folding in +EV situations during SNGs...

[wiggs73]

In this (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=singletable&Number=3527600 &page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=14&fpart=all) thread, Megabet, myself, and a few others have been debating whether to take slight edges early in tournaments when you have the pot odds to, but losing means busting out of the tournament. I think it's an interesting debate and I wanted to make a new thread since the title of the original had to do with an AK $55 hand and maybe not everyone had read the actual debate within. I'd like to get as many opinions on this as possible.

[MegaBet]

wiggs, I understand where you are coming from and it is the Harrington approach. However, Harrington is referring mainly to MTTs and is generally more of a tight player.

In SNGs, I believe if you have the odds to make a call then you should do so, even early in the game. If you play a lot at the higher levels (as I do), good players will catch on pretty quickly that you don't want early confrontations and this will be very very -EV to you in the long run. That's just my approach.

I don't think calling this thread "+EV v +money" is accurate either, because of course you want to maximise your return.

[bigt439]

Your big edges come later on in the tournament when you push much better than any of your opponents. While you should be looking to get yourself into +EV situations early on, neutral EV or very marginally +EV situations should be avoided because you have such a larger edge later on in the tournament. For largely this reason and a couple more relating to the dynamics of an sng that I don't think I'm totally qualified to discuss, the increase in $EV of doubling up is not proportionate to the $EV of busting out of a tourney.

[ace_in_the_hole]

I personally think that many people overplay AK early in SnG's. In the hand in question from megabet's post, I feel like folding is defiantley the best option.

[MegaBet]

[ QUOTE ]
I personally think that many people overplay AK early in SnG's. In the hand in question from megabet's post, I feel like folding is defiantley the best option.

[/ QUOTE ]

More people overplay AQ and even AJ and KQ - especially if they are suited.

[downtown]

This has at least been covered in some detail before.

In this (http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=508323&page=28&view=c ollapsed&sb=7&o=all&vc=1) post, in reply to this statement:
[ QUOTE ]
"Survival is in my opinion(I will never say this enough) the absolute first concern in your game."

[/ QUOTE ]
Bozeman wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
This is incorrect: your first concern is money (per hour or per tourney). While money does not correlate perfectly with CEV (chip EV), it correlates much stronger with CEV than it does with survival. Exceptions will occur, but only some of the time, and only around the bubble. Admittedly, a SnG starts closer to the bubble than a multi, but it is still far enough that doubling up is worth at least 1.9x $EV."

[/ QUOTE ]

I tend to agree, and I think it applies here as well.

There's also a lengthy discussion about this topic here:
Positive EV vs. survival in Tourneys (http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=507199&page=0&fpart=all& vc=1)

Not trying to dissuade others from sharing at all, but just thought I'd point out some places I'd read about this before and had bookmarked in my favorite posts.

I tend to be of the school that if I have enough overlay in $EV I'll take the edge early. What is that overlay though? I'm not sure, and it varies according to different players on this site on what it "should" be. Do I personally calculate it on the fly? No.

Generally speaking:
If I feel my edge is small but I have FE, I push the edge even with a small advantage and moderate overlay.
If I feel my edge is large, I obviously call for my tourney life.
If I feel my edge is small and I have to call for my tourney life, I only call if the overlay is large enough. Your independent style and risk tolerance is largely going to affect what that overlay # is for you.

[Ixnert]

[ QUOTE ]
Your big edges come later on in the tournament if you push much better than any of your opponents.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP.

At the lower levels, you can probably take it as a given that this is the case. Given that, it does not make sense to subject yourself to early close calls when you can generate a large advantage over the field just by playing a good mathematical late game.

At higher levels, you have no such expectation that a good late push/fold game gives you a large advantage over the field. Since you can't depend on this, you are more correct (and it is more necessary) to exploit much smaller early edges.

It's only correct to pass up a small advantage now for a big advantage later when you indeed expect to have a big advantage later.

[Mr_J]

"the increase in $EV of doubling up is not proportionate to the $EV of busting out of a tourney."

This isn't necessarily so since ICM only looks at stack size, and not the skill/strengths/weaknesses of the person behind that stack.

Edited to add that ICM also doesn't include the fact that busting out early gives you great turnover of sngs/hr.

There never is a right answer for these situations. Sure you can argue +EV and pot odds until you are blue in the face, but if you make the call and lose, try to use pot odds to pay for your next sng.

I think it is so early in the sng that i will find a better time to take someone on. it could very well be you were lucky enough to get a chance to bust the first donk on the table...something i am always jealous of. I am the type that would fold here and wait it out...i would rather stick around and outplay these guys than give in to a coin flip this early on.

On a side note, why dont you just decide how you want to play this hand, early in sngs, in a heads up hand. I say this because to me, you should play this hand consistently (barring excellent reads of course) because, correct me if I'm wrong, but in order for the long term EV numbers to be valid, you have to call in this position EVERY TIME. you cant pick and choose your fights, you have to be consistent and that is what i think people overlook...

[MegaBet]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Your big edges come later on in the tournament if you push much better than any of your opponents.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP.

