I folded AKs on the bubble tonight pre-flop. I felt dirty.

[Karak567]

The hand is lost in the abyss somewhere so I'll type it out here.

Average stack sizes:

Blinds are 200/400

UTG (200)
Button (4000)
SB (1500)
Hero (bb)(2500)

UTG folds

Button pushes.

SB folds

Hero folds

[gildwulf]

I'm getting deja vu (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=2531267&page=0&view=c ollapsed&sb=5&o=14&fpart=2#Post2531703).

Zach

[Voltron87]

before noticing utg has 200 chips, rather than the 2000 i thought:

you [censored] [censored] [censored] [censored], learn to [censored] [censored] [censored] you stupid [censored] [censored].

after noticing utg has 200.

if I am button, i am pushing any 2. what is your read on button? i have a very, very hard time folding.


plug this into icm, dont get other people on the forum to do it for you.

[Karak567]

Well the small stack wasn't all in on the BB in the next hand in that one, or all in in the SB on the hand after that even if he did double up (well nearly).

[Voltron87]

these are very different situations.

[mike28]

autofold.

[Voltron87]

[ QUOTE ]
autofold.

[/ QUOTE ]

no.

[mike28]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
autofold.

[/ QUOTE ]

no.

[/ QUOTE ]

UTG has to win his next 2 hands to stay alive and you're thinking about calling with a drawing hand?

Autofold.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
drawing hand

[/ QUOTE ]

stfu

[ QUOTE ]
Autofold.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes

[Voltron87]

first pays 5 times as much as third, and calling AK a "drawing hand" when you have 6 BB left 4 handed is a crime.

just think about what happens if you win the hand. You have 5K chips, two others have 1.5K. and theres a guy with 1/2BB. there is profit.

now think about what button is pushing here. you are ahead, if button has any sense.

[Voltron87]

autofold?

i really disagree.

[dhende3]

Folding this is definitely +$EV. I call with AA, KK, and maybe QQ depending on whether I am positive the BB is pushing any 2. You need to ask yourself... has he missed some clear any 2 spots in the past?

[lastchance]

First pays nowhere near 5 times as third. In terms of profit, yeah, but what about the times where you bust?

And yeah, this is what I call a very, very good laydown. I don't know if I make this. But I think it's a good one, as long as you recognize the circumstances. (button's got a bigger stack, UTG has a very small one, you've got a decent one).

[Voltron87]

[ QUOTE ]
First pays nowhere near 5 times as third. In terms of profit, yeah, but what about the times where you bust?

And yeah, this is what I call a very, very good laydown. I don't know if I make this. But I think it's a good one, as long as you recognize the circumstances. (button's got a bigger stack, UTG has a very small one, you've got a decent one).

[/ QUOTE ]

did i actually say first pays 5 times as much as third? wow. thats a bad one.

button is in the biggest steal situation of all, and you are doing very well against a stealing range.

[1C5]

I also think a good fold.
QQ I would most likely fold also.

KK or AA I probably couldn't fold though. /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[wdcbooks]

If you read my post on the other thread you know I am with Voltron here. I can see a fold under some rare situations though. This is a case where if I think the pusher is a decent player I insta-call.

He knows that you would need a top five hand to call here and that is unlikely. I would be pushing with any two in this situation, knowing that the odds are that the vast majority of the time I can take down the blinds. You have one of those top five hands and you shoud call.

If I felt my opponent was just playing his cards I might fold. If the range is as narrow as 66-AA, AK-T my gut tells me that your slight advantage doesn't offset the move into the money by letting the micro stack blind out.

80% or more of the time I am calling here.

[pokerlaw]

i enjoy folding this.

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
autofold?

i really disagree.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you actually done the ICM calc here? In order for this to be a +EV call you have to literally put the button on only hands that you dominate and then it only shows a tiny profit. You don't even really get any of that hidden bigstack EV, becasue the bubble is usually going to end in the next 2 hands even if you win so trying to justify the call that way doesn't really work.

