Steal Attempt

[lehighguy]

I don't really know enough about tournament strategy to tell a good steal from a bad one, so I'll ask you guys.

PP$100 Single Table. Everyone starts with $1000. I have $900, 7 people left. Table is very conservative, very few flops. Blinds are up to 100/200. I have J8o in CO and I go all-in to steal blinds. Good move, bad move. They are fairly conservative people, and the blinds had big enough stacks to fold.

[Rolen]

If the table, and more importantly the three people you're stealing into, have been willing to fold their blinds consistently and none of the three have stacks too small to be forced to call, it's not a terrible play. You do have plenty of time however so i'd probably need a very strong read of 'tight' on all three.

[davehwm]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't really know enough about tournament strategy to tell a good steal from a bad one

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
PP$100 Single Table.

[/ QUOTE ]

Something about these two statements together bothers me.

[Pokerscott]

I would say it is a good push.

I don't have your exact case analyzed, but I have done the analysis for a similar case.

The case closest to yours I can easily analyze is the following:

-You are on the button (not the cutoff)
-You have 4.5xBB as your stack (your situation)
-The SB and the BB have tight calling ranges (Pairs down to 44, Aces down to A7 and KQ).
-you have J9o as your hand (instead of J8o)

In this case, a push is a +EV play of about .75BB.

In your case, the EV is likely less since you have one more potential caller (the button) and your hand is J8 instead of J9. However, if the callers are tighter than I assumed, your EV increases. Net net, I would say this is easy a +EV push.

Enough with the analysis...you have to push something soon since paying the blinds makes it much more difficult to steal. Given that, you likely would push even if it was a bit negative EV to preserve future fold equity.

Pokerscott

[Pokerscott]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't really know enough about tournament strategy to tell a good steal from a bad one

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
PP$100 Single Table.

[/ QUOTE ]



Something about these two statements together bothers me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I play the 100s...these two statements don't bother me at all /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[lehighguy]

I play mostly cash games. I know you are suppose the become aggressive in tournaments as the blinds get big, but I probably have less experience then people who do it exclusively.

[lehighguy]

Thank you for the analysis, that was basically what I was thinking. I would have to push on the next rotation, this looked like a situation where I might not have to showdown.

[lastchance]

With 7 people left in the 100's at level 5, I certainly like this play.

[bluesbassman]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't really know enough about tournament strategy to tell a good steal from a bad one, so I'll ask you guys.

PP$100 Single Table. Everyone starts with $1000. I have $900, 7 people left. Table is very conservative, very few flops. Blinds are up to 100/200. I have J8o in CO and I go all-in to steal blinds. Good move, bad move. They are fairly conservative people, and the blinds had big enough stacks to fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

All so-called "steal" attempts are a bad idea. The problem is, inputs to ICM calculations WAY underestimate the probability you will get called. Until you are in the money, do not try to steal. Only go all-in or raise if you have a very strong hand, unless perhaps you are literally about to be blinded out. (Bracing for flames.)

[Pokerscott]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't really know enough about tournament strategy to tell a good steal from a bad one, so I'll ask you guys.

PP$100 Single Table. Everyone starts with $1000. I have $900, 7 people left. Table is very conservative, very few flops. Blinds are up to 100/200. I have J8o in CO and I go all-in to steal blinds. Good move, bad move. They are fairly conservative people, and the blinds had big enough stacks to fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

All so-called "steal" attempts are a bad idea. The problem is, inputs to ICM calculations WAY underestimate the probability you will get called. Until you are in the money, do not try to steal. Only go all-in or raise if you have a very strong hand, unless perhaps you are literally about to be blinded out. (Bracing for flames.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you somehow disagree with my analysis? Would it surprise you if the result for my case described above was still +EV even if both the SB and the BB were loose callers (meaning they called with 2/3 of all hands including things like 54o?).

sticking in 4.5xBB to win 1.5xBB is a very good play with a decent defending hand given reasonable fold equity.

Pokerscott

[bluesbassman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't really know enough about tournament strategy to tell a good steal from a bad one, so I'll ask you guys.