At the lower levels, you can probably take it as a given that this is the case. Given that, it does not make sense to subject yourself to early close calls when you can generate a large advantage over the field just by playing a good mathematical late game.

At higher levels, you have no such expectation that a good late push/fold game gives you a large advantage over the field. Since you can't depend on this, you are more correct (and it is more necessary) to exploit much smaller early edges.

It's only correct to pass up a small advantage now for a big advantage later when you indeed expect to have a big advantage later.

[/ QUOTE ]

Aha!! Great post! I play at the higher levels where most people know how to push/fold. Therefore I take my +EV call because a large stack early, if played right, will likely get you in the money. My posts here assume the higher levels. If playing at the lower levels where a good player has a much higher advantage over the field, I can see why folding would work.

[downtown]

[ QUOTE ]
Sure you can argue +EV and pot odds until you are blue in the face, but if you make the call and lose, try to use pot odds to pay for your next sng.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is misleading. Since pot odds could in fact dictate a call based on +$EV.

+$EV moves pay for all my SNGs.

I just think there is too much at risk this early if you are a solid sng player at least at the 33s.

but please respond to my question about playing consistently...in order for these EV calculations to hold up, you must play them consistently, right? I mean, barring reads, if you decide to play AK in this particular situation, then fold it next time, you rendering these EV discussions pointless.

[wiggs73]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Your big edges come later on in the tournament if you push much better than any of your opponents.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP.

At the lower levels, you can probably take it as a given that this is the case. Given that, it does not make sense to subject yourself to early close calls when you can generate a large advantage over the field just by playing a good mathematical late game.

At higher levels, you have no such expectation that a good late push/fold game gives you a large advantage over the field. Since you can't depend on this, you are more correct (and it is more necessary) to exploit much smaller early edges.

It's only correct to pass up a small advantage now for a big advantage later when you indeed expect to have a big advantage later.

[/ QUOTE ]

Aha!! Great post! I play at the higher levels where most people know how to push/fold. Therefore I take my +EV call because a large stack early, if played right, will likely get you in the money. My posts here assume the higher levels. If playing at the lower levels where a good player has a much higher advantage over the field, I can see why folding would work.

[/ QUOTE ]

And I play primarily at the 11s and 22s, which is probably why I'm more inclined to not take early coinflips. I think there are much safer ways to build a stack at these levels.

I play the 33s and have the same logic as you, i dont take early coinflips either...i believe its a solid strategy at the 33s, so when you move up, i think your style will will hold up. I just got called out for saying screw +EV in this situation, i fold and fight later...

[downtown]

[ QUOTE ]
I just think there is too much at risk this early if you are a solid sng player at least at the 33s.

but please respond to my question about playing consistently...in order for these EV calculations to hold up, you must play them consistently, right? I mean, barring reads, if you decide to play AK in this particular situation, then fold it next time, you rendering these EV discussions pointless.

[/ QUOTE ]

I will also pass on borderline situations in the 33s with only a small overlay. In the original post, it was a very close decision, and I think I would have called. It was very close in my mind, and I think it was clear in that post that it was close, so I didn't post my thoughts.

I think what you mean by play consistently is what I refer to in my above post as the amount of overlay you need to make a particular decision. You will of course run into similar situations over and over, and it's useful to know what approach you generally take, but it's better to generalize and take each situation as it comes. By thinking about what is most +$EV, and at what level you just can't pass on the potential to double up or more, it makes these decisions easier in the future.

I am more risk tolerant, so I think that threshold is lower for me than others. I would tend to play similar situations the same over and over again, I hope always choosing the most +$EV one.

If both options have the same EV, then no, it doesn't matter what you do. You don't have to play consistently. It is like the question in the Mike Matasow (sp?) interview I read recently. The interviewer asks him, "Would you rather go into a 50/50 situation with a made hand or a drawing hand?" Matasow answers "Clearly..." and then picks one of them. I don't remember which, but it was so hilarious to me.

[MegaBet]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Your big edges come later on in the tournament if you push much better than any of your opponents.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP.

At the lower levels, you can probably take it as a given that this is the case. Given that, it does not make sense to subject yourself to early close calls when you can generate a large advantage over the field just by playing a good mathematical late game.

At higher levels, you have no such expectation that a good late push/fold game gives you a large advantage over the field. Since you can't depend on this, you are more correct (and it is more necessary) to exploit much smaller early edges.

It's only correct to pass up a small advantage now for a big advantage later when you indeed expect to have a big advantage later.

[/ QUOTE ]

Aha!! Great post! I play at the higher levels where most people know how to push/fold. Therefore I take my +EV call because a large stack early, if played right, will likely get you in the money. My posts here assume the higher levels. If playing at the lower levels where a good player has a much higher advantage over the field, I can see why folding would work.

[/ QUOTE ]

And I play primarily at the 11s and 22s, which is probably why I'm more inclined to not take early coinflips. I think there are much safer ways to build a stack at these levels.

