One of my favorite moves...

[Messy_Jesse]

Not sure if anyone else does this, but...

A lot of times on the bubble, or even 5-handed, the next hand after I make a standard blind-stealing all-in, I oftentimes push with less than blind-stealing quality hands. I do this because I think that people probably saw the first push as a steal; when I push again, I think people give me credit for a very solid hand, since it seems a little too blatant a move for it to be a regular steal.

I hope I got the right message across there, I know I didn't articulate that too well. Anyways, thoughts? Anyone else do this?

[DyessMan89]

Either that or they will interpret you as an extreme LAG and call you down from every angle. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Messy_Jesse]

True, but I won't do this unless I have a table-image that would allow me to do this. Obviously, if I've had to show down weak hands prior to this, I won't do it. Its simply a move that requires that you pick good spots to execute it.

[Hendricks433]

Ive done this before. I started to realize when I got a good hand and raise the hand after I just raised I rarely ever get called. Definetly depends on table image and other reads.

[The Don]

Probably works better the higher levels you are playing.

[DyessMan89]

Does this really work? I kind of blew it off at first; since to me it would seem like another LAG steal. IDK, maybe I interpret things differently then everyone else. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

I do this in home games; I don't trust it online because of donks. I guess it's level-dependent. np.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
Does this really work? I kind of blew it off at first; since to me it would seem like another LAG steal. IDK, maybe I interpret things differently then everyone else. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

In my experience, the OP has it backwards. I love when I make a steal and then pick up KK because I'm a lot more convinced that I'm going to get called. Perhaps against very high level opposition, but even then the easier assumption is just that you're a real maniac.

[DyessMan89]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Does this really work? I kind of blew it off at first; since to me it would seem like another LAG steal. IDK, maybe I interpret things differently then everyone else. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

In my experience, the OP has it backwards. I love when I make a steal and then pick up KK because I'm a lot more convinced that I'm going to get called. Perhaps against very high level opposition, but even then the easier assumption is just that you're a real maniac.

[/ QUOTE ]

That was what I was thinking.

[Messy_Jesse]

Let me clarify:

This works because:

1) Others recognize that YOU recognize that they would be more likely to call a second all in.
2) Because they know that you know (1), then they can assume that you are only going to be pushing with cards that live up to higher pushing standards.


In other words, if everyone knows that pushing twice in a row is just asking for it, then they will recognize that you know this, and have the cards to back up the possiblility of being called because you pushed the hand before.

That make any sense?

[gumpzilla]

But let's not forget that they know that you know that they know, and consequently they should realize you're bluffing more often. Iocaine powder!

This is also a level of thinking that you're not going to see at low level SNGs at all, so it's best staying on a low level.

[J-Lo]

i find it works the opposite way, whenever i pick up a monster after stealing the previous hand, people LOVE to call w/ as weak as KJ-- even at the $55's...

[Newt_Buggs]

IME this is very read dependent and can go both ways. Against bad, loose players it works the opposite way but it seems like Jesse's idea is dead on against certain players. The seem thing can work with resteals. An aggressive player raises, and you push over the top the 2nd time in a row with a junk hand because he doesn't expect you to make a play a 2nd time without a very strong hand.

[microbet]

And then the hand after that you can push with a really bad hand because who would push a third time without a monster?

Just teasing.

I've never thought of this and have no idea.

[Messy_Jesse]

Exactly. It is very read dependent, and obviously cant be used to often, but I do think, against solid opponents atleast, that it is a very good move to use in certain spots.

[stupidsucker]

How much do you really think they will tighten up to?

Already the good players have a tight calling range. These are the only players it works against right? So a good player that knows that you know blah blah blah.... is already going to have a tight calling range. (AK, JJ+) So now they drop AK and JJ?

Do you honestly think they put you on KK-AA only and wont call with anything less? Nah, I think you are going to get called more often because of your push-push.

All of this just if your read is correct about what type of opponents are behind you .... All of them.

I don't see this being remotely +EV, but I have been wrong before... oi have I been wrong.

[suited_ace]

I do it too, and it works really well, even at the low buy-ins.

