SNGPT says to push this

[DMACM]

150/300

BB 2965
SB-hero 1340
btn 350
CO 3345

j8o is the hand. I put the villan on the loose range. This was a 22. I actually folded. Is folding an over reaction to the small stack?

edited: loose default range= 44+, a7s+, a9o+, KJs+

[Sabrazack]

Hmm, i think folding this is fine. BB has alot of chips and i never trust a $22 player with alot of chips. I have seen some make some truly baffling calls, and you don't want a spitecall here. I think if btn had 500 it would be a push, but i fold this.

[bigt439]

Good post, but this is a push in my eyes. The two main factors are that shorty may double and if you're blinded through then you're shorty, and by stealing here I think you really increase your shot at 1st or 2nd.

[schwza]

[ QUOTE ]
I put the villan on the loose range.

[/ QUOTE ]

what is that?

i'd fold for sure here. i'd need a lot more hand to get involved with the tiny stack.

[Nick B.]

He is getting very good odds and even if he loses the other shorty will still bust so he will get ITM. This would be a very poor push.

[raptor517]

e z fold. holla

[bigt439]

I'm unsure of what the right answer is (although I've given my opinion), but if this is a fold as many of you are advocating, where does the discrepancy between your desired action and the sngpt results come from?

[schwza]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm unsure of what the right answer is (although I've given my opinion), but if this is a fold as many of you are advocating, where does the discrepancy between your desired action and the sngpt results come from?

[/ QUOTE ]

it might be because sngpt is not the all-knowing oracle.

[DMACM]

Hes not saying that it is. I have the same question he does.

[bigt439]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm unsure of what the right answer is (although I've given my opinion), but if this is a fold as many of you are advocating, where does the discrepancy between your desired action and the sngpt results come from?

[/ QUOTE ]

it might be because sngpt is not the all-knowing oracle.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize there would still be a reason it "is not the all-knowing orcale" and improperly computed this situation.

[Apathy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm unsure of what the right answer is (although I've given my opinion), but if this is a fold as many of you are advocating, where does the discrepancy between your desired action and the sngpt results come from?

[/ QUOTE ]

it might be because sngpt is not the all-knowing oracle.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize there would still be a reason it "is not the all-knowing orcale" and improperly computed this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Give me a call today and I'll explain it to you. Basically the problem lies in the trouble ICM has when stacks are very short compared to the blinds.

[Nick B.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

it might be because sngpt is not the all-knowing oracle.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize there would still be a reason it "is not the all-knowing orcale" and improperly computed this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

In this case it is because the call ranges are close to accurate. I would say his call range is 40%. The "loose" range is tight.

[barry111]

What is the $ value behind it? Is it a small EV edge or a big one?

[schwza]

ok, ok, i'll try to give an answer that is not worthless.

icm says that if you fold, the chips/equity are like this:
3115 .346
1190 .227 (hero)
350 .074
3345 .354

i think that this probably underestimates hero's equity. if it folds to the SB and the SB gets a-i with shorty, hero has a 50-50 shot of making the money immediately, putting the floor at .20, with some chance at getting more. hero's chance is better that 50-50 because somebody besides SB may play (and maybe multi-way). so hero is well better than 50-50 to make the money immediately, and even if shorty doubles up, hero is ahead.

i'd guess that the icm is overvaluing the shorty's equity, but i'm less sure about that one.

btw, this will all get screwed up if the shorty's SB is crafty and walks him to keep the bubble alive. but i doubt that'll happen.

the other reason might be because "tight" is too tight a range for BB, but i have no idea what that range is. also, it'd be nice to know if sngpt called it an easy push or a borderline push.


edit: didn't see this in the OP -
[ QUOTE ]
edited: loose default range= 44+, a7s+, a9o+, KJs+


[/ QUOTE ]

i think this is too tight. these hands will call almost every time (maybe not 44), but you'll also get called sometimes by a6, KT, etc.

[schwza]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm unsure of what the right answer is (although I've given my opinion), but if this is a fold as many of you are advocating, where does the discrepancy between your desired action and the sngpt results come from?

[/ QUOTE ]

it might be because sngpt is not the all-knowing oracle.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize there would still be a reason it "is not the all-knowing orcale" and improperly computed this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Give me a call today and I'll explain it to you. Basically the problem lies in the trouble ICM has when stacks are very short compared to the blinds.