Basically, the fact that you are a significant favorite against his range doesn't matter becasue you need to be an overwhelming favorite to make this call.

[Voltron87]

eh, maybe I'm not as right as I thought.

[wdcbooks]

Ok, I just did the ICM calculation. I still think the people in the other thread are a bunch of donks, but you are right here. This is a fold, it pains me deeply, but you have to let the button have this one.

[Phill S]

I was in the voltron et al camp earlier today as im more of a gut instinct type player.

Now im pretty converted here by the math guys.

Nice laydown.

Phill

[LotsOfOuts69]

[ QUOTE ]
autofold.

[/ QUOTE ]

I play for money, I got stones not to chase cards, action or fucin pipedreams of winning Party Poker $10+1 SNG tournies

[MrX]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
autofold.

[/ QUOTE ]

no.

[/ QUOTE ]

UTG has to win his next 2 hands to stay alive and you're thinking about calling with a drawing hand?

Autofold.

[/ QUOTE ]

AKs is not a drawing hand in HU play oridinarily. Now I am still deciding on the call, but leaning toward fold. but I think your rational is wrong.

Do you consider 22 a drawing hand...Would you call with 22 here...of course not.

X

[Voltron87]

yeah, the more i think about it the more likely I'm wrong. AK is not that great here, since someone is about to go out and it doesnt stack up well to 89s. i cant fold qq here though. this would all change if ss had 400-500 chips

[treeofwisdom7]

[ QUOTE ]
autofold.

[/ QUOTE ]

KICK THE [censored] OUT OF the other two.

AND DONT EVER POST THIS HAND.. cuz someones gonna tell you to call. why argue if you wont listen .. duh!

[treeofwisdom7]

[ QUOTE ]
I was in the voltron et al camp earlier today as im more of a gut instinct type player.

Now im pretty converted here by the math guys.

Nice laydown.

Phill

[/ QUOTE ]


we been saying this all day. but you only listen to other 2+2ers.

[Phill S]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm getting deja vu (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=2531267&page=0&view=c ollapsed&sb=5&o=14&fpart=2#Post2531703).

Zach

[/ QUOTE ]

Nah, im getting vuja de (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=2528499&page=&view=&sb=5& o=&fpart=1&vc=1).

Phill

edit in response to treeofwisdom: I changed my opinion on this type of situation once someone came into the other thread with a ICM calculation - vague 'opinion' passed of as fact without numbers doesnt change my mind, no.

[valenzuela]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I was in the voltron et al camp earlier today as im more of a gut instinct type player.

Now im pretty converted here by the math guys.

Nice laydown.

Phill

[/ QUOTE ]


we been saying this all day. but you only listen to other 2+2ers.

[/ QUOTE ]

awwwww /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[Degen]

yikes i call that all day and twice on sundays...dunno if thats right but i insta call that.

Andre

[ilya]

Calling is terrible.

A good calling range would be QQ+ against most, JJ+ against super loose opponents.

P.S. What's more, if I hadn't already known that calling was terrible, it would have taken me a whole 5 minutes with an ICM program to realize it.

[microbet]

That is impossible. How can you call here?

I'm not trying to insult you. I do not call here.

[Phill S]

[ QUOTE ]
yikes i call that all day and twice on sundays...dunno if thats right but i insta call that.

Andre

[/ QUOTE ]

I admit i was wrong on these scenarios - lesson learnt.

I also admit i dont coach people whilst claiming to be bubble/ITM expert (i could find the quote, its in that leak thread of yours.

Phill

[ilya]

[ QUOTE ]
i cant fold qq here though. this would all change if ss had 400-500 chips

[/ QUOTE ]

If SS has 400 chips calling with AKs is still terribly wrong.