[Messy_Jesse]

HAHA THANK YOU... sheez someone who does that... lol...

[Myst]

[ QUOTE ]
Not sure if anyone else does this, but...

A lot of times on the bubble, or even 5-handed, the next hand after I make a standard blind-stealing all-in, I oftentimes push with less than blind-stealing quality hands. I do this because I think that people probably saw the first push as a steal; when I push again, I think people give me credit for a very solid hand, since it seems a little too blatant a move for it to be a regular steal.

I hope I got the right message across there, I know I didn't articulate that too well. Anyways, thoughts? Anyone else do this?

[/ QUOTE ]

I found this to be the case too, but I only do it if I NEED the chips.

[curtains]

Your opponents arent as smart as you. Instead they will think "he pushed last hand, Im going to get him this time".


[ QUOTE ]
Not sure if anyone else does this, but...

A lot of times on the bubble, or even 5-handed, the next hand after I make a standard blind-stealing all-in, I oftentimes push with less than blind-stealing quality hands. I do this because I think that people probably saw the first push as a steal; when I push again, I think people give me credit for a very solid hand, since it seems a little too blatant a move for it to be a regular steal.

I hope I got the right message across there, I know I didn't articulate that too well. Anyways, thoughts? Anyone else do this?

[/ QUOTE ]

[REL18]

Depends what stakes if the stakes are to low they will believe your second push even less then the first

[REL18]

gumpzilla hit it on the noise read his remark over and over

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
Let me clarify:

This works because:

1) Others recognize that YOU recognize that they would be more likely to call a second all in.
2) Because they know that you know (1), then they can assume that you are only going to be pushing with cards that live up to higher pushing standards.


In other words, if everyone knows that pushing twice in a row is just asking for it, then they will recognize that you know this, and have the cards to back up the possiblility of being called because you pushed the hand before.

That make any sense?

[/ QUOTE ]

Messy please for the love of Jesus don't give your opponents so much credit for having brains.

[bennies]

they do have a brain of course, and I think OP's point has some merit.

Then again, when I pushed 3rd time in a row today (with 11bbs) I got called by the button(!) (who also had 11bb) with A6o!!

[ilya]

[ QUOTE ]

Your opponents arent as smart as you. Instead they will think "he pushed last hand, Im going to get him this time".


[ QUOTE ]
Not sure if anyone else does this, but...

A lot of times on the bubble, or even 5-handed, the next hand after I make a standard blind-stealing all-in, I oftentimes push with less than blind-stealing quality hands. I do this because I think that people probably saw the first push as a steal; when I push again, I think people give me credit for a very solid hand, since it seems a little too blatant a move for it to be a regular steal.

I hope I got the right message across there, I know I didn't articulate that too well. Anyways, thoughts? Anyone else do this?

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

You're such a shapkazakidatel', curtains /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[curtains]

His point has not very much practical merit. In the very large majority of cases you will be MORE likely to be called each consecutive time you move allin. (Not taking into account the effect of the extra chips you gained from your last steal)

[curtains]

whats a sktkejykeyjdatel?

[ilya]

[ QUOTE ]

whats a sktkejykeyjdatel?

[/ QUOTE ]

it's a kind of sterkkcwwllelost.

[ilya]

ok it's a russian slang word for someone who tends to underestimate his opponents. although i actually agree with what you say in this thread; i just really love the word.

[bennies]

They are not more likely to call in my experience (but I know you have more of that...).

Anyway, yes, in all cases we have to consider the new position and the new chip count, so an A6 from the first steal might equal an A9 here or something...

I agree that u really can't say anything in general about this issue. U should probably just vary ur style, and be more aggressive when really weak or tight mediumstack players are in the blinds.
One thing though... I have a couple of times folded TT and 99 in early position on the bubble after having stolen the blinds two times in a row... am I weak ?

[45suited]

I actually take my thinking one level deeper than everyone else:

I'm thinking, "My opponents just saw me push the last hand. When they see me push again, they will know that I know that I am more likely to be called, so then they will think that I must have a very strong hand to push again. But then, they will go a level deeper and know that I know that they will give me credit for having a hand, so they will go yet another level deeper and realize that I know that they know that I know that they will give me credit for a hand. Because of this, they will untangle my mult-layered plan and see it for the steal that it is. They will then brilliantly call me with Q high."

