calling/setting a all in here with 4 left?,the only problem i see is that the size of the blinds are not taking into account with icm...

is not the skill argument/debate about icm when there are more than 5 players left as in sngs when 9/10 players begin? 3to5 players left then icm is pretty useful as the increases in equity are more important now. [in tightends case he is in the payout position]