But calling with QQ is good. Against someone who you think really is pushing any 2, you can also call with JJ and perhaps even TT. Your big pairs gain value at a much faster clip than AKs as your opponent's range broadens.

[citanul]

this thread pains me.

i can't believe how many posts occurred before someone brought up the concept of doing an icm.

i can't believe how many posts occurred before someone said they did the icm.

i can't believe that no one has posted the numbers or calculations from an icm yet.

no one has, i believe, mentioned anything very deeply linked to anything close to your win percentage against the likely range of hands.

shameful.

instinctively, this is a fold.

whoever it is that said "drawing hand," you're an idiot.

please god, people, try to put some ounce of "this is my reasoning and thought process" into your posts. even if it's "i put this range into the sng power tools and this is the numbers it spat out."

sigh.

citanul

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
before noticing utg has 200 chips, rather than the 2000 i thought:

you [censored] [censored] [censored] [censored], learn to [censored] [censored] [censored] you stupid [censored] [censored].

after noticing utg has 200.

if I am button, i am pushing any 2. what is your read on button? i have a very, very hard time folding.


plug this into icm, dont get other people on the forum to do it for you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Calling here is terrible...this is as clear a fold as you can get with AKs. Sorry I haven't read the other 4 pages of this thread so I'm sure this has been rehashed over and over, but you absolutely cannot call here. If you do think it's correct to call here you have absolutely no understanding of the mathematics of sit and go's.

[1C5]

4 pages? Change your settings, all I have is one page. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[curtains]

Wow read more of the thread and cannot believe how many people say to call here?? This is like sit and go class 101. The guy has 200 chips!!! I believe that you should fold JJ here as well (and maybe QQ), but I might be off on that.

(HMM turns out I am likely wrong about the QQ+JJ. btw 88 is always stronger than AKs when you suspect any 2. Also since this is a lower buyin sit and go, I wouldnt put opponent on any two.)

[microbet]

How many times a day can I post ICM on folding a good hand on the bubble when there is a tiny stack involved?

[citanul]

once a week before i pee in your ear.

citanul

[Newt_Buggs]

What I find interesting is the difference between pockets and AKs here using some rough calculations with eastbays program. If he is pushing any two then AKs is a very bad, -1.7% call but 10s is an easy +1.7% call. If you tighten up the range a little and throw out the complete trash then JJ is a marginal +.1% call and AKs rises to -1.3%.

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
What I find interesting is the difference between pockets and AKs here using some rough calculations with eastbays program. If he is pushing any two then AKs is a very bad, -1.7% call but 10s is an easy +1.7% call. If you tighten up the range a little and throw out the complete trash then JJ is a marginal +.1% call and AKs rises to -1.3%.

[/ QUOTE ]

as has been noticed before, just cause something is +ev in the calculator does not make it a "call" and just caus it's -ev does not make it a "fold."

also, these results shouldn't be that interesting to you.

citanul

also "a -1.7% call" is hardly a very bad call, and a +1.7% is not an "easy call"

like i said, i knew this thread disgusted me.

[Mike Cuneo]

reraise

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
reraise

[/ QUOTE ]

i can't decide if you're sarcastic or retared.

either way you're useless.

citanul

[ilya]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What I find interesting is the difference between pockets and AKs here using some rough calculations with eastbays program. If he is pushing any two then AKs is a very bad, -1.7% call but 10s is an easy +1.7% call. If you tighten up the range a little and throw out the complete trash then JJ is a marginal +.1% call and AKs rises to -1.3%.

[/ QUOTE ]

as has been noticed before, just cause something is +ev in the calculator does not make it a "call" and just caus it's -ev does not make it a "fold."

also, these results shouldn't be that interesting to you.

citanul

also "a -1.7% call" is hardly a very bad call, and a +1.7% is not an "easy call"

like i said, i knew this thread disgusted me.

[/ QUOTE ]

dude what are you talking about. 1.7% is pretty huge.