Because I give my opponents credit for thinking at the 5th level, I will not attempt to make this move. They are far, far too clever and intelligent to not see past this for what it is. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

<font color="white"> (Or, they're just donks that like to spite call.) <font color="white"> </font>

[stupidsucker]

lol i can't believe this post. Do all of you people really think that your FE goes up with a second push in a row? At any limit?

Wow I must really be on tilt, because I still think this is one of the most backwards things I have ever seen posted.
You are counting on so many precise factors to all be true.

[Unarmed]

[ QUOTE ]
I also think this is one of the most backwards things I have ever seen posted.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well maybe not MOST backwards. I mean, if a guy pushes the button, pushes the CO, and pushes UTG consecutive times, I'm pretty sure he has a hand the third time. However, I'm not 99.9% of opponents, most of which will call you with A2 and type in, "Works everytime but once." So there's somthing to what OP is saying, its just more of a 2nd level impact that counters, but in no way reverses the 1st level impact (he has pushed 3 times in a row he's LAG)

[45suited]

Don't know if you guys are referring to my post or the OP. If you read my post carefully, you 'might' detect a hint of sarcasm.

If you are referring to the OP, I agree with you. I don't like to make plays that rely on my opponents thinking on a high level. I like to make plays that profit from my opponents playing poorly.

[stupidsucker]

sorry... was in reference to OP

I always just reply to the last post(almost always)
I use flat mode.

For the record... I am almost always refering to the OP unless I directly make a response to someone else. Normally with a quote.

I am not trying to be an ass. Just trying to show the basic fundamentals here. Any success at all at this can be sumed up with 2 words.
<font color="white">sample size! </font>

[Messy_Jesse]

The only one thinking on a higher level here is YOU. Here is what your opponents are thinking: "He just pushed and knows that we won't let him continue to get away with it. He pushed again: there's a good chance he has a better hand." THats it.
It's not rocket science and I'm not my opponent more than he deserves. But yes, the only times that. I only do this if I know my opponents to be a solid player who recognizes me as a solid player (despite what Stupidsucker seems to think.)

[45suited]

No offense intended Jesse. I suppose that the difference is that I play 11s, 22s, and the occassional 33. You play at a higher buy-in where putting your opponent on a thought is probably more likely to work.

[stupidsucker]

show me the math
show me normal ranges of your opponents
show me ranges after this brilliant move
stack sizes

Show me the money

Post 10 HHs where you have done this, and I will show you that are wrong mathmatically most of the time even IF you can convince me that you somehow had a great read on ever single opponent behind you.


I have no doubt in my mind that some people will tighten up when they see you push 2x in a row thinking you MUST have a monster, but it isnt going to happen enough. All it takes is to be wrong here and there and your EV goes out the window in the long run.

It is your theory
Show me.

[USCSigma1097]

And most importantly...

Tell me that you love black people.

[stupidsucker]

Don't forget to run a table seacrh on all of your oppoents and make sure they aren't multitabling...

Most multi-tablers wont be affected by your double push whatsoever.

[MegaBet]

I don't like it at all. It has "spite call" written all over it.

[Messy_Jesse]

Multitablers pay attention on the bubble. They have to. Most of the time, I use this against multitablers, because usually those are the solid opponents.

You want 10 HHs? Two things:
1) I dont need you to check and do the math- its not a mathematical play. I can't tell you exactly how much their calling standards change: its a situational play.
2) If you don't like this move, then fine. But I think that executing plays like this in certain situations elevates my game; picking spots like this to pick up those extra chips on the bubble is just another little thing that I do that sets me apart in my mind and explains my tremendous success at the 55s over a long period of time.

Also, I agree that this would not be advisable at low-buyin SNGs. However, to say that those at other buyins "have no brains" and "dont think" is ridiculous. If you know them to be that dumb, then obviously you don't do something as advanced as this.

