NL50 6-max hand against 2 uberLags

[Raiser]

Party NL50 6-max

Both villains in this hand are very loose and very aggressive before and after the flop. UTG has gone from $650 to his current level of $1400 by winning a bunch of all ins, most of which he wasn't the favorite when the money got in. BB is borderline maniac.

Stacks:
BB - $55
UTG - $1400
Me - $180

I get AQ in CO. UTG raises to $5, I call, BB calls. ($15 pot)

Flop is 8TJr. BB checks, UTG bets $7, I call, BB pushes, UTG calls, Hero ?????

What's your plan for the flop and the rest of the hand if you continue?

[Tilt]

How can you continue? It sounds like UTG isn't going to fold almost any hand, so you either have to ahead with Ace high or draw out on him. And a Q may not be a clean out. You are probably behind at least one of the two players. Fold it.

[Raiser]

Hey Tilt,

Did you notice that I've got a double gutter here?

[TrailofTears]

Come on, Raiser. Are you telling me that you can't find a better spot to put all your money in against two LAGfests. I know for a fact you can, and with these guys it seems like you will get that chance. Don't put your 3xBuyin stack at jeopardy on a complete draw when you don't even know which outs are good or how many you have. Lay it down and battle them another time.

-T

[Tilt]

[ QUOTE ]
Hey Tilt,

Did you notice that I've got a double gutter here?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but you do and you don't. At least one if not 2 of your 9's are in their hands. Possibly 3 if the pfr was from 99.

I don't think I am seeing mosters under the bed here, I just think you can get away from this now and that proceeding is just gambling. Even against these guys. Somebody here is at least paired I think. Which even if all your outs were clean - overcards and all - gives you at best a coin flip heads up. But lets not kid ourselves; you don't have that many outs.

[TheWorstPlayer]

You have to REALLY protect your 3x buyin stack with these uber deepstacked fish around. Don't go for this TINY edge, if there is an edge at all. Wait for a better spot.

[jdaddy]

You know you are going to double though the big stack a time or two, just not with this hand. Clearly a lay down.

[Raiser]

/images/graemlins/confused.gif <sigh>

Thanks guys. Sounds like I totally butchered this hand. Here was my though process.

After BB's push and UTG's call, I assumed that at least one of my 9's was gone. UTG calling could honestly be any part of the flop. He'd call here with AT. So I figured I had 4 outs to the nuts and maybe as many as 10 or so (3 Aces, 4 kings, 3ish nines) to the winner. I figured that on average, I would have 7 outs here, which put me right on the boarderline of calling as the pot was laying me ~2.5:1. And I knew if I hit my hand UTG would pay me off.

Anyway, I called BB's push. The turn was a 7. UTG bet $20, I called. River blank and I lost to BB's 92 and UTG's 99. Very nice read by Tilt.

I've always subscribed to the school of thought that in a cash game you take any edge you have and play it. The "wait for a better spot" theory never made sense to me in the context of a ring game. I'm not sure how I feel now?

[TrailofTears]

I can understand your skepticism of the "wait for a better spot" theory, but with these guys you KNOW there will be a better spot.

-T

[jhall23]

Pushing any edge would make perfect sense if there was no max buy in and you could just re-buy back to what you had. But if you loose your lovely stack to the huge stack you can only buy back in for 50 bucks and then have to work back up again so it's not quite so clear. Since he is a crazy lag you can find a better spot than a draw that you are unsure how many outs you have.

If you were both around the max buy-in then I agree the "waiting for a spot" tourney thinking doesn't make any sense.

[Raiser]

I see what you are saying. Nobody wants to lose the stack that they've built up. But, if at the end of the day, making a certain play is +EV and you make enough of these +EV decisions then you are better off, no? I don't think stack size should be a consideration in this, unless it's your last dollar or something like that.

[mason55]

Just because a play is +EV doesn't mean that it's the MOST +EV play possible. Just as TEV happens in a tournament where you do things like push while you still have a reasonable stack so that you have folding equity, in a capped buyin ring game where both people are over the cap, certain plays will have a higher EV because they have a better chance of preserving your stack than losing it on a 50/50 play. Especially against very poor players.

[TrailofTears]

OK, then how about I don't think this move is +EV. And stack size is certainly something that should come into consideration, as previous poster said. Find a better spot to double through on big stack maniac or stack off the crazy 92o player. If you were sitting with your original buyin here, it would be easier to advocate a push here, but not as it is.

Think of it this way, : [ QUOTE ]
UTG has gone from $650 to his current level of $1400 by winning a bunch of all ins, most of which he wasn't the favorite when the money got in.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait to go in when you are a favorite and take him down. Don't try to come from behind, especially when you have no idea of villains holdings or how far behind you really are.

- Trail

[Raiser]

[ QUOTE ]
OK, then how about I don't think this move is +EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

That I can live with. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Also, I've crunched some numbers and now see that you guys are right about it sometimes being correct to "wait for a better spot" in these capped buy in games. Thanks for being patient with me. This has been very helpful.

[TrailofTears]

Thanks for making a good post and playing devil's advocate. I would be lying if I said I didn't learn as much from posting advice as from reading it. I learn just as much from trying to explain something as I do from someone explaining it to me. Also, when posting, sometimes I realize the errors in my line's and reasoning, and I can fix those things that I never thought about. It has been a good thread and a subject that isn't always discussed on here (playing with a big stack) yet many of us players are familiar with.

P.S. As a side note, tell Pierre Pierce that he's an [censored] for blowing the season for Iowa. Such a good thing wasted...

- Trail (UW Alum)

[mason55]

Your post really got me thinking about doing some math to incorporate the size of your stack above the fixed buyin into EV calculations.

