Questionable ITM push, i need icm and thoughts..

[raptor517]

***** Hand History for Game 1733669430 *****
NL Hold'em $100 Buy-in + $9 Entry Fee Trny:10376772 Level:8 Blinds(250/500) - Monday, March 14, 02:46:28 EDT 2005
Table Table 14238 (Real Money)
Seat 3 is the button
Total number of players : 3
Seat 7: Bebop86 ( $3986 )
Seat 2: jepguy ( $640 )
Seat 3: DeCartagena ( $5374 )
Trny:10376772 Level:8
Blinds(250/500)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to Bebop86 [ 7d 2d ]
DeCartagena folds.
Bebop86 raises [750].
jepguy is all-In [140]
** Dealing Flop ** [ 6s, Jc, Qd ]
** Dealing Turn ** [ 4h ]
** Dealing River ** [ 8h ]
Bebop86 shows [ 7d, 2d ] high card queen.
jepguy shows [ 3h, 2c ] high card queen.
jepguy finished in third place and won $200.
Bebop86 wins 360 chips from side pot #1 with high card queen with seven kicker.
Bebop86 wins 1280 chips from the main pot with high card queen with seven kicker.
jepguy has left the table.

ok, here are my thoughts:
for me im putting in 380 more to win 880, so i only need 2.316 to 1 to make the call correct. 27s is 38% against a random hand. therefore, this play should be +ev chip wise for sure. what im wanting to know is this a losing play? there are a lot of levels of thought that go into this, so analyze them please.

ive asked around about this hand, and im really confused about what is the CORRECT play, in every instance. so please, post it up, id love to hear it. holla

[curtains]

I believe that mathematically it's correct to push.

[Daliman]

Chip EV is poistive by about 160 I'd say, but overall this is a -ev move for more reasons than I have time to go into at the moment.

[curtains]

Aww cmon its not that complicated! It's correct to push!

[eastbay]

Here you go:

http://sitngo-analyzer.com/poker/72s.PNG

It's marginally profitable play by the standard ICM line.

This is probably a good threshhold of closeness to consider extra-ICM factors. I'll let other elaborate. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

eastbay

[raptor517]

thanks eastbay, that oughtta help the argument. oh, and obviously my argument is to push. all u naysayers siding with dali comment away /images/graemlins/wink.gif holla

[curtains]

+Chip Ev of 160 chips in such a small pot is a big deal! btw I think it's closer to +100 chips in EV, but I did the math pretty quickly. No way I'm giving that up here for strategical purposes.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
Here you go:

http://sitngo-analyzer.com/poker/72s.PNG

It's marginally profitable play by the standard ICM line.

This is probably a good threshhold of closeness to consider extra-ICM factors. I'll let other elaborate. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, I Wanna know 3 things and I want to know them now..

#1 WTF is that?
#2 HTF does it work?
#3 WTF can I get one?

[raptor517]

its eastbays SnG Power Tools silly. it works by MaGiK that i will never understand. as for getting one, im def gonna be first in line. holla

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
+Chip Ev of 160 chips in such a small pot is a big deal! btw I think it's closer to +100 chips in EV, but I did the math pretty quickly. No way I'm giving that up here for strategical purposes.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's only because you have no competence to think a move ahead or more in a game of strategy.

[curtains]

First of all I'm very lucky, so I'm pretty sure I'll win with the 72s.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
its eastbays SnG Power Tools silly. it works by MaGiK that i will never understand. as for getting one, im def gonna be first in line. holla

[/ QUOTE ]

Like you'd know how to utilize it....

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]

Ok, I Wanna know 3 things and I want to know them now..

#1 WTF is that?


[/ QUOTE ]

It's a program I wrote/am writing to do SnG preflop analysis.

[ QUOTE ]

#2 HTF does it work?


[/ QUOTE ]

Pretty much the same way that we've been doing ICM type calculations for a long time. It just makes it a tad bit quicker and less painful.

[ QUOTE ]

#3 WTF can I get one?

[/ QUOTE ]

See my profile.

eastbay

[curtains]

Can I have it now please, thanks! Ill give you 1million play money chips on pokerstars.