[stupidsucker]

bawk bawk bawk bawk...

allow me to make it easier on you.

You obviously made this move recently in order to spawn this post.

Post that one.

[Messy_Jesse]

lol.

[stupidsucker]

For the record.

I encourage ideas like this all the time. I think the idea behind your move has great merit, but if you want any respect behind it then you have to put out.

If you know my posts, then you know that I often like to discuss the alternative moves to ABC play. I am not afraid of being wrong. Only good can become of this argument if you allow it.

I am not even afaid of being wrong here. You may show me up and then I have a new move to my arsenal.

To say any push isnt mathmatical is laughable. Every push is mathmatical and situational.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
The only one thinking on a higher level here is YOU. Here is what your opponents are thinking: "He just pushed and knows that we won't let him continue to get away with it. He pushed again: there's a good chance he has a better hand." THats it.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have just described opponents thinking about what you think they think. And you're saying this isn't higher level thinking?

There are definitely situations where there is wisdom to your move. But I think those situations are pretty rare.

[durron597]

Honestly guys....

I really think this depends more on your opponents cards than it does on whether you pushed last hand.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
Honestly guys....

I really think this depends more on your opponents cards than it does on whether you pushed last hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, because what we're debating is how this play will affect their range, which by definition can't depend on their actual cards. Nobody is questioning that whether you get called or not depends on the cards, it's a question of how they will adjust their calling range.

[durron597]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Honestly guys....

I really think this depends more on your opponents cards than it does on whether you pushed last hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, because what we're debating is how this play will affect their range, which by definition can't depend on their actual cards. Nobody is questioning that whether you get called or not depends on the cards, it's a question of how they will adjust their calling range.

[/ QUOTE ]

What I meant was, whether you get called is so overwhelmingly dependant on their cards whether you pushed last hand doesn't matter all that much.

If they would have called with KQ last hand and now they add KJ to the range really doesn't make that much of a difference. It's not like the calling range is going to adjust by much more than that.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

If they would have called with KQ last hand and now they add KJ to the range really doesn't make that much of a difference. It's not like the calling range is going to adjust by much more than that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are underestimating both the power of spite and the number of opponents who are perceptive enough to notice that you are pushing a lot but not necessarily knowledgable enough to know that they probably still can't call very often.

[stupidsucker]

This is dead anyways.

Obviously OP doesnt even believe much in his own move.

He can't even post one example.

[DyessMan89]

I think this thread was an attempt to brainwash us. Mission failed!

[Myst]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree that u really can't say anything in general about this issue. U should probably just vary ur style, and be more aggressive when really weak or tight mediumstack players are in the blinds.
One thing though... I have a couple of times folded TT and 99 in early position on the bubble after having stolen the blinds two times in a row... am I weak ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. They might call with A2 for god sakes.

[Myst]

[ QUOTE ]
This is dead anyways.

Obviously OP doesnt even believe much in his own move.

He can't even post one example.

[/ QUOTE ]

OP doesnt owe you $hit. He throughly explained what he meant in a very matter of fact way.

Instead of griping about it and thinking this is counter-intuitive, why wont you give it a try yourself? This isnt a feeding session, with your turn to suck on OP's teats. Sack up, grow some balls, be willing to learn, and do it yourself.

[Messy_Jesse]

Here's the thing. I'm not going to go back through all my HHs and find an example. If one comes up soon, I'll be sure to post it so you can see.

Let me say this one more time. I want you to disagree with my logic:

1. Your opponents are solid and perceive you to be a good player.
2. You make a standard steal on the bubble. It is obviously recognized as a steal.
3. The next hand, you go all-in again.
4. Since it seems obvious that oponents calling standards will be lower after a second push, and since everyone knows this, your solid opponent respects your allin as well.

Its a difficult concept to grasp, and sure its debatable, but I can think of a few situations where I have done this, and even a few where I have folded a hand to a second all-in from a solid opponent, whereas I might have called their first all-in with that same hand.

[durron597]

This logic can go around and around and around though. Since he knows that I know that he knows etc.

That's why I think that cards matter so much more. Of course if your opponents are the type to spite call then yes of course, but that's not typical.