I made a post in the poker theory forum if anyone wants to check it out.

Capped buy-in and EV: some math (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=1809133&page=0&view=colla psed&sb=5&o=14&fpart=&vc=#Post1809133)

[jhall23]

I'm not really concerned about loosing my stack so that I start playing weak tight or anything. It's just that in this situation you have already identfied both players are bad and one of them has a huge stack. Your EV here is questionable and if it is positive at all it is probably very small. Since you know that the big stack stinks you can probably wait for a better EV spot to get his chips.

+EV is always good of course, but when you have a stack over 3 times the max buy-in I would think your session EV would be better if you waited for a better spot. Let's take an extreme example. Say next hand you get AA and he get's KK and you get it all in pre-flop and last hand you either doubled up or lost with a 55% advantage.

55 percent of the time you ended up with a stack of 415 (took out rake to keep it simple). 45 percent you loose 168 more and have to rebuy to 50.

.55 * (( 830 * .813) - (415 * .187)) = .55 * 597.19 = 328.45
.45 * (( 100 * .813) - (50 * .187)) - 168 = .45 * 71.95 - 168 = -135.62

So $ won would be 328.45 - 135.62 = 192.83

If you just fold and get in on the AA hand it would be:

(( 336 * .813) - (168 * .108)) = 255.02


I think my math is correct on this. If anything the 830-100-336 are doubled and shouldn't be. Regardless similar results would still come out.

EDIT: Ok, there have been a few reply's after this some some of my initial comments are unnessary, but for those that want to see the math.

[mason55]

This is the sort of thing I was trying to quantify in my post in the poker theory thread. Jhall - click my link, I'm interested in what you think of the math I attempted for a general situation

[jhall23]

I think at least the thought process behind the math is definetly on the right track. It hurt's my brain too much right now (after going threw all my own calculations) to really hit that last equation you have in there. It looks good at first glance but obviously we can't exactly quantify 75%/25% piece exactly as Ghazban pointed out.

But basically if you have a good amount more than the cap and a villian who is horrible and has you covered you can see by making guesses at the math that it can be more profitable to wait. If the villian is really bad and we are sure we can get him all in with a much bigger edge it is probably a good idea to pass on the very small ones.

[Raiser]

Cool. Thanks Mason. I did something along these lines earlier. I'll check your post and see how it compares to my results and post what I did.

Thanks.

[Raiser]

[ QUOTE ]
But basically if you have a good amount more than the cap and a villian who is horrible and has you covered you can see by making guesses at the math that it can be more profitable to wait.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey jhall. This isn't necessarily true.

I've got some math to back this up and will post it later. But situations do exist where taking advantage of the tiny edge now and the big edge later is much more preferable to just waiting for later. I'll try to post my math later tonight.

[jhall23]

Raiser, don't forget to post this, I'd love to see it. Good thread you started.

[Burno]

[ QUOTE ]
You have to REALLY protect your 3x buyin stack with these uber deepstacked fish around. Don't go for this TINY edge, if there is an edge at all. Wait for a better spot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Amen.


I'd fold here, even though I have some sick, borderline -EV obsession with double gutters. Hopefully I'll grow out of it.

[TheWorstPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd fold here, even though I have some sick, borderline -EV obsession with double gutters. Hopefully I'll grow out of it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Usually people like double gutters because of implied odds since they are diguised when they hit. When it comes to questionable calls of all-ins, though, I think we should recognize them for simply 8 (at best) outs.

[Raiser]

OK, this thread generated a lot of discussion about whether "waiting for a better spot" is always a good idea when facing terrible LAG opponents who are sitting behind ginormous stacks. Here are some EV caluclations that I did yesterday that show that in, at least, one case it doesn't make sense to wait.

Here are the assumptions of the problem.
1) You have a big stack. For this example assume $200 in a $50 max buy in game.
2) You have a very bad player at your table that you know you can double through.
3) Said player has significantly more money than you. For the case of this example we'll assume he has you outstacked by at least 3:1. This assumption allows the possibility that you can double through him twice.

Now lets say that you are facing an all in decision where you knew you were 51% to win. The question is: Should you wait for a better spot because you know that eventually you will have a 75% shot at doubling through him.

2 cases.

Case 1: You choose to take the 51% shot and the 75% shot. If you lose the 51% shot you will rebuy and still take the 75% shot later.

EV=(0.51)*(0.75)*(600)+(0.51)*(0.25)*(-200)+(0.49)*(0.75)*(-150)+(0.49)*(0.25)*(-250)=229.5-25.5-55.13-30.63=$118.24

Case 2: You skip the 51% shot and wait for the 75% shot.

EV=(0.75)*200+(0.25)*(-200)=$100

Obviously there are a lot of variables here. The 3 that effect this the most are:

1) Our stack size. If our stack started at $100 instead of $200, our EV in case 1 is now $65.24 and our EV in case 2 is $50. EV1 is 30% greater than EV2 in this case. In the original set of assumptions it was 18% greater. So as your stack grows, your rate of return by taking both +EV situations is diminished.
2) How much bigger our opponents stack is than ours. This is the key to this problem. If we can't double through our opponent more than once then it doesn't make sense to take both +EV situations. I'll let you guys play with the numbers here.
3) What if the % you will win if you wait for the better spot is higher? For example, if you knew you could wait and get a 90% shot later, then your EV in the second case is $160, and it would be correct to wait. Of course we are very rarely in a situation where we know we are 90% favorites.

Feel free to check my math. I think I've done this correctly. Of course we are probably not fortunate enough to be in a situation where all the assumptions of this problem hold, so in the long run it seems that "waiting for a better spot" in these capped buy in games has a lot of merit.