[/ QUOTE ]

And hence our difference in opinion. I can see a donk at the $11s pushing AA or KK, but I would find it hard to believe many people would at the $109s upwards...at least not regularly enough for me to fold AK. Or if my advantage is great enough that early coinflips don't make sense.

[Nicholasp27]

no, u don't have to do the same thing everytime

the ev of the move is the ev of the move...if u make that move 50% of the time, then it just takes twice as long to reach a significant number of trials that should converge closer to the true ev of the situation

but to say you have to do it every time is incorrect

[Gramps]

(a) The times you're knocked out, you pass up future +cev opportunities that (on average) would have presented themselves;

(b) You don't always have to have a confrontation to get in the money in SNGs. It's not just how +cev a confrontation is, it's when in the SNG that confrontation happens. Ideally, you want everyone to go all-in every hand until it's just you and big stack HU, guaranteeing you no worse than 2nd every time. That doesn't happen in real life, but what does happen a % (smaller the higher the buy-in, but still happens) of the time is you can get to the final three without having to win a showdown with your tourney life on the line - you don't play like a puss hoping against hope for it to happen (oftentimes the best defense is a good offense, etc.), but it does factor into the equation.

But, if you're at my table, feel free to get involved (with other players) in marginal confrontations early for all your chips. Or, keep presenting the all-in opportunity to me, and I'll call you when (on average) I have the best of it by a wide margin.

I tend to agree with you gramps because even though there is a +EV, it doesnt necessarily mean you should call. There will be times later in the sng where you will have a better idea of what your opp holds and how you stand. And that was what my remark about how +EV doesnt pay for your next sng when you get knocked out even though you made a +EV move. Seems like everyone in this forum uses that for every decision, barring good reads. I say, pick your battles to win the war!

[llabb]

This is a great thread. I just posted my summary thoughts in the original thread (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Catthoughts =&Number=3538108&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=31&v c=1), but perhaps I should have posted them here instead.

Did I miss anything that I should have learned?

So, Gramps, are you saying that you would fold in the situation in the OP of the OT? Because there's enough dead money there to make it worthwhile. If you would fold, what amount of overlay is enough for you to call?

[the_joker]

I just ran this through SNGPT with the blinds at 10/15, you have 88, your opponents push range is 22+, so your win % is exactly 50%. It's very negative $EV to call here, but obviously slightly +chipEV. It really depends on how "slight" your edge is, how many dead chips are in the pot, and how accurately you can put your opponent on a hand. Personally, I'm going to wait around and let people looking for slight edges knock each other out.

[Gramps]

No read I probably fold AK, because I'm thinking AQ at the worst - more likely AK/pair (at least at the 109s/215s). If I have some sort of "donkey notes" on the player (and the fact that he's doubled up already makes it more likely he's a donkey, but that's not enough evidence to put him on as wide a range of hands as I need to to call), I have no problem calling if I think he'd do this with a number of crap Ax hands (with maybe even some semi-crap/total crap hands thrown in there). That's why it pays to pay attention to what's going on at your table (if you can), even when multitabling.

[llabb]

[ QUOTE ]
No read I probably fold AK, because I'm thinking AQ at the worst - more likely AK/pair (at least at the 109s/215s).

[/ QUOTE ]
Gramps, I was under the impression that at the higher levels, the bubble play is quite solid, so you have to take your small early edges. If I read you correctly, you are saying that you would fold because you think his range is tight, limited to pairs and AK. You are not saying you would fold because you think you still have greater +EV chances closer to the bubble. Is this correct?

At the $55's, I'm calling, because I think at the early levels there are enough donks to make the range include plenty of Ax hands (and possibly even KQ or other Broadway) to make the edge too great to pass up, especially with the dead money I've already contributed to the pot. As an example (not to be results-oriented, but simply as evidence), in the original thread, I stated that the villain had AJo, I called and won.

But would this be incorrect at the 109's and above?

[MegaBet]

We think alike.

Another important factor to consider which I do not believe has been mentioned is your $/hour. IF you are playing continuous SNGs and are winning player, passing up a +CEV early makes even less sense. Let me try and explain...

Let's say you are 4-tabling the 55's, beating them for ~$10 a tournament. You raise at level 2 to 100 chips with AK, someone pushes, and you fold, thinking you do not want to enter a coinflip this early. While this play is marginal CEV - wise - I am qutie sure it is -EV, assuming you are going to load up another tourney if you bust out.

The reason is:
1. If you call and win this marginal situation, you are very strong +EV for this tourney
2. If you call and lose, you load up another tourney, and that new tourney is +$EV.
3. If you fold, you have a below average stack, and have a better chance of playing ~40 minutes without making it ITM.

Conclusion: While folding AK and passing up a marginal CEV situation here MAY improve your ROI, if you are playing continously, it will ultimately improve your hourly rate, which is what its all about, right? /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

interesting spin on the question. But, I really dont think that losing 100 chips early in a tourney is reason to panic or say it is now a -EV tourney. I mean, losing a few hundred chips, even at empire poker where you start with 800 (1000 on 50s), is no reason to panic. so that is the only place i disagree with you. Otherwise, interesting thought.