Beyond Wiz?

[Longy]

The % = % of the prize pool in terms of EV difference between shoving(in this case calling) and folding.

Ok so perhaps I do know what it means but I don't really know how to interpret it

This isn't right is it? (Or rather, it's an explanation of the wrong thing). The 'edge' %age is a value you can choose to reflect your skill advantage or disadvantage, which in turn affects the equity value of your stack. So if you tell Wiz you have a +1% edge it will tell you to avoid a coinflip (with no ICM factors), whereas if you have a -1% edge it will tell you to take it.

I think it is supposed to be measured in terms of %age of the prize pool, but as you say, God knows how you're supposed to assess it.

Erm, pretty sure that what I was saying! The edge is just how - or + you want the diff % to be which is a measure of the prize pool between shoving and folding.

[Moskvich]

The % = % of the prize pool in terms of EV difference between shoving(in this case calling) and folding.

Ok so perhaps I do know what it means but I don't really know how to interpret it

This isn't right is it? (Or rather, it's an explanation of the wrong thing). The 'edge' %age is a value you can choose to reflect your skill advantage or disadvantage, which in turn affects the equity value of your stack. So if you tell Wiz you have a +1% edge it will tell you to avoid a coinflip (with no ICM factors), whereas if you have a -1% edge it will tell you to take it.

I think it is supposed to be measured in terms of %age of the prize pool, but as you say, God knows how you're supposed to assess it.

Erm, pretty sure that what I was saying! The edge is just how - or + you want the diff % to be which is a measure of the prize pool between shoving and folding.

Ah OK, I geddit, apologies.

[MC]

I think the second one is 'beyond Wiz' as you say....

You make some excellent points man, ty for input. I think I've been putting too much weight on what Wiz says recently. There are spots arise where it isn't appropriate, and if Wiz was a bot, I swear it would blind down to 1 big blind half the time!

1st one I have to fold.  As for options thereafter, you can either piggy-back someone else's shove with a gambling hand (if you believe there is zero F/E) or if it does fold round to you on a subsequent hand, you could try the old 'limp-n-go'

I never limp-n-go unless I have less than 2 bigs. Is this something I should be doing more? If I was to go with next hand instead of 95 I would be "TARPing" to 1200 if it folds round

I'm with Simon on hand one, I'd fold and be looking to limp & go or call with any remotley connected hand before it gets to my next bb.

2nd hand I am probably folding for a couple of reasons. Firstly I dont know your hud but the BB looks quite loose (is that 27 VPIP?) so you never know, he may call even though he would probably be nuts to. If the supernova is a reasonable player he will probably shove UTG the next hand to avoid being in the same sorta situation and if he doesnt, he may be nitty enough to fold if you shove (whenever I see a supernova I think NIT, which is probably wrong). Also, if I am going to shove either hand I would min raise, so someone else has to reraise to bust you and avoids that slim chance you get called in two places.

Yeah 27 VIP but stats are filtered for # of players at the table and stack size, so 27 is probs fine. I use the same read with Supernovas, it's usually right, but this guy is a decent reg so it doesn't apply in the same way.



I think maybe folding the 95 is right, but calling with 97 or something is probably okay. I kinda want to call with the A7s now. It's a table full of regs so it's probs the best spot I can really hope to get, and the upside is pretty decent.

[DaveShoelace]

I think the second one is 'beyond Wiz' as you say....

You make some excellent points man, ty for input. I think I've been putting too much weight on what Wiz says recently. There are spots arise where it isn't appropriate, and if Wiz was a bot, I swear it would blind down to 1 big blind half the time!

1st one I have to fold.  As for options thereafter, you can either piggy-back someone else's shove with a gambling hand (if you believe there is zero F/E) or if it does fold round to you on a subsequent hand, you could try the old 'limp-n-go'

I never limp-n-go unless I have less than 2 bigs. Is this something I should be doing more? If I was to shove the next hand instead of go with 95 I would be "TARPing" to 1200 the next hand if it folds round

I'm with Simon on hand one, I'd fold and be looking to limp & go or call with any remotley connected hand before it gets to my next bb.