[DasLeben]

Personally (without running the numbers or looking at the other posts in this thread), I consider this a clear-cut fold. That said, I'm supremely confident SGA will agree.

Smallie has 0.5BB and takes the blind for his whole stack next hand. There is no reason to bust here, unless you have aces.

[citanul]

i dunno man, when we're looking at say, -1.7% being the difference in equity between folding (147 in equity) and calling (138 in equity) we're not actually talking about very much. 1.7% of the prize pool yes, is nicish money. but.

but there's variance to consider, which is often a consideration for say, everyone. and there's things like how easy it has been/will be for you to steal now and in the money. most push with any two spots in the money at large blind sizes and a decently tight calling range for the bb from the sb are worth a very similar amount of money. and they have the added bonus of you have already gotten into the money.

i'm not a huge fan of sneaking into the money or anything, but if i knew that i could routinely give up a buck or two of sklansky bux to assure myself a huge(r) itm%, i'd do that and be happy knowing that i can outplay my opponents in the money as well as out of the money.

i guess my point is that on an equity of say $150, $8 isn't much. and if you throw $8 out the window once in order to make sure you get into the money, assure yourself $100, likely $150, and possibly $250, i don't think most people run it out.

citanul

[pergesu]

[ QUOTE ]
i guess my point is that on an equity of say $150, $8 isn't much. and if you throw $8 out the window once in order to make sure you get into the money, assure yourself $100, likely $150, and possibly $250, i don't think most people run it out.

[/ QUOTE ]
Guess it depends what your goal is then. If you want to maximize ROI, you take whatever +$EV situations you can get. Pass a couple up if you want to reduce variance.

As long as the player understands that he's passing up a +$EV spot, and why he's passing it up, it's fine. "Optimal" play doesn't mean the same to everyone.

Btw, you get the histories I sent you?

[imported_cocarondelle]

Hi.

I don t see how a winning coin flip with your AKs is going to give you more EV+ (regarding first place) if you compare to the disaster of being out of the $.

Anyway, good fold for me.
Don t feel dirty... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

cocarondelle

[45suited]

With the shortstack so low, I don't see how calling is even a consideration. Even if Button is pushing with any two (as he should), you are only 70-30 over 72o. I get the whole "double up and play for first" thing, but this is one of these times where you just gotta fold to the bigstack. There is a REASON why he should push any two - because he knows that you would need a monster to call if you're smart. This is a no-brainer here with shortstack at 1/2 BB. If I KNEW that button had 72o, I'm still not calling here. (Edit: If I couldn't see his cards, I'd call with aces or kings)

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i guess my point is that on an equity of say $150, $8 isn't much. and if you throw $8 out the window once in order to make sure you get into the money, assure yourself $100, likely $150, and possibly $250, i don't think most people run it out.

[/ QUOTE ]
Guess it depends what your goal is then. If you want to maximize ROI, you take whatever +$EV situations you can get. Pass a couple up if you want to reduce variance.

As long as the player understands that he's passing up a +$EV spot, and why he's passing it up, it's fine. "Optimal" play doesn't mean the same to everyone.

[/ QUOTE ]

well yeah, you're agreeing with one of my points, and then kinda sorta missing another.

while it definitely does matter what your goals are, it's not true that a player seeking to make the most money possible will take every +ev situation given to them. it is important to sometimes pass +ev situations to allow yourself to take +ev situations that are plus-er ev later.

no, i didn't get any hhs since that first one. i hate yahoo. gimme a minute.

citanul

[pergesu]

[ QUOTE ]
while it definitely does matter what your goals are, it's not true that a player seeking to make the most money possible will take every +ev situation given to them. it is important to sometimes pass +ev situations to allow yourself to take +ev situations that are plus-er ev later.

[/ QUOTE ]
You're right, I understand that idea but didn't take it into account in my post.