[raptor517]

yea well, one day i would learn.. holla

[curtains]

I challenge Daliman to a headsup match right now...best 2 of 3 on UB or Pokerstrs for $200!!!!!!!!!!!!!! bring it on !!%#%!^

[Daliman]

Ok, i'm going to make this REAL simple.

ICM is a great tool, but it only gives static value of chipstacks. While I don't know the exact correlating value of ROI% to bubble play, it is safe to say if your ACTUAL ROI were 10%, your stack value TO YOU at the beginning of a $200 tourney will be approximately $237. To simplify; if you are a +ROI player, chips are effectively worth more in your stack than a -ROI player. If I have 2500 in chips and everyone else does too 4 handed, our ICM value is all the same, but if the players are all break-even players, the chips in my stack are worth far more. I'd veture to guess by an amount almost exactly equal to my ROI +$15.

In other words, if your ROI is less than .3%, pushing is proper, if it isn't, folding is proper.

In other words; yes, Raptor should fold. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

I just want to say F raptor for keeping me up with this.

[curtains]

Your skill advantage is greatly depleted once the blinds are 250-500. Your skill advantage factors into ICM decisions much more in the early stages of the tournament when the blinds are low, not when they are absurdly high.

[raptor517]

lol. you should kick the crap out of imdapokergod and take his name. it fits you. according to my statistics tho.. it would still be fairly close to push this hand.. and lets not forget, we should calculate time into this as well, for $/hr situations. lets assume pushing saves us time, and folding makes us lose time. so i think that my roi would have to be closer to around 1.2% to make this fold correct. holla

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
Your skill advantage is greatly depleted once the blinds are 250-500. Your skill advantage factors into ICM decisions much more in the early stages of the tournament when the blinds are low, not when they are absurdly high.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not close to true. Your edge is gained MORE at these levels I feel, and either way, why is it then that almost all top level SNG players essentially sit out the first 2 levels?

[raptor517]

because everyone ELSE gives up points in the good ol roi category. so if they LOSE points we GAIN points. and yea, the late game factors very heavily into the roi. probably so much so that learning to play with the blinds at 50-100 and higher can make at LEAST a 10-12% roi difference. maybe more. holla

[curtains]

btw I agree with Daliman that you have a great skill difference at the end, but 250-500 is a bit too high for me to expect any great skill advantage.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]

btw I agree with Daliman that you have a great skill difference at the end, but 250-500 is a bit too high for me to expect any great skill advantage.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is only because you suck and call known tight players with A9.

[curtains]

That was obvious call with A9s!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Daliman]

Ok, I wanted to get a Mini Cooper for my Birthday, but now I want this.


Seriously though, if you don't let me get this from you when it is done, i'm going to hunt you down and fart on your head.

[Zelcious]

So you only do a single profitable play each tourney ?
I'm afraid things are a bit more complicated than this. Your ROI is the sum of all your good and bad moves during the tourney. It's even more complicated than this since, later moves actual affect on ROI is modified by previous moves survival probability. Your statement is simply just wrong.

[curtains]

You arguing with me or Dali?

[lacky]

[ QUOTE ]
In other words, if your ROI is less than .3%, pushing is proper, if it isn't, folding is proper.

[/ QUOTE ]

so doesnt this mean raptor should push? /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[raptor517]

thats PRECISELY why i did push. and after considering that time factor thing, i calculated the 1.2%, since im not quite there, i pushed. all of these things of course went through my head while posing on here and 8 tabling. holla

[Zelcious]

Dali, it was his message I replied to.

[raptor517]

oh boy i cant wait till he wakes up and starts kicking sand in your face. bwahahaha. holla

[curtains]

Which Dali message?

[Zelcious]

Turn off flat mode and you'll see.

[partygirluk]

what program are you using?

[Zelcious]

And why is that ? The post about not making a 0.3% ev move unless your ROI is less than +0.3% is one of the most stupid comments I've seen on this site. It's just a such fundamentally wrong reasoning. So if you have 30% ROI you should wait for a +30% EV move ? Moving from a 100% sure third place to a 100% sure first place is +30% EV.
Even if that 0.3% is relative to your stack it's still wrong. It's kinda like saying if I only make +80% moves (reletive to you fold ev) then I will have an ROI of 80%.
It's just much more complicated than that. You can't ignore how many such moves you can make and your survival probability of all previous moves.

