Frozen hand

[NotReady]

This is a hand from one of Frozen_Fish's $215 SnG's. I've replayed them all and there are many, many questions about the play, but I chose this one because it goes to the fundamental approach of a player. It appears Frozen has a virtual lock on 3rd and he risks it all here against a big stack which tells me he has no interest in 3rd but is always looking to win. I can't see any other reason for making this play.

Am I reading this right or should this be a standard move in this situation?

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t200 (4 handed)

Hero (t1330)
UTG (t3965)
Button (t430)
SB (t4275)

Preflop: Hero is BB with A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, Q/images/graemlins/club.gif.
UTG folds, Button folds, SB completes, Hero raises to t1330 (All-In), SB calls t1130.

Flop: (t2660) 9/images/graemlins/club.gif, 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 3/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="blue">(2 players, 1 all-in)</font>

Turn: (t2660) 4/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="blue">(2 players, 1 all-in)</font>

River: (t2660) 3/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="blue">(2 players, 1 all-in)</font>

Final Pot: t2660

Results: <font color="white"> SB had Kh6h. </font>

FWIW: Twodimes gives AQ 3:2 here.

[La Brujita]

This seems like a very standard move to me. The reason imo is that the raise all in creates a decent amount of folding equity on Hero's part.

Additionally, hero also figures to have the best hand after a SB limper. This makes a push hugely plus ev. Limping with a hand that good and a big stack is frankly not a good play at all by the small blind.

Hero is also not as safe from bubbling as you think, one or two hands can make the difference.

[AJo Go All In]

there is a pretty good chance the SB will fold. given that, it's an easy push. also, he doesn't have anywhere close to a lock on 3rd. the shortstack doubles up once and he's back in it.

[slogger]

This seems pretty standard to me. I don't think Frozen is pushing on a steal, although I'm sure he'll be more than happy if big stack folds. He figures to have, by far, the best hand here. Hopefully big stack has Ax (x &lt; Q) - hard to imagine he's got AQ beat regardless.

I don't know Frozen and haven't reviewed the available replays of his tourneys, but I'd go so far as to say that if he's a successful player at that level, shorthanded aggression (even when risking elimination on the bubble) is a hallmark of his game.

The real question here: what would be the minimum hand Frozen pushes with when big stack completes the SB here (of course, if Frozen has a particular read, it could change quite a bit)? Or would he push with any two?

[Sam T.]

I've been thinking a lot about this play from the perspective of both the SB and the BB.

SBs who only complete often find themselves looking at a substantial raise from the BB, and I've been trying to figure out how to handle this:

If you are in the SB in the situation described above, and it is folded to you, what are your standards for raising? Completing? Folding? Given the frequency with which completing will entice a big raise from the BB, is completing a good way to entice a bluff?

If you are in the BB, and the SB completes, when do you raise? Check?

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a hand from one of Frozen_Fish's $215 SnG's. I've replayed them all and there are many, many questions about the play, but I chose this one because it goes to the fundamental approach of a player. It appears Frozen has a virtual lock on 3rd and he risks it all here against a big stack which tells me he has no interest in 3rd but is always looking to win. I can't see any other reason for making this play.

Am I reading this right or should this be a standard move in this situation?

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t200 (4 handed)

Hero (t1330)
UTG (t3965)
Button (t430)
SB (t4275)

Preflop: Hero is BB with A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, Q/images/graemlins/club.gif.
UTG folds, Button folds, SB completes, Hero raises to t1330 (All-In), SB calls t1130.

Flop: (t2660) 9/images/graemlins/club.gif, 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 3/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="blue">(2 players, 1 all-in)</font>

Turn: (t2660) 4/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="blue">(2 players, 1 all-in)</font>

River: (t2660) 3/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="blue">(2 players, 1 all-in)</font>

Final Pot: t2660

Results: <font color="white"> SB had Kh6h. </font>

FWIW: Twodimes gives AQ 3:2 here.

[/ QUOTE ]

One thing to add to this discussion on top of:

1) this is not a lock
2) this is a standard play

I think analyzing this play solely in terms of this hand is your biggest mistake.

