Too tight?

[NoflopsHomer]

Hmm i prefer Green & Blue cards and these are Red and Black so probably fold.

Would call if they were suited though coz with the four colour deck, suited cards look amazing (esp Blue & Green ones as iv said).

Id probably call if one was Blue & one was Green aswell.

[temp0r]

Nit. I shove here like always.

I agree, thought I'm not a STT player. You have to play the Step4 like a proper STT as only top 3 will really do, so would be interested in what the STT pushbots have to say.

i'd say less than half of winning STT pushboy strat pros who play this limit would even raise AK here let alone re-raise shove against an unknown in the first level!!!

You can't look at the limit though as the Steps sats are not filled with 215$ players but with 20 and 7$ players

ok then. fuck the limit. this is still a donkish push.

by doing this we're basically saying 'yknow what i'm not good enough to win this thing by playing my normal game so i'm gonna go ahead and gamble first level with ace high HOPING to get a coinflop (which is what we're getting at the very best) because i'm just that unconfident in my ability to outplay the table over all the hands that could be played throughout the tournament.'

that sound like the mentality of a winning player?

[boldie]

Nit. I shove here like always.

I agree, thought I'm not a STT player. You have to play the Step4 like a proper STT as only top 3 will really do, so would be interested in what the STT pushbots have to say.

i'd say less than half of winning STT pushboy strat pros who play this limit would even raise AK here let alone re-raise shove against an unknown in the first level!!!

You can't look at the limit though as the Steps sats are not filled with 215$ players but with 20 and 7$ players

ok then. fuck the limit. this is still a donkish push.

by doing this we're basically saying 'yknow what i'm not good enough to win this thing by playing my normal game so i'm gonna go ahead and gamble first level with ace high HOPING to get a coinflop (which is what we're getting at the very best) because i'm just that unconfident in my ability to outplay the table over all the hands that could be played throughout the tournament.'

that sound like the mentality of a winning player?

Worked for Jamie Gold

[LuckyLloyd]

Nit. I shove here like always.

I agree, thought I'm not a STT player. You have to play the Step4 like a proper STT as only top 3 will really do, so would be interested in what the STT pushbots have to say.

i'd say less than half of winning STT pushboy strat pros who play this limit would even raise AK here let alone re-raise shove against an unknown in the first level!!!

You can't look at the limit though as the Steps sats are not filled with 215$ players but with 20 and 7$ players

ok then. fuck the limit. this is still a donkish push.

by doing this we're basically saying 'yknow what i'm not good enough to win this thing by playing my normal game so i'm gonna go ahead and gamble first level with ace high HOPING to get a coinflop (which is what we're getting at the very best) because i'm just that unconfident in my ability to outplay the table over all the hands that could be played throughout the tournament.'

that sound like the mentality of a winning player?

Nah, your right. Winning players should be able to consistently outplay the opposition in situations where you start with 75BB stacks and the blinds go up at regular intervals. Gambling is baaaaaad.

[Longy]

This really is a clear fold.

Due to the payout structure which is quite flat and pays in this case something to 66% of the field and a clear profit to 22% of the field, getting it in even as 60/40 favourite (against a range as obv ak is not a 60% over any hand) is a bad idea.

If you have like myself in the past immersed myself in learning ICM, equity decisions in sngs are often extremely counter intituative. As survival for the most part is key over gaining chips.

Why do you think top live MTT pros (Allen Cunningham, Barry Greenstein, Daniel Negreanu etc) get totally owned in high stakes sngs as everything they have learnt doesn't apply to sngs and gaining chips early is something that should be only done with minimum risk.

Seriously anyone advocating getting it in here, has little to no knowledge/experience of proper sng theory.

Fwiw I only get it definitley in here with aa/kk. QQ is the only marginal hand to me and then I go with my reads.

[LuckyLloyd]

This really is a clear fold.

Due to the payout structure which is quite flat and pays in this case something to 66% of the field and a clear profit to 22% of the field, getting it in even as 60/40 favourite (against a range as obv ak is not a 60% over any hand) is a bad idea.

If you have like myself in the past immersed myself in learning ICM, equity decisions in sngs are often extremely counter intituative. As survival for the most part is key over gaining chips.

Why do you think top live MTT pros (Allen Cunningham, Barry Greenstein, Daniel Negreanu etc) get totally owned in high stakes sngs as everything they have learnt doesn't apply to sngs and gaining chips early is something that should be only done with minimum risk.

Seriously anyone advocating getting it in here, has little to no knowledge/experience of proper sng theory.

Fwiw I only get it definitley in here with aa/kk. QQ is the only marginal hand to me and then I go with my reads.

Longy, he's currently in level 4 of the step system. As such, we should surely only be concerned with the top two places? Would you fold here in a regular Sng?

[booder]

Seriously anyone advocating getting it in here, has little to no knowledge/experience of proper sng theory.