[Scuba Chuck]

OK, interesting post. Daliman, I'm curious if you could finish your thoughts around the following statement.

[ QUOTE ]
That's only because you have no competence to think a move ahead or more in a game of strategy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this a blanket statement of, since you have better skills, it's smarter to fold here, or is there something deeper here?

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
And why is that ? The post about not making a 0.3% ev move unless your ROI is less than +0.3% is one of the most stupid comments I've seen on this site. It's just a such fundamentally wrong reasoning. So if you have 30% ROI you should wait for a +30% EV move ? Moving from a 100% sure third place to a 100% sure first place is +30% EV.
Even if that 0.3% is relative to your stack it's still wrong. It's kinda like saying if I only make +80% moves (reletive to you fold ev) then I will have an ROI of 80%.
It's just much more complicated than that. You can't ignore how many such moves you can make and your survival probability of all previous moves.

[/ QUOTE ]

One of the stupidest comments you've read? Ok, let's run this by you then. I'll try to keep it simple.

Let's say you have 3 players left in a tourney. blinds are 100-200. You have 4500 chips in the BB, Chip leader, a player you know very well and trust and know you can outplay has 5100 in the SB, and button has 400 chips left. Button folds, the SB pushes on you, then says "Fold, I have black Queens", and you have every reason to believe him, as he always tells you his hand You have AhKd

QcQs is a 57.3/42.7% favorite against AhKd, but using your logic folding will leave you with 4300 chips, but calling will give you 3843 on average. So easy fold, right?

WRONG
ICM says the fold is worth 37.93% of the prize pool, but calling is worth 40.47%, so not only is it a call, but it's an EASY one given static chip values.

But chip values AREN'T static, are they? As shown elsewhere, chips in my stack are OBVIOUSLY worth more than in other's stack, or else I would have a -7% roi from making $200 back for every $200 I play. And as I said in this simplified example, it would be a terrible idea to call here when the blinds are very manageable and you have an opponent you feel you can outplay.

Now, whether ROI directly correlates to HU play, I don't know for sure. I doubt you could just say "Player A has a 15% ROI, player B has a 0% ROI, so player A's stack is worth 15% more.", but I'm certain it's damn close. OF course, you could have a great ROI, but suck HU, but in these I'd say the better players have a greater edge later in the tourney, where often even ok players will make an allin call for 4k or more chips with hands as bad as 22 or QTo.

Yes, it IS more complicated. But .3% to a player with an 11% ROI at the risk of doubling up a short stack 62% of the time isn't worth it. Maybe to you it is.

This line of thinking is the kind of thing that seperates top SNG players from winning SNG players.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
OK, interesting post. Daliman, I'm curious if you could finish your thoughts around the following statement.

[ QUOTE ]
That's only because you have no competence to think a move ahead or more in a game of strategy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this a blanket statement of, since you have better skills, it's smarter to fold here, or is there something deeper here?

[/ QUOTE ]

Really, it's just a slap at curtains, who happens to be ok at a certain game in which thinking several moves ahead is a necessity.

But there ARE many additional factors of future play here, the least of which in my mind is the fact that folding gives the OP's short stacked opponent 880, which cannot logically make the Big stack fold in the BB next hand, but 62% of the time it gives him 1240 chips, meaning even though the BB is getting a little over 2-1, not only could it be proper to fold in a some instances, depending on the level being played at, many WILL fold for 740 more in the BB unless holding a semi-premium hand. Should THAT happen, he now has 1740, which is far more manageable.

There are plenty of other situational reasons to make one play versus the other here. Personally, I'd fold every time here and not give it a second thought. .3% +EV is nothing to me, especially if it can reduce my tactical advantage.

