Lets figure out this PVS thing

[Newt_Buggs]

Sorry that I made a new thread for this but the other one was messed up.

I know that a PVS is technically done with complete junk but go ahead and look these over anyway. If you would do something other than push/fold feel free to speak up as well (hand 3?)

assume that these are $50s, although if you think that the play would vary dependong on buy in I think that that could be an interesting discussion as well.

Hand 1:
Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t100 (7 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

CO (t3078)
Hero (t990)
SB (t936)
BB (t2095)
UTG (t938)
MP1 (t852)
MP2 (t1111)

Preflop: Hero is Button with 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif, A/images/graemlins/club.gif.
<font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, CO calls t100, Hero?

Hand 2:
Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t50 (8 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

UTG (t1105)
UTG+1 (t1055)
MP1 (t1065)
MP2 (t1555)
Hero (t460)
Button (t1835)
SB (t1500)
BB (t1425)

Preflop: Hero is CO with J/images/graemlins/spade.gif, Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
<font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, MP2 calls t50, Hero?


Hand 3:
Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t100 (7 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

MP2 (t1235)
CO (t1075)
Hero (t1015)
SB (t2630)
BB (t960)
UTG (t1115)
MP1 (t1970)

Preflop: Hero is Button with 6/images/graemlins/club.gif, 6/images/graemlins/diamond.gif.
UTG calls t100, <font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, Hero?

[spentrent]

PVS SchmeeVeeEss... it's a funny way to say "punish the MP/LP limpers." Do it in a good spot and your life will be sublime.

[Phil Van Sexton]

I definately push #2.

I probably push #1. A limp from a big stack in CO usually means nothing, so I would often push if I didn't have a better read.

#3 concerns me a bit. The limper is UTG and he doesn't have a big enough stack to pay 100 to see a flop with crap. I often fold in this spot with no read.

[Bigwig]

[ QUOTE ]
I definately push #2.

I probably push #1. A limp from a big stack in CO usually means nothing, so I would often push if I didn't have a better read.

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO, #1 is a far easier push than #2. Why do you feel differently?

[MentalCombat]

[ QUOTE ]

IMO, #1 is a far easier push than #2. Why do you feel differently?

[/ QUOTE ]

My guess? If you get called, you're behind. #2 has more suckout potential.

[Bigwig]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

IMO, #1 is a far easier push than #2. Why do you feel differently?

[/ QUOTE ]

My guess? If you get called, you're behind. #2 has more suckout potential.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I hope it's something else, because what you said is false.

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I definately push #2.

I probably push #1. A limp from a big stack in CO usually means nothing, so I would often push if I didn't have a better read.

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO, #1 is a far easier push than #2. Why do you feel differently?

[/ QUOTE ]

#1 - 990 chips
#2 - 460 chips

If I knew the limpers had 55 and would call a push, I would fold #1, but I would still push #2.

With #2, I don't mind gambling, so it's a far easier push for me.

[Bigwig]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I definately push #2.

I probably push #1. A limp from a big stack in CO usually means nothing, so I would often push if I didn't have a better read.

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO, #1 is a far easier push than #2. Why do you feel differently?

[/ QUOTE ]

#1 - 990 chips
#2 - 460 chips

If I knew the limpers had 55 and would call a push, I would fold #1, but I would still push #2.

With #2, I don't mind gambling, so it's a far easier push for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

The blinds in #1 are 50/100. So you have just under 10BB in both hands.

[Newt_Buggs]

My main problem with #2 though is that I can see a lot of players limping KJ/KQ here and calling the push. After all, its "only" 410 more chips for him to call. I think that pushing will get called often by a hand that is a coinflip, slight favorite, or dominating. I like your point though phil about how you don't mind racing in this situation.

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I definately push #2.

I probably push #1. A limp from a big stack in CO usually means nothing, so I would often push if I didn't have a better read.

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO, #1 is a far easier push than #2. Why do you feel differently?

[/ QUOTE ]

#1 - 990 chips
#2 - 460 chips

If I knew the limpers had 55 and would call a push, I would fold #1, but I would still push #2.