Edit: because of the circular logic, what I'm really trying to say is that against an unknown the possible differences in push/call ranges turn out to be effectively a wash.

[Isura]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's the thing. I'm not going to go back through all my HHs and find an example. If one comes up soon, I'll be sure to post it so you can see.

Let me say this one more time. I want you to disagree with my logic:

1. Your opponents are solid and perceive you to be a good player.
2. You make a standard steal on the bubble. It is obviously recognized as a steal.
3. The next hand, you go all-in again.
4. Since it seems obvious that oponents calling standards will be lower after a second push, and since everyone knows this, your solid opponent respects your allin as well.

Its a difficult concept to grasp, and sure its debatable, but I can think of a few situations where I have done this, and even a few where I have folded a hand to a second all-in from a solid opponent, whereas I might have called their first all-in with that same hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Regarding points 1 and 2. Your opponents are solid, so even it it's a blatant steal, they know that it is not correct for them to call in most cases. So point 4 is not "obvious" by any means, since a solid opponent is not going to loosen up enough in most cases to turn a -EV push to +EV. But maybe you can show some clear examples where a slight change in calling range can drastically change the EV of a push.

[Messy_Jesse]

I definitely agree that the cards matter when it comes to this. For me, on the otherside of this, I'm more likely to lay down medium pocket pairs and decent aces if a solid opponent psuhes twice in a row.

Also, sure the logic can go around and around ad infinitum. But I'm taking it to this level. One level higher than I'm giving my opponents credit for thinking at. And the level that I'm giving them credit for thinking at isn't going too far, as any solid player will go that far in their thinking about a hand.

[stupidsucker]

[ QUOTE ]
OP doesnt owe you $hit. He throughly explained what he meant in a very matter of fact way.


[/ QUOTE ]

OP owes it not only to me, but to every poster that takes in the hogwash - EV moves and trusts him. The integreity of the board depends on it.

[ QUOTE ]
Instead of griping about it and thinking this is counter-intuitive, why wont you give it a try yourself?

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't "griping" about anything. I was dissagreeing and challenging a poster to back up his idea with a live example and show me that he is right. Why would I try anything myself if I feel it is a - EV move?

[ QUOTE ]
This isnt a feeding session, with your turn to suck on OP's teats.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not sure this even merits a response. So this is my response. Besides... He showed us all how big his teats were. I am claiming the milk is sour before having a taste.

[ QUOTE ]
Sack up, grow some balls, be willing to learn, and do it yourself.

[/ QUOTE ]

What about any of my requests or comments show that I am not willing to learn? The only balls that have retracted are OP's. I challenged him. I asked him to show me in order that I might learn. He is only willing to brag about how awesome his moves are and how high level thinking he is.

To say he isnt willing to go through HHs is pure hocus pocus. I am calling him out. He did this recently. He knows he did, and any one with any intuition knows it too. He could find that HH in less then 5 minutes if he saves them. If he doesnt save them he would have mentioned that by now.

I meant nothing personal in anything I had to say. I have been blunt, honest, and harsh, but I have not made personal attacks on him only his theory.

I challenge anyone that believes in this theory to show me an in game example. Saying that no one owes me is anything more then a cop out. I can walk on water too, but I don't feel like it.
<font color="white"> Have I been trolled??? </font>

[Messy_Jesse]

Sigh... OK- first of all, I have done it recently. The only problem? I've played like 150 SNGS in the past three days. Then, I have to find the specific spot where I pushed twice on the bubble. It's a lot of work to do, and frankly, I'm not willing to go back and do it.
[ QUOTE ]
OP owes it not only to me, but to every poster that takes in the hogwash - EV moves and trusts him.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't owe you [censored]. I explained a concept that I have, and when and how I use it. It's your job to evaluate it, and then use or not use it. I don't have to hold your hand and walk you through how to do everything.

[ QUOTE ]
The only balls that have retracted are OP's. I challenged him. I asked him to show me in order that I might learn. He is only willing to brag about how awesome his moves are and how high level thinking he is.

