Mini Step 5 Hand

[Shovesies]

Seat 3: IronMonkey05 (350)
Seat 4: SunPoker3D (475)
Seat 5: pga4life (1005)
Seat 7: JanozMT (2525)
Seat 8: NUTZREALBIG (3425)
Seat 9: ICE121 (1120)
Seat 10: NutStupid (1100)
pga4life posts small blind (100)
JanozMT posts big blind (200)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to NUTZREALBIG [ Kd Jh ]
NUTZREALBIG raises (3425) to 3425
NUTZREALBIG is all-In.

This is a hand from a $430 Party SNG with payout structure 2k/1k/500/300/200. I'm not NUTZREALBIG. I was surprised to see him make this play and wouldn't have made this play myself. Is this play actually +EV? His image was solid but this still seems overly reckless. Is this standard for anyone?

[ZeeJustin]

There's a few things you need to realize here. First is that there are 7 players left, including 2 players with less than 2.5x the big blind. The other 4 players are likely to be playing very tight until these 2 players bust and they are then in the money (note that I am not saying their tight play is correct, but this is how people think in step tournaments). The 2 shortstacks are likely to be playing tight thinking they have no chance of winning, but they would like to fold into the money if possible.

Although this line of thinking certainly does not hold true against all opponents, my guess is that was what Nutzrealbig's read on the table was. The next question is how much to raise? Only 1 other player at the table has over 6x BB, and a standard "rule" is that if you have 10x BB or less to work with, you are better off going all-in. So an all-in raise is fine against 5 of the players at the table, but Janoz actually has 12.5x BB. Janoz is the other dangerous stack, and I really think nutzrealbig wants to avoid action w/ him the most, so a big raise like this is just the trick. Basically, Janoz is at no risk of not making the money, and can even get all-in vs anyone at the table, except for nutzrealbig.

I am not saying the nutzrealbig's play is correct, but under certain conditions, it definately can be.

[raptor517]

ZJ, i dont like this play at all. because of the flatter pay out structure, people are less concerned about bubbling, as it doesnt make NEAR as much difference as it does in the 50/30/20 payout strucuture. i can understand the logic behind it assuming that they ARE playing scared bubble money, but imo its not even close to worth it pushing here. holla

[ZeeJustin]

[ QUOTE ]
people are less concerned about bubbling

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Although this line of thinking certainly does not hold true against all opponents, my guess is that was what Nutzrealbig's read on the table was.

[/ QUOTE ]



[ QUOTE ]
i can understand the logic behind it assuming that they ARE playing scared bubble money

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I am not saying the nutzrealbig's play is correct, but under certain conditions, it definately can be.

[/ QUOTE ]