[gumpzilla]

I think the underlying idea of trying to continue to outplay players you know you can outplay is a good one. But this ROI stuff makes no sense to me, because it's a measure of how you perform over the whole tournament, not just in bubble or ITM settings. As an example of my own, suppose you were up against a player who played way too aggressively and loosely early and consequently had a smallish ITM, 20-25% we'll say. However, when he makes it to the bubble he does very well. Is ROI a useful measure of how he'll perform on the bubble here? It sure doesn't seem like it to me.

[Daliman]

Your example is a good one, but brings far too many variables into the mix. I think it is easily conceded however that a vast majority of winning SNG players have a greater edge late, ESPECIALLY in bubble situations, than vice versa. Whether the ROI% directly correlates, and if it does, how is the the question.

[Zelcious]

I commented on one thing, and one thing alone.

"In other words, if your ROI is less than .3%, pushing is proper, if it isn't, folding is proper."

I didn't say whether pushing or folding was right, I just said that the above reasoning simply is wrong. IMHO horribly wrong.

This is what my program says about your situation
http://www.mdstud.chalmers.se/~md9zelc/sng2.jpg
A super clear fold. Your calculation is way off since you use an average chipstack instead of the two cases of winning and loosing. Makes a huge difference. -5.8% is a really bad move.

[Benholio]

[ QUOTE ]
Chip EV is poistive by about 160 I'd say, but overall this is a -ev move for more reasons than I have time to go into at the moment.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd agree with you if Hero was the big stack, or if the big stack was known to be uber-tight. Otherwise, I think you can gamble (+CEV gamble, even) to get rid of the shortstack here, so that the bigstack can't push you around due to his presence.

How does losing this pot hurt you so bad to make it worth giving up chips to avoid?

I'm a little late coming into this thread, but maybe now you have time to go into all of those reasons, besides having a > .3% ROI. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Gramps]

I think you played it right. I don't see how giving your opponent and his random hand free chips getting him closer to restoring some fold equity would some "higher level thinking play" here. Sometimes the simple play is the best play.

72s wins 38.2% of the time against a random hand. BB has a random hand, thus that is how often you win. The other 61.8% of the time he calls and you lose (assume he calls 100% of the time like he should), all you do is give him another 390 chips. So...instead of him having 890 and posting a SB of 250, he now has 1280 and posts a small blind of 250.

Yes, there will be a few times where the extra 390 is enough fold equity on the big stack who gets a crap hand in his BB to be the "but for" reason why the BB folds (at that point restoring some decent fold equity for SB, who may (or may not) be able to take this fold equity and successfully steal some more) but most of the time that won't be the case. And 38.2% of the time, the short stack won't be around to play his SB.

If there was some chip gap you had on another player that you were trying to protect, or some other variables in play, then it can be correct to pass up +EV chip plays like this, but I don't see it here. In the absence of clearly articulable variables and logic (specific to this game) to the contrary, I say just make the simple play and raise. It's clearly the +EV chip play, and probably the +EV$ play.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
I commented on one thing, and one thing alone.

"In other words, if your ROI is less than .3%, pushing is proper, if it isn't, folding is proper."

I didn't say whether pushing or folding was right, I just said that the above reasoning simply is wrong. IMHO horribly wrong.

This is what my program says about your situation
http://www.mdstud.chalmers.se/~md9zelc/sng2.jpg
A super clear fold. Your calculation is way off since you use an average chipstack instead of the two cases of winning and loosing. Makes a huge difference. -5.8% is a really bad move.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, IMHO your opinion on mine is horribly wrong. You appear to know more about programming and math than I do, but you are not playing at the levels that I do, nor as profitably. Learn if you like, or don't. I really don't care about that. What I DO care about is you telling people I am trying to help that my opinion is totally wrong, and based on fallacious thinking. That, I can tell you with 100% assuredness, is dead wrong, and not to pull out johnsons or anything, probably has more than a little to do with the fact that I play 100's with a higher ROI than you have been playing 10's for. It's one thing to question thinking different than yours, and quite another to impugn it. You push with this all you like, I never will, and I would never advocate it for anyone I am teaching for many more reasons than I have stated.