For whatever hand someone said there was a +1.7% EV diff, and you said it wasn't much, not a whole lot of spots come around that are more +EV than a 1.7% difference. That's just too big to pass up if you're looking to make the most money.

[citanul]

it's true that i misunderestimated how big 1.7% or so is. i still would argue that it's not terribly much when you're expecting to have like 27% or whatever % of the prize pool to start with. that said, it's likely that you shouldn't be often passing up on spots that big, or wandering into negative spots that big either.

it's quite easy to believe, however, that if your opponents play poorly, (and so many of them do) that you'll be able to find several/many spots later in the game that will give you much more ev than a 1.7% portion.

citanul

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What I find interesting is the difference between pockets and AKs here using some rough calculations with eastbays program. If he is pushing any two then AKs is a very bad, -1.7% call but 10s is an easy +1.7% call. If you tighten up the range a little and throw out the complete trash then JJ is a marginal +.1% call and AKs rises to -1.3%.

[/ QUOTE ]

as has been noticed before, just cause something is +ev in the calculator does not make it a "call" and just caus it's -ev does not make it a "fold."

also, these results shouldn't be that interesting to you.

citanul

also "a -1.7% call" is hardly a very bad call, and a +1.7% is not an "easy call"

like i said, i knew this thread disgusted me.

[/ QUOTE ]

A -1.7% call is a terrible call!!! It's very hard to find a call that's within reason that loses that much money late in a tournament.

[citanul]

yes yes, as i responded to i think, though maybe not, i misunderestimated how bad a call the -1.7% was. though i'm still not sure that making every call that is >1.x% positive is that great, given bad opponents and certain situations. my thinking is that they're going to often give you lots and lots of chips later just by folding too much (certain opps). but who knows, i could be totally whacked out right now, you never know.

alright, i'm going to go to bed now.

citanul

[curtains]

Also please shoot me the day I pass up a situation that I know for sure is +1.7% in EV. One thing I think everyone may not realizing is that the maximum EV of the prize pool you can have is 50%, not 100%. To knowingly throw away 1.7 (3.4% of 50), is just a sin, and cannot be overcome by any skill differential.

[ilya]

[ QUOTE ]
i dunno man, when we're looking at say, -1.7% being the difference in equity between folding (147 in equity) and calling (138 in equity) we're not actually talking about very much. 1.7% of the prize pool yes, is nicish money. but.

but there's variance to consider, which is often a consideration for say, everyone. and there's things like how easy it has been/will be for you to steal now and in the money. most push with any two spots in the money at large blind sizes and a decently tight calling range for the bb from the sb are worth a very similar amount of money. and they have the added bonus of you have already gotten into the money.

i'm not a huge fan of sneaking into the money or anything, but if i knew that i could routinely give up a buck or two of sklansky bux to assure myself a huge(r) itm%, i'd do that and be happy knowing that i can outplay my opponents in the money as well as out of the money.

i guess my point is that on an equity of say $150, $8 isn't much. and if you throw $8 out the window once in order to make sure you get into the money, assure yourself $100, likely $150, and possibly $250, i don't think most people run it out.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're really underestimating the value of 1.7%.

For one thing, most of your edges on the bubble and in the money will be smaller than 1.7%. Say you're on the button with KQs, the blinds are 250/500, and the stacks are even. The guys in the blinds are gonna have to be as tight as 66+, A9+, KJ+ before your edge for pushing in that spot hits 1.7%. And this is a pretty favorable scenario: KQs is a strong hand, there are no short stacks to force you to tighen up. I'm sure that in your daily play you routinely take edges that are considerably smaller than 1.7% and feel quite good about it.

another consideration is hourly rate. even if you could make up the 1.7% with superior ITM play, calling in spots like this speeds things along and lets you pack a few more tournaments into each hour.

also. it's true that $8 isn't a lot. but what if this kind of situation comes up once in every tournament you play? if you play 1000 tournaments a month, as many do, you may be costing yourself as much as $8000/month if you fold in this spot every time. Even if you figure that your skill advantage will somehow let you recover 1.5% of the 1.7% you lose by folding here, the remaining 0.2% will still add up to $1000/month in lost potential profit!

[citanul]

meh, i am not saying necessarilly that you should pass up those edges, i'm saying that for many people who want to reduce variance, it's going to be the "right" play.

and again, against certain opps, i think that you can make up more than 1.7% of the prize pool given their particular types of bad play.

citanul

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
meh, i am not saying necessarilly that you should pass up those edges, i'm saying that for many people who want to reduce variance, it's going to be the "right" play.

and again, against certain opps, i think that you can make up more than 1.7% of the prize pool given their particular types of bad play.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know, I find it hard to believe people can play that poorly to give up 1.7% edge. I believe this is the type of rationalization people make to make obviously wrong plays and yet write them off as correct because of some abstract future advantage they believe they have (which is almost always overestimated).

[citanul]

again, you guys win. i did underestimate the amount that 1.7% is. i am going to maintain that for certain players, though it is not right to pass on such edges, it is "right." these players are not likely the ones playing 1000 games a month though.

on your in the money example, i'm assuming that the bulk of the power of that kq hand is generated from the folding equity, not the strength of the hand. if you know the players to be particularly tight, (some tighter than your prescribed sets), you could make more steals. and also, the even stacks is hardly the "there are situations" that i was talking about. even stacks is problems for passing edges in general.

yes, i'm sure that i take edges smaller than 1.7% often. i also pass on them very infrequently i believe. and yeah, i probably also make a bunch of calls that lose me a few bucks every day. some for image, and some for other reasons.

ilya, your argument, and curtains' and anyone else who was up there too, your arguments are all very good. i did underestimate the size of 1.7%, and i hadn't really looked at the %'s on eastbays doohicky before, just the raw dollar amounts. i yield, while humbly still stating that there are players who folding such an edge, and there are opponents that make folding such an edge, work.

citanul

[citanul]

one last post:

dude, people do play that bad. people frequently play really bad.

all this said, i doubt i've passed on an edge as big as 1.7% in a long, long time.

citanul

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
one last post:

dude, people do play that bad. people frequently play really bad.

all this said, i doubt i've passed on an edge as big as 1.7% in a long, long time.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah but once you start guessing that people are playing bad and letting it affect your play so that you start making
"bad" plays, you are allowing yourself to be exploited. Also the higher the blinds are, usually the less often you should be willing to pass up on +EV situations IMO, and this holds especially true at the higher buyins.

By the way I admit that I do sometimes pass up on marginally +EV situations based on some very obvious game situations (players wayyy too tight is usually the reason but it has to be very extreme, which is rare), but I believe it's a lot less often than most people on this forum.

[Voltron87]

lets rename this thread "voltron jumps to a conclusion, gets corrected, still thinks hes right, gets corrected again, goes back and really thinks about it, realizes he's wrong". ughh, man i look like an idiot in this thread.

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
lets rename this thread "<font color="blue">citanul</font> jumps to a conclusion, gets corrected, still thinks hes right, gets corrected again, goes back and really thinks about it, realizes he's wrong". ughh, man i look like an idiot in this thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fyp.

citanul

[adanthar]

It's OK, I think we can all agree the real idiot is the 'drawing hand' guy.

[Voltron87]

i say so much dumb crap on this forum, i dont know how anyone actually believes Im a winning player. did anyone see where i said first pays five times as much as third? bahahaahhaha.

at least im not one of the people who checks what everyone else says, then agrees. you know who you are.

[ilya]

[ QUOTE ]

at least im not one of the people who checks what everyone else says, then agrees. you know who you are.

[/ QUOTE ]

damn, you know that trick?!

[Voltron87]

there are also the people who memorize "party is better because of the fast structure, 50 buy in br, etc...". theyre helpful too.