PP$100 Single Table. Everyone starts with $1000. I have $900, 7 people left. Table is very conservative, very few flops. Blinds are up to 100/200. I have J8o in CO and I go all-in to steal blinds. Good move, bad move. They are fairly conservative people, and the blinds had big enough stacks to fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

All so-called "steal" attempts are a bad idea. The problem is, inputs to ICM calculations WAY underestimate the probability you will get called. Until you are in the money, do not try to steal. Only go all-in or raise if you have a very strong hand, unless perhaps you are literally about to be blinded out. (Bracing for flames.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you somehow disagree with my analysis? Would it surprise you if the result for my case described above was still +EV even if both the SB and the BB were loose callers (meaning they called with 2/3 of all hands including things like 54o?).

sticking in 4.5xBB to win 1.5xBB is a very good play with a decent defending hand given reasonable fold equity.

Pokerscott

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with the assumptions upon which your analysis is based. Add a 3rd potential caller, and assume all three will call with any two, provided nobody has already called. I claim the EV you then get is much more realistic, or at least is a more relevant decision metric.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't really know enough about tournament strategy to tell a good steal from a bad one, so I'll ask you guys.

PP$100 Single Table. Everyone starts with $1000. I have $900, 7 people left. Table is very conservative, very few flops. Blinds are up to 100/200. I have J8o in CO and I go all-in to steal blinds. Good move, bad move. They are fairly conservative people, and the blinds had big enough stacks to fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

All so-called "steal" attempts are a bad idea. The problem is, inputs to ICM calculations WAY underestimate the probability you will get called.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh... why?

eastbay

[dfscott]

[ QUOTE ]
Table is very conservative, very few flops.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
assume all three will call with any two, provided nobody has already called.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do you think they'd call with any two if the table has been so conservative?

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
Assume all three will call with any two, provided nobody has already called.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, it's time we started a regular "award" on this forum.

Think about what you just said, dude. What's the probability that guy #3 calls? Guy #2?

eastbay

[dfscott]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Assume all three will call with any two, provided nobody has already called.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, it's time we started a regular "award" on this forum.

Think about what you just said, dude. What's the probability that guy #3 calls? Guy #2?

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL -- I must confess, I missed that. But it is very funny.

[bluesbassman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't really know enough about tournament strategy to tell a good steal from a bad one, so I'll ask you guys.

PP$100 Single Table. Everyone starts with $1000. I have $900, 7 people left. Table is very conservative, very few flops. Blinds are up to 100/200. I have J8o in CO and I go all-in to steal blinds. Good move, bad move. They are fairly conservative people, and the blinds had big enough stacks to fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

All so-called "steal" attempts are a bad idea. The problem is, inputs to ICM calculations WAY underestimate the probability you will get called.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh... why?

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

My experience has been that the range of calling hands is basically any two. (Not to mention the extra potential caller nakess a big difference.) However, now that I re-read the original post, I see that the question refers to a $100 buy-in table. Since I've only observed and tracked under $50 SnGs, the provided analysis may be reasonable for that level, since the buy-in is obviously important. At $100, players may actually respect a raise...

[bluesbassman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Assume all three will call with any two, provided nobody has already called.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, it's time we started a regular "award" on this forum.

Think about what you just said, dude. What's the probability that guy #3 calls? Guy #2?

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

At a lower buy-in (I didn't notice it was a $100 table at first), I claim the probability of *at least* one call is 100%

[microbet]

Based on the fact that this hand was posted in the forum, I'd say there is somewhere near a 100% chance that he was called and lost.

I'm not doing this and won't, but has anyone else ever thought of posting advice encouraging people to never bet or call without having a great hand?

[dfscott]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Assume all three will call with any two, provided nobody has already called.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, it's time we started a regular "award" on this forum.

Think about what you just said, dude. What's the probability that guy #3 calls? Guy #2?

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

At a lower buy-in (I didn't notice it was a $100 table at first), I claim the probability of *at least* one call is 100%

[/ QUOTE ]

That's just silly.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't really know enough about tournament strategy to tell a good steal from a bad one, so I'll ask you guys.

PP$100 Single Table. Everyone starts with $1000. I have $900, 7 people left. Table is very conservative, very few flops. Blinds are up to 100/200. I have J8o in CO and I go all-in to steal blinds. Good move, bad move. They are fairly conservative people, and the blinds had big enough stacks to fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's generally a good move.