[/ QUOTE ]

Haha... ok, i've stopped laughing. I told you before that the next time such a situation came up, that I'd post it. But I'm not going to waste my time going through HHs for an hour. Sorry, its just not gonna happen.

I realize that its not personal, and I'm glad that you have been critical- that's what these things need. Right now though, the logic is what need's criticizing. THat's what I want to see: tell me how I'm wrong if those conditions are met.

[45suited]

I'm always open to listen to someone who thinks outside the box. But in this case, my experience has been that the opposite of what you wrote is true.

I have posted a couple ideas on this forum that the majority of posters have disagreed with, but these ideas have worked well for me. I suspect that when you have made this play, your read of the table played a role as well. I'm sure it's not so simple as, "I've pushed twice, now I'll push junk because my opponents will give me credit for a strong hand."

I can't find the HH, but I recently had a spot come up that I wasn't happy with but I had no choice but to push. I was shortstacked and picked up two very strong hands in a row, which I pushed. The third hand, I picked up KQo UTG. Pushing was still the right play because of my stack size / blinds / number of players, but I knew that my FE had been severely compromised. Anyway, the guy to my left (who by this point had an equal stack with me) called with 44.

No way does he make that call if I hadn't pushed two hands in a row. Again, I had to do it, but it was too bad that it was the third hand in a row that I pushed.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
THat's what I want to see: tell me how I'm wrong if those conditions are met.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think people are arguing that your move is wrong if you assume you're up against players who will use your logic. Obviously it isn't, almost by definition, though it does neglect even higher-order thinking that should mean that people should call you more (and then beyond that they should call you less, etc.) The problem that people have is assuming that you're going to be up against a table populated mostly by players who think in this fashion anywhere near often enough to make this something that you should do more than once in a blue moon.

[stupidsucker]

posters come and go that have all kinds of FPS leaking out of them.

I am protective of this board as are others.

I shouldn't have turned any of my anger towards you that derived from MYST protecting you.

We have been trolled.

My intentions are pure. I am in an extremly bad mood. You just happened to get in my path.

I stand by the thinking that your move is not nearly as good as you think it is. I am sorry that it got personal at all, but I am not sorry that I dissagree.

[ QUOTE ]
THat's what I want to see: tell me how I'm wrong if those conditions are met.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is your conditions. You aren't psycic. Your move does nothing more then make players think about their hands differently. Some will tighten up, some will loosen up, some won't pay attention at all. Your read can NEVER be good enough.

A player good enough to be thinking hard about your push standards is going to have a very very tight calling range already. For a lot of us that means mucking AK. Your margin for error is too small to have this read be worth anything at all.

The real bottom line is... Most people wont think the way you do. Most people will loosen up rather then tighten up. The only exception is if every single person behind you has played with you enough to know you wouldnt do something like this. Such a situation will almost never happen at the 55s, and rarely happen at the 215s. This post itself makes your move lose value.

[Messy_Jesse]

The reason I posted this hand in the first place was because lately I've been shorthanded a lot with other 2+2'ers who I respect and expect to think this way. This is definitely not something to use that often, but I have found several situations where I have been on either the pushing or folding side of this. I promise to post the next hand where it comes up. It may turn out that I'm dead wrong and that I've been lucky so far. We'll see...

[microbet]

sktkejykeyjdatel is to sterkkcwwllelost as siamese is to:

A) Dog
B) Cat
C) Moeron
D) SAT

[durron597]

Stop being intentionally confusing.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Your opponents arent as smart as you. Instead they will think "he pushed last hand, Im going to get him this time".


[ QUOTE ]
Not sure if anyone else does this, but...

A lot of times on the bubble, or even 5-handed, the next hand after I make a standard blind-stealing all-in, I oftentimes push with less than blind-stealing quality hands. I do this because I think that people probably saw the first push as a steal; when I push again, I think people give me credit for a very solid hand, since it seems a little too blatant a move for it to be a regular steal.

I hope I got the right message across there, I know I didn't articulate that too well. Anyways, thoughts? Anyone else do this?

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

You're such a shapkazakidatel', curtains /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[/ QUOTE ]