IMO these EPT steps (i presume its a turbo ? ) play completely differently to regular SnGos.  If it was a $215 buy in regular sng then i would lean towards a fold but as the majority of players have "stepped" to this level,the standard of play is not up to the usual "buy in " sng standard,indeed i have seen this kind of reraise with KQ,K J type hands. i'm not folding AK here.

* i have little experience of regular sng, but i do have some experience of step strategy

[boldie]

Seriously anyone advocating getting it in here, has little to no knowledge/experience of proper sng theory.

IMO these EPT steps (i presume its a turbo ? ) play completely differently to regular SnGos.  If it was a $215 buy in regular sng then i would lean towards a fold but as the majority of players have "stepped" to this level,the standard of play is not up to the usual "buy in " sng standard,indeed i have seen this kind of reraise with KQ,K J type hands. i'm not folding AK here.

* i have little experience of regular sng, but i do have some experience of step strategy

It's not a turbo at 215..or atleast the APPT one weren't anymore at that level

[Longy]

This really is a clear fold.

Due to the payout structure which is quite flat and pays in this case something to 66% of the field and a clear profit to 22% of the field, getting it in even as 60/40 favourite (against a range as obv ak is not a 60% over any hand) is a bad idea.

If you have like myself in the past immersed myself in learning ICM, equity decisions in sngs are often extremely counter intituative. As survival for the most part is key over gaining chips.

Why do you think top live MTT pros (Allen Cunningham, Barry Greenstein, Daniel Negreanu etc) get totally owned in high stakes sngs as everything they have learnt doesn't apply to sngs and gaining chips early is something that should be only done with minimum risk.

Seriously anyone advocating getting it in here, has little to no knowledge/experience of proper sng theory.

Fwiw I only get it definitley in here with aa/kk. QQ is the only marginal hand to me and then I go with my reads.

Longy, he's currently in level 4 of the step system. As such, we should surely only be concerned with the top two places? Would you fold here in a regular Sng?

Lol Lloyd are you playing devils advocate here or trying to wind me up as your the last i expected come back with this response. Poker is about EV its not about zomg i have just made step 4 i have to gamble it up here to make the next level.

Once you have entered your buyin is gone and is converted into equity in chip, now all that counts is the payout and how we can best achieve the max expectation.

Unless opponent is known to raise with a massive range here and fold alot to a 3bet shove, passing is always the best option and yes i fold quickish in a reg sng.

Seriously anyone advocating getting it in here, has little to no knowledge/experience of proper sng theory.

IMO these EPT steps (i presume its a turbo ? ) play completely differently to regular SnGos.  If it was a $215 buy in regular sng then i would lean towards a fold but as the majority of players have "stepped" to this level,the standard of play is not up to the usual "buy in " sng standard,indeed i have seen this kind of reraise with KQ,K J type hands. i'm not folding AK here.

* i have little experience of regular sng, but i do have some experience of step strategy

They are just sngs with a different payout structure. The buyin is semi irrelevant and their range doesn't change enough, if you go and play the $16 turbos on stars (i have played circa 2000 post UIGEA but admittedly in late 06) and people are not getting it in here with kq for the most part.

[totalise]

They are just sngs with a different payout structure.

of course, but the different payout structure enormously affects the ranges. For example, if it was winner take all, there would be no bubble pushbot play, there would be no "play tight early because 55% edge on our stack is still $ev due to payout" standards, chip values would be linear with chip stacks (ie double up stack = double up in equity), as a result the play would open up a lot more early, and it wouldn't be the same game with 4 or 3 left. I have no idea how these things payout, but saying its "just a sng with a different payout structure" is kinda strange, imo, because the payout structure is the main thing that effects the play in the sng.

[Longy]

They are just sngs with a different payout structure.

of course, but the different payout structure enormously affects the ranges. For example, if it was winner take all, there would be no bubble pushbot play, there would be no "play tight early because 55% edge on our stack is still $ev due to payout" standards, chip values would be linear with chip stacks (ie double up stack = double up in equity), as a result the play would open up a lot more early, and it wouldn't be the same game with 4 or 3 left. I have no idea how these things payout, but saying its "just a sng with a different payout structure" is kinda strange, imo, because the payout structure is the main thing that effects the play in the sng.

I agree with you and in seperation that comment seems rather flippent. Yet i feel I have had outlined in earlier posts that this structure is even less linear than the standard 50/30/20. Thus making holding onto chips is even more important early relative to equity.

Totalise I take you fold here?

[totalise]

probably, I wonder how good/bad limping pre is as well, in this kinda sng

[ACE2M]

ignoring the maths side, from a phsycological point of view i can tell you that 95%+ of low limit players don't have the gumption to re raise with anything your ahead of here and 99% of decent players aren't raising with anything you can beat here either. I have a 22% roi in sngs over a sample of 3000+ and i am folding here everytime.

your out of position facing a re raise in level 1, fold ffs.

survival and fold equity are paramount and your offending them both here.

[LuckyLloyd]

Lol Lloyd are you playing devils advocate here or trying to wind me up as your the last i expected come back with this response. 

dang. busted. i've been levelling in this thread fwiw.