Assuming calling ranges of 44+,A7s+,A9o+,KJs+, here are the relevant numbers, filling in some blanks which aren't too critical anyway:

http://sitngo-analyzer.com/poker/J9o.PNG

As they loosen up, this tends towards a fold:

22+,A3o+,A2s+,KJo+,KTs+,QJs:

http://sitngo-analyzer.com/poker/J9o-loose.PNG

I prefer the first read sight-unseen and probably push. Of course, after preferring the first read for an orbit or two, I have to start adjusting my reads. This is a dynamic game we play, and one of the reasons it's so tough to give good advice for hand histories presented mostly in a vacuum.

eastbay

[dfscott]

[ QUOTE ]
At a lower buy-in (I didn't notice it was a $100 table at first), I claim the probability of *at least* one call is 100%

[/ QUOTE ]

***** Hand History for Game 1799432036 *****
NL Hold'em $20 Buy-in + $2 Entry Fee Trny:10746486 Level:4 Blinds(50/100) - Saturday, March 26, 23:05:19 EDT 2005
Table Table 13838 (Real Money)
Seat 4 is the button
Total number of players : 6
Seat 5: radge1 ( $980 )
Seat 4: dfscott1 ( $3588 )
Seat 6: DDrifter ( $482 )
Seat 2: benwa28 ( $1050 )
Seat 3: JDS33111 ( $1470 )
Seat 8: ejnelson72 ( $430 )
Trny:10746486 Level:4
Blinds(50/100)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to dfscott1 [ 4h 5s ]
ejnelson72 is all-In.
benwa28 folds.
JDS33111 folds.
dfscott1 folds.
radge1 folds.
DDrifter folds.
ejnelson72 does not show cards.
ejnelson72 wins 580 chips

[lehighguy]

1) This was a very conservative table. There were no flops the previous rotation. There were some loose players, but they all got eliminated early.

2) The blinds and button had moderate stacks. They were not committed to calling. At the same time they would effectively be out of the tourny if they called and lost, the perfect psycological posistion in my mind.

3) The blinds are huge. If I go another rotation without winning a pot I will lose 1/3 my stack. At which point I can only go all-in for 600, which won't make anyone fold.

4) There are still seven people left (alot for this level). I can't just wait them out to get in the money. I have to make a move.


4) J8o isn't 72o. Yes I would prefer them suited, yes I'd prefer more connectivity. But unless the caller has a J or an 8 I'm not dominted and not that bad of an underdog in the event of a call.

I will leave a space before results, but I feel they are an anomly and not very useful for this debate.




Results:
Button calls with AA, I lose.

[Benoit]

Chances are with 3 left to act, there won't be a hand to call your all in. With already that much in the pot and short stacked, you are not risking that much to get 1.5BB from the pot. Like you said, even if called you even had a decent chance to suck out as long as your cards were live.

[bluesbassman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Assume all three will call with any two, provided nobody has already called.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, it's time we started a regular "award" on this forum.

Think about what you just said, dude. What's the probability that guy #3 calls? Guy #2?

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

At a lower buy-in (I didn't notice it was a $100 table at first), I claim the probability of *at least* one call is 100%

[/ QUOTE ]

That's just silly.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree I was just being a bit dramatic. /images/graemlins/cool.gif
However, at a lower buy-in I think you would expect to get a call from a top 80% hand. Thus the probability you will get at least one call from three yet to act is:
1 - (.2)^3 = 0.92

Since this neglects the cases in which you get more than one call (or raise), to assume there is a 100% chance you will be called with a top 80% hand seems reasonable.

[KJ o]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree I was just being a bit dramatic. /images/graemlins/cool.gif
However, at a lower buy-in I think you would expect to get a call from a top 80% hand. Thus the probability you will get at least one call from three yet to act is:
1 - (.2)^3 = 0.92

Since this neglects the cases in which you get more than one call (or raise), to assume there is a 100% chance you will be called with a top 80% hand seems reasonable.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is so silly, I'm starting to think you are a troll.

Do you know how bad the worst hands in the top 80% range are? They are almost indistinguishable from 72o, and their winning rate is not much higher. Suggesting that people regularily call with that in $50 tourneys is patently false.

2. 1-(.2)^3 = 99.2%. Try using a calculator next time.

3. Even if most tourneys will feature pepople calling 80% of hands, this was, according to the OP, obviously not such a tourney, so your points are moot.