Well, the pot says I'm getting 2:1....

[Jimbobobb]

Party 30 + 3

Blinds 150/300
Hero: ~2300
CO: ~2500
Button: ~2500
SB: 748

Hero is BB with Th 6s
CO Folds
Button Folds
SB pushes

Hero?

I called pretty quickly, and actually had planned on calling his allin 'almost' regardless of my cards since the last hand. A friend watching me whos opinion I respect questioned the call. I normally call when I'm getting 2:1 and I have a hand I don't think will be dominated pretty often for a small chunk of my stack....didn't really think this was some kind of leak. Am I just wrong here? If so why?

[pergesu]

Any read on this guy to give you an idea what he'll push with? I ran it through SNGPT, and it said that it's only very marginally profitable (+0.2% ev diff) if he's got maniacal standards. Looks like you'd want to pass this one up.

[uphigh_downlow]

if you accept that you are 40%on this hand, then its a losing proposition.

has a -ve EV for a call with 40% odds

barely even at 45%

[Degen]

if you're getting 2:1, its less than 1/3rd of your stack and the guy is all-in...call with any two cards...always.

also, having your friends who are good at poker watch you play SNG's is very, very -EV.

Andre

[uphigh_downlow]

I wont go into the details, but i disagree

The important factor in this situation is the relative chip standings. If chip positions were
2300
3500
1500
750

it would be a positive expectation play to call here being 40% to win the pot.

This is also quite intuitive, if you see the resulting chip positions as a result of losing/winning the pot.

[curtains]

This is a very clear call IMO, everyone who says otherwise is giving you crap advice. At WORST case its slightly +ev, and then you can take a look at some other factors and try to figure out whether its worth it, or whether you should sacrafice the EV. At best case its huge +EV (If they are pushing any 2, which some players will definitely try here), in which case you are making a huge mistake by folding.

pergesu gave an example of the EV gained against someone with maniacal standards using eastbay's powertools, however I wouldn't expect anyone to be that TIGHT - By folding you are just letting your opponents exploit you the way you try to exploit them, by pushing and hoping they fold when they shouldnt.

A good player will raise from the SB here probably over 90% of the time, because its the last chance for any semblence of FE, especially since we know that players at this level fold when they shouldn't. Don't be one of those players. It's incredible how everyone on this forum talks about how dumb the opponent's are because even when it appears you have no folding equity, the opponents fold anyway. Now the exact same thing is happening, and everyone is suggesting a fold.

[uphigh_downlow]

well i cant really argue with carpal tunnel, being a stranger myself ( and I mean that in the best possible way)

But the fold is predicated on being behind at about 40% to win the pot. 45% is almost even money.

If you have reasons to believe that your 10 high is better than that, then the answer could be different.

From the other perspective, using ICM
It also seems that the sb should push at this stage with any hand thats 40%, if he expects to get called all the time. This condition can be relaxed if he expects a fold a small percent of the time. In addition,it is important to note that short stack has to post sb next, which ICM does not take into account. As a result, he can push with much weaker holdings. (_almost_ any 2, but not quite) Since he _is_ expecting a call.

This is of course if sb is considering all these parameters.
(I'v seen sb folding here on several occasions)

Anyway i remember seeing a chart of how individual hands did against random 2 cards in showdown poker somewhere. Wonder if anyone can point those out here. Mebbe that could shed some light on how this hands plays out.

I must say that this is an interesting problem, because of the chip stacks. Am I wrong in suggesting that they play a role here? I dont know, but this sure has turned out to be an interesting problem.

For one, I wud have said easy call off the boot. But after I did some numbers, it proved more insightful than a rule of Thumb.

Any takers?

As regards not succumbing to explotation by calling, some situations lend themselves uniquely to exploitation, just by virtue of payoff structure chip stacks and or position. There is really nothing much that one can do in certain situations, except come out with the least damage. It feels to me that this is one of those. It's not about not letting them exploit you, but about adopting a strategy, that will minimize that exploitation.

[curtains]

Pretty sure your math is wrong. I think that even if we win like 35% of the time, we are +ev to call here. 40% should be clearcut.

[Jimbobobb]

Guess I just don't see how numbers are against me here....I'm putting in one third of the chips in a pot I figure to win at *least* 40% on average. Not to mention knocking out the small stack is good times. Someone point out what I'm missing?

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
Guess I just don't see how numbers are against me here....I'm putting in one third of the chips in a pot I figure to win at *least* 40% on average. Not to mention knocking out the small stack is good times. Someone point out what I'm missing?

[/ QUOTE ]

JIMBO YOU ARENT MISSING ANYTHING THIS IS AN EASY CALL! (sorry for screaming)

[uphigh_downlow]

gotta admit it. Shuda known before i opened my mouth to doubt a carpal tunnel /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Math was indeed wrong. 35% is the correct threshhold for +ve expectation.

My apologies for causing this confusion.

[UMTerp]

The breakeven threshhold is closer to 33%. Easy call.

[swarm]

This call wins tournaments, it's good for two reasons:

1) You have the odds; win this and you have a major advantage heading into post bubble round. You likely have two clean out cards.

2) It sends a message to your opponnents to not push into me with nothing because i'm likely to call with any two; When I see a Big Stack fold in these situations I push at them like crazy when i'm another medium or Big Stack because I know they will only call with premium hands.

[SuitedPair]

Not necessarily advocating it, but no discussion on keeping a short stack alive?

Overrated strategy? Would his stack be too small after posting the SB on the next hand? Would he gain some FE for his future pushes? Or be viewed as weak and everyone would push him around?

[UMTerp]

[ QUOTE ]
Not necessarily advocating it, but no discussion on keeping a short stack alive?

Overrated strategy? Would his stack be too small after posting the SB on the next hand? Would he gain some FE for his future pushes? Or be viewed as weak and everyone would push him around?

[/ QUOTE ]

You're misapplying that concept - you'd only want to keep the short stack alive if the chip counts were something like 4500 (you) - 1600 - 1500 - 400. You need a significant chip lead to think about doing something like that.

[wiggs73]

just adding my .02, but if you're getting better than 2:1 and you have the stack to do it (which you do here), i think it's an easy call.

[SuitedPair]

Thanks, that is what I started thinking as I was writing the post.

[Nottom]

You letting Morgan tell you how to play SNGs?

This is a call as the others have already said. I don't agree with the "always call getting 2-1 for less than 1/3 of my stack" mantra but in this case its solid.

[chopchoi]

[ QUOTE ]
if you accept that you are 40%on this hand, then its a losing proposition.

has a -ve EV for a call with 40% odds

barely even at 45%

[/ QUOTE ]

WRONG. You are risking 448 chips to win 1048. If you did this 100x, the sixty hands you lost would cost you 26,880 chips, but the 40 hands you won would gain you 41,920 chips. The +ev of a call here is a little over 150 chips per hand. Calling is a no-brainer.

[curtains]

Also T6o is a good hand! btw I think folding should be fine with the very weakest of hands, especially if you don't expect your opponent to be pushing any 2. I suspect that the weakest one's may be CLOSE to -EV (ie 32o, 53o etc). However T6 is the nuts.