With regards to your program's response to the situation I created, I did not use average chipstack for my calculation, which I believe yours did, because average chipstack would give 3843, obviously worth specifically less, which also doesn't factor your chance of busting. I multiplied the ICM value of 9k chips of .4795 by 42.7 to get .2047, and then just added that .20, the value of busting out 3rd. Clearly, THAT was wrong, as I'd further have to multiply each value again by the %'s it occurs to arrive t the proper final figure. It was early, and I'm no math wiz, what can I say. But there are plenty of situations that could be properly done by someone who doesn't have to spend 20 minutes doing it all out by hand while watching a baby where a +EV chip play can be incorrect.

[curtains]

I LOVE YOU ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Zelcious]

I never claimed to be a better poker player than you or that I'm used to playing anything higher than 4-table 30+3 or 8-table 20+2. I'm still just learning. But I am good at math/programming and saw a very wrong statement and commented on it. I critized the reasoning behind that one statement, never once said you made the wrong move by folding. It's a big difference. Hope you understand my point instead of being offended.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
I never claimed to be a better poker player than you or that I'm used to playing anything higher than 4-table 30+3 or 8-table 20+2. I'm still just learning. But I am good at math/programming and saw a very wrong statement and commented on it. I critized the reasoning behind that one statement, never once said you made the wrong move by folding. It's a big difference. Hope you understand my point instead of being offended.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Your statement is simply just wrong.


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's just a such fundamentally wrong reasoning.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I just said that the above reasoning simply is wrong. IMHO horribly wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, hard to see how I could be offended....

THere is a big difference between criticizing an opinion and saying it is HORRIBLE wrong. ESPECIALLY when you yourself even say it is a close decision.

In that you are just learning, maybe you should listen to the opinions of players who are more successful than you rather than just out-of-hand insult it. There is lots of math IN poker, but poker is NOT math. Blackjack IS. Video Poker IS. Poker IS NOT.

Now, I don't know alot about chess, but curtains once told me that computer chess programs, which I would guess look at overall value, place a high value on taking pieces which can be exploited by an intelligent human player. If this is true, I would say that this is a comparable situation. Sacrifice the pawn, and gain tactical advantage otherwise.

[Eder]

It just bad form to give small stack chance to double up....give him your blind...pound him later....jmo

[raptor517]

ok, techincally, its a double up for him, but i dont look at it that way. he has 640 chips right now eh? if i fold, he will have 890 chips, yes? if i push and he doubles, he has 1280 chips yes? i dont think that difference right there is enough to justify a fold in any circumstance. holla

[microbet]

Someone here posted something about getting rid of the small stack so that the big stack can't bully. Don't remember who and don't want to look, but hero's stack is close enough to big stack and if hero folds, short stack won't be as short, so, depending on how big stack is playing, hero has enough chips to bully him.

Enough commas for you?

[Zelcious]

You still not get the point. I was taking about the reasoning of the following sentence:
"In other words, if your ROI is less than .3%, pushing is proper, if it isn't, folding is proper."
I have NOT commented on this particular instance !
I have commented about your statement that you should fold any move with less EV than your ROI. This is what I reacted on and I'm still pretty confident that I'm correct.
There is obviously some connection between the EV of the moves you make and your ROI but suggesting that is equal like your sentence implies is simply wrong. It's not even proportional. If you want, I questioned or critized the math behind it, not whether it was correct or not in this particular instance but you obviously don't get that.

[Daliman]

Forget it. You don't get it and I no longer care.

[Mr_J]

"but 250-500 is a bit too high for me to expect any great skill advantage"

Sure there is. If you put a skillful player up against a typical player, each with 5k stacks and 250/blinds, the skillful player will win quite a bit more often longterm. It's like flipping a biased coin. Shorterm results ar a crapshoot, but longterm the skill will show.

[curtains]

Yeah I was off a bit there, as I do believe I have a skill advantage with the high blinds, but I still think pushing is correct.

[curtains]

btw part of my advantage in these situations is that I know that pushing is +ev in this situaton.

[Mr_J]

" btw part of my advantage in these situations is that I know that pushing is +ev in this situaton."

lol.

[curtains]

Well it is +EV from a chip count perspective.

[partygirluk]

What software are you all using?

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
What software are you all using?

[/ QUOTE ]

See my profile.

eastbay