2nd hand I am probably folding for a couple of reasons. Firstly I dont know your hud but the BB looks quite loose (is that 27 VPIP?) so you never know, he may call even though he would probably be nuts to. If the supernova is a reasonable player he will probably shove UTG the next hand to avoid being in the same sorta situation and if he doesnt, he may be nitty enough to fold if you shove (whenever I see a supernova I think NIT, which is probably wrong). Also, if I am going to shove either hand I would min raise, so someone else has to reraise to bust you and avoids that slim chance you get called in two places.

Yeah 27 VIP but stats are filtered for # of players at the table and stack size, so 27 is probs fine. I use the same read with Supernovas, it's usually right, but this guy is a decent reg so it doesn't apply in the same way.



I think maybe folding the 95 is right, but calling with 97 or something is probably okay. I kinda want to call with the A7s now. It's a table full of regs so it's probs the best spot I can really hope to get, and the upside is pretty decent.

If you have under 2bb then limp & go. If everyone is super shallow and you think that you can get people to fold for 2.5x shoves, then shove, because I certainly have been in a few games where people will still fold this shallow. But assuming you think they have to call, I would min raise your slightly more than 2bb stacks because if you are getting called anyway, may as well try to force one of the blinds to raise the other one out of the hand to boost your equity and every now and then you might get lucky and they all somehow fold pf.

BTW, its amazing how many times I have seen multiple opponents fold to my 1/18th of pot all in bet on the flop afterwards.

[Simon Galloway]

I never limp-n-go unless I have less than 2 bigs. Is this something I should be doing more? If I was to shove the next hand instead of go with 95 I would be "TARPing" to 1200 the next hand if it folds round

If you think you have zero F/E, then the limp'n'go works with however many bigs you have zero F/E with.  In reality with 3 bigs, bad players will fold to the shove 'some of the time' and multi-tabling regs will fold to the flop bet 'some of the time' due to distractions when they would have auto-called your shove pre.  So the more bigs you have in your stack, if you still believe you have zero F/E, the limp'n'go gets better and better because you have more ammo to follow it in with?

[DaveShoelace]

I never limp-n-go unless I have less than 2 bigs. Is this something I should be doing more? If I was to shove the next hand instead of go with 95 I would be "TARPing" to 1200 the next hand if it folds round

If you think you have zero F/E, then the limp'n'go works with however many bigs you have zero F/E with.  In reality with 3 bigs, bad players will fold to the shove 'some of the time' and multi-tabling regs will fold to the flop bet 'some of the time' due to distractions when they would have auto-called your shove pre.  So the more bigs you have in your stack, if you still believe you have zero F/E, the limp'n'go gets better and better because you have more ammo to follow it in with?

also the other good thing about min raising/limp & gos is that even some of the decent regs have no fucking clue what you are doing and assume you are terrible or have misclicked, and its never a bad thing for them to think you are shite.

[SuuPRlim]

So while Wiz says we don't gain enough equity by calling off 2.6k as a 60% favourite to get a 6.9k stack, its calculation is basically nonsense, since we're effectively calling off less than 2.6k and effectively getting more than 6.9k. I say it's nonsense, only in the sense that it's using numbers that don't really mean anything - maybe its conclusion is still correct. Whatever, it comes down to a lot of judgment - game flow, skill of the other players, how you think the big stack will change his play if you double up off him, etc etc. So I wouldn't worry about Wiz too much here and would go with your instinct. Fwiw, I think I'd call.

I was fascinated (but pretty lost) by most of this thread - ^^^ this looks like a really interesting point, forgive the newbie in here, but is this basically ICM, or is that a different calculation?

[Simon Galloway]

Apologies for the external link, and the in-joke pun, but in the name of education I think it's worth it.  Hood explains brilliantly the role of SNGW....

cliquey