Going all-in here, besides being a significant +EV move, sends an important signal: I'm not afraid - don't contest my blinds unless you're ready to go all the way with it. This can have a very large +EV effect on subsequent hands when players would rather fold the SB to you than gamble on a steal against you. And from 200/100 on, picking up blinds is basically the whole game.

eastbay

[Frozen]

"Going all-in here, besides being a significant +EV move, sends an important signal: I'm not afraid - don't contest my blinds unless you're ready to go all the way with it. This can have a very large +EV effect on subsequent hands when players would rather fold the SB to you than gamble on a steal against you. And from 200/100 on, picking up blinds is basically the whole game."

You got it! Also keep in mind that I never just squeak into 3rd. I'll pound my way into 1st...or 4th when it backfires.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

You got it! Also keep in mind that I never just squeak into 3rd. I'll pound my way into 1st...or 4th when it backfires.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for this reply. I was seriously considering giving up on SnG's. This was the point of my post, that the only reason to play this hand this way is you place great weight on getting 1st or nothing, even when not yet officially ITM.

There is a theory that you should get ITM no matter what, then go for 1st rather than 3rd, and I just felt the way you played this hand violated that theory.

I have no idea which is better, but they are clearly opposing theories and this hand illustrates how they require completely different plays in some situations.

Edit: Meant to add thanks very much for providing the hand histories. They are a gold mine for us SnG newbies, I think easily worth as much as a whole book on the subject would be. This single hand is going to give me a couple weeks thinking material to reassess my whole approach.

[slogger]

[ QUOTE ]


This was the point of my post, that the only reason to play this hand this way is you place great weight on getting 1st or nothing, even when not yet officially ITM.

I have no idea which is better, but they are clearly opposing theories and this hand illustrates how they require completely different plays in some situations.

[/ QUOTE ]

NotReady, I really think you're looking at this hand the wrong way. Yes, it's true that a great emphasis should be placed on placing first (sometimes at the risk of bubbling), but this move is not as illustrative of that principle as you make out. Pushing with JTs or a complete bluff would be a better example of this philosophy.

As I mentioned in my earlier post, the move is somewhat dependent on reads, but if you're fairly comfortable that Big Stack is not trapping, then pushing all-in is automatic from both the survival/ITM perspective, as well as the place first at all costs perspective.

It would be different if big stack had pushed in and Frozen had to decide whether or not he was willing to risk his whole stack with AQ because he now has no chance to make the big stack fold (this a much closer decision than the decision to push over the SB-completion, although I think a very strong case could be made for calling - AQ is a big hand when the game is 4-handed).

[NotReady]

Suppose a case where someone offered you 1 million to finish in the money. It doesn't matter whether it's 1st, 2nd or 3rd. 4th is worth nothing, 3rd is worth 1 million. Would you still go all in with the AQ here?

[schwza]

[ QUOTE ]
Suppose a case where someone offered you 1 million to finish in the money. It doesn't matter whether it's 1st, 2nd or 3rd. 4th is worth nothing, 3rd is worth 1 million. Would you still go all in with the AQ here?

[/ QUOTE ]

i would check with that payout. the question is pretty relevent, as it describes the payout for a satelite.

i would love to watch 200+15 sit n go histories from a good player - is there any way i can get my hands on them?

[slogger]

First of all, this scenario ($1 million for any Top 3 finish) significantly changes the value of pushing versus folding relative to the actual situation, and it's not because of how much money is at stake. It's because there is ZERO increase in pay for finishing higher than 3rd.

As long as big stack was dealing with the same parameters (same prize for any top 3 finish) I believe pushing in is still correct, although it's much closer. It
s even more correct if big stack is familiar with correct strategy (although, if he was, he would not have limped in here), because he should consider folding even AA if this prize structure was in effect.

So there's your answer, but I cannot stress enough that under actual conditions (50% to first, 30% to second, and 20% to third), pushing is clearly correct.

[slogger]

See AA Suited's post on the second page of this forum, entitled, "How much can you learn by watching the 200+15 tournys?"

There is a link to Party Poker's hand replayer software and it includes some of Frozen's 200+15 hand histories.

By the way, after watching the first one, I must say I was shocked by how badly some these people played. Frozen played very solidly, but I think even he would agree that there wasn't much involved in making it to the money in this one.