With #2, I don't mind gambling, so it's a far easier push for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

The blinds in #1 are 50/100. So you have just under 10BB in both hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this a serious response? I'll respond in a bit. Please reconsider in the meantime.

[Bigwig]

[ QUOTE ]
My main problem with #2 though is that I can see a lot of players limping KJ/KQ here and calling the push. After all, its "only" 410 more chips for him to call. I think that pushing will get called often by a hand that is a coinflip, slight favorite, or dominating. I like your point though phil about how you don't mind racing in this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

QJ is anywhere from 5-10% less valuable in a heads-up all-in pot than A9. That's my main concern.

[Bigwig]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I definately push #2.

I probably push #1. A limp from a big stack in CO usually means nothing, so I would often push if I didn't have a better read.

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO, #1 is a far easier push than #2. Why do you feel differently?

[/ QUOTE ]

#1 - 990 chips
#2 - 460 chips

If I knew the limpers had 55 and would call a push, I would fold #1, but I would still push #2.

With #2, I don't mind gambling, so it's a far easier push for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

The blinds in #1 are 50/100. So you have just under 10BB in both hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this a serious response? I'll respond in a bit. Please reconsider in the meantime.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know there's a difference--obviously. But the 'effective' stack is what's going to affect the call probability. Not to mention that A9 is much better than QJ.

[berya]

1. Push
2. Call and see a flop. Push is out of the question for me here.
3. Don't know (I fold this most of the time, sometimes call.)

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I definately push #2.

I probably push #1. A limp from a big stack in CO usually means nothing, so I would often push if I didn't have a better read.

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO, #1 is a far easier push than #2. Why do you feel differently?

[/ QUOTE ]

#1 - 990 chips
#2 - 460 chips

If I knew the limpers had 55 and would call a push, I would fold #1, but I would still push #2.

With #2, I don't mind gambling, so it's a far easier push for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

The blinds in #1 are 50/100. So you have just under 10BB in both hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this a serious response? I'll respond in a bit. Please reconsider in the meantime.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know there's a difference--obviously. But the 'effective' stack is what's going to affect the call probability. Not to mention that A9 is much better than QJ.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think your statement about having the same # of BBs is flawed for 2 reasons. First, the 460 needs to more than double in the next 10 hands (or fewer) in order to equal the "990 at level 4" that we have in #1. No amount of fold equity is going to make that happen, especially if you are folding QJs after 1 limper.

Fold equity is nice, but chips are better. He is in far, far better shape with 990 chips in #1.

The second problem that I have with your statement is using # of BBs as the main factor to compute your fold equity.

I don't think about FE in terms of number of BBs at all. I use #BBs to determine whether I could raise less than allin (ie the 10BB rule), but that doesn't have much to do with FE.

My folding equity is determined by my opponents. When I push, I imagine my opponent doing 4 things:
1. Putting me on a hand range.
2. Determining how many chips he will have left if he calls and loses.
3. Determining how much $EV he will gain if he calls and wins.
4. Determining how many chips he will have left if he folds.

Before pushing, you can estimate all of these for the opponents left to act and determine an approximate FE before pushing. The biggest factors are the size of your stack and the size of your opponents stack. Not # in BBs, but in # of chips.

Here's an example. It's the bubble of a 50/5 and the villian in the BB has 2500 chips. It's folded to me in the SB. In which scenario do I have more FE on a push:
A. I have 2500 chips at the 500BB (5xBB)
B. I have 1200 chips at the 100BB (12xBB)

I think that I have more FE in scenario A. I'm sure you can come up with many other examples.

I'm sorry to ramble on like this, but I think a lot of people think too much about # of BBs when deciding when to push.

I suppose it matters when you only have 2xBB left, but by then its pretty much common sense that you are going to be called. Anything more than that, you should be looking at stack sizes.

[djj6835]

[ QUOTE ]
2. Call and see a flop. Push is out of the question for me here.