[/ QUOTE ]

wanna fill the rest of us in too?

[Apathy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm unsure of what the right answer is (although I've given my opinion), but if this is a fold as many of you are advocating, where does the discrepancy between your desired action and the sngpt results come from?

[/ QUOTE ]

it might be because sngpt is not the all-knowing oracle.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize there would still be a reason it "is not the all-knowing orcale" and improperly computed this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Give me a call today and I'll explain it to you. Basically the problem lies in the trouble ICM has when stacks are very short compared to the blinds.

[/ QUOTE ]

wanna fill the rest of us in too?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well it's more that I just didn't want to type it out rather then keeping a secret or something.

Does SNGPT consider the order of blind movement around the table and factor that into their stack equity? I didn't think it did but I could be wrong, that alone would easily be enough to make my point.

[DMACM]

My suspicion wass that in this case it has to do with the size of the blind in relation to the stacks rather than its order around the table. I.e SNGPT gives the same answer whether 300 chips is 1 bb or 5 bbs. Is this correct?

[Nicholasp27]

by default, i put opps' on maniac range unless i have other reads

and how positive was it? +.1? +.5? +1.0?

[raptor517]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm unsure of what the right answer is (although I've given my opinion), but if this is a fold as many of you are advocating, where does the discrepancy between your desired action and the sngpt results come from?

[/ QUOTE ]

it might be because sngpt is not the all-knowing oracle.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize there would still be a reason it "is not the all-knowing orcale" and improperly computed this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Give me a call today and I'll explain it to you. Basically the problem lies in the trouble ICM has when stacks are very short compared to the blinds.

[/ QUOTE ]

wanna fill the rest of us in too?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well it's more that I just didn't want to type it out rather then keeping a secret or something.

Does SNGPT consider the order of blind movement around the table and factor that into their stack equity? I didn't think it did but I could be wrong, that alone would easily be enough to make my point.

[/ QUOTE ]

im pretty certain it doesnt.. it takes the current situation and has no concept of future blind movement, etc. and yes, that alone should make yer point. holla

[DMACM]

+1.5% with villan on loose
+.1% with villan on maniac

I Guess it makes a big difference which one is correct.

Thats interesting to me that you use maniac as a default. Ive always used loose even when I was in the 11s. You do 22s?

[Nicholasp27]

loose is too tight, especially for 11s/22s

and the difference is usually 1+%, like u see here

i prefer to err on the side of caution, especially when pushing into a huge stack and i'm in good shape with an extreme shorty left in 4th...why risk it with j2o

[raptor517]

[ QUOTE ]
why risk it with j2o

[/ QUOTE ]

because thats how u win money playing sngs. holla

[Nicholasp27]

yes, but i dont like this situation

i risk it with 27o all the time if the situation calls for it...but in this case, i don't think j2o is a strong enough hand with the extreme shorty


with that huge of a big stack and that small of a shorty, i don't take a +.1% ev on maniac setting...very good chance big stack will call with a slightly looser range than 'maniac'

[DMACM]

raptor do you agree that loose is too tight a default for 22s. Or do you play htem enough to know. Im not disagreeing I just would be curious about other posters opinions on that.

[schwza]

[ QUOTE ]
raptor do you agree that loose is too tight a default for 22s. Or do you play htem enough to know. Im not disagreeing I just would be curious about other posters opinions on that.

[/ QUOTE ]

it matters entirely on the depth of stacks. if you're pushing 10x, the bb is going to call a lot fewer hands than if you're pushing 2.5x, where he'll call almost anything. and other situational stuff, of course.

[raptor517]

[ QUOTE ]
raptor do you agree that loose is too tight a default for 22s. Or do you play htem enough to know. Im not disagreeing I just would be curious about other posters opinions on that.

[/ QUOTE ]

as always, it depends. i dont really know the exact requirements loose is, as im in class right now.. i dont really refer to sngpt much.. there have been several patches changing these settings, etc. i usually err on the side of caution as well, and auto adjust the calling reqs to what i think they will call with. i dont like the presets very much. holla

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm unsure of what the right answer is (although I've given my opinion), but if this is a fold as many of you are advocating, where does the discrepancy between your desired action and the sngpt results come from?

[/ QUOTE ]

it might be because sngpt is not the all-knowing oracle.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize there would still be a reason it "is not the all-knowing orcale" and improperly computed this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Give me a call today and I'll explain it to you. Basically the problem