[/ QUOTE ]

Calling is out of the question here. Those 125 chips look really nice when you only have 460. Pushing should be pretty easy here. You also need to double up really soon here and limping with QJ is not the way to get that done.

[adanthar]

I don't know why this has anything to do with PVS or why this is a thread, because the first two are really easy pushes and the third is probably a limp*.

*if he's a donkey, it could be a push. But when I see solid UTG limpers in level 4 and I have a pair in LP, I like hitting sets.

[Newt_Buggs]

you think that you're going to get paid off on your set enough to make limping 66 utg profitable?

[adanthar]

Uhh, I'm on the button after UTG limped (and when solid UTG limps in L4, I crack his aces a lot)

[Double Down]

Okay, here's my 2 cents. I play the 100 and 200 sngs on pp so I don't know if a 50 is played differently. Do they call more liberally? Anyway, here's what I think:
Flat calling when the blinds are so big is a very suspicious move. It is almost never correct to be the first to enter a pot by just calling, and a lot of players do it because they have a monster and don't want everyone to fold.

So in hand 1, I have around 1000, right? It is enough money that a raise to 300 can steal the blinds and get the co to fold but is not so big that I am pot committed if the co was indeed slowplaying and he decides to push (or if the small or bb have a hand and push). I feel that a raise to 300 is ideal. It will also be taken more seriously and not look like a steal because the co limped, so any reraise that I face I could respect.

In the 2nd hand, a push with qj seems just a little too much as well. Again, the limper behind me has me a little wary and I need to put a bet out there to test the waters. But any raise at this point that would be significant to get him out (say, to 150 or 200) would commit me if he reraised, and any hand I beat (maybe he was trying to limp with j10 or q9) he will fold. So with qj I would call. 50 doesn't seem too much with what I have left.

In the 3rd hand, the utg limper makes me VERY concerned. I can't think of one hand that it is correct to do this in, so there is a very reasonable chance he has aces or kings. Still, 66 is an ok hand with the blinds so big. With the blinds at 50/100, a raise to 250 is enough to get out the blinds and see what the utg's plan was. If he has aces or kings and was indeed slowplaying, a bet of 250 to him will appear that I am committed to my hand and he will try for the push. If I only minraise 200, he may still just call with his monster in hopes that I put it all in on the flop. 250 is enough to show I'm serious and he will show his true colors. If he reraises I fold and I still have enough to make a move or two.

I guess you guys can tell by now that I would much rather make small raises than push. It has been my experience that folding equity is the same with a min raise than an all in, if not better, because allins look so much more suspicious and will tend to get more calls. But min raises look like a person has a good hand and is trying to get a little more value out of it than the blinds.

[lastchance]

These aren't PVSes cuz your hand is good. I'd fold Hand 2, but I'm not sure about that.

Hand 1 and Hand 3 are easy, easy, EAZZZZY POOSHES.

[Newt_Buggs]

[ QUOTE ]
Uhh, I'm on the button after UTG limped (and when solid UTG limps in L4, I crack his aces a lot)

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree that limping against a known solid player is the best play on hand 3, but against an unknown it may not be since the majority of $50 players aren't solid. If you manage to get your whole stack in every time that you flop a set you are getting 11:1 on your money. Considering that you only flop a set something like 7.5:1 and you won't win every time that you hit (and the blinds might raise after you), it seems to me that against most opponents limping to try to flop a set is a very marginal play. Even if you make a set against Aces, you will still lose the hand approximately 18% of the time.

Also, please note that I did mention that these are not true PVSs in the OP. I just used the term since its convenient (didn't know what else to call this). If Phil himself isn't complaining I don't see why you guys are.

[hansarnic]

[ QUOTE ]
Uhh, I'm on the button after UTG limped (and when solid UTG limps in L4, I crack his aces a lot)

[/ QUOTE ]

You really should be routinely folding baby pairs here IMO. It's barely break-even to play for your set even if he does have Aces and will stack off on any flop. And most times he doesn't and he won't.

There are far better things to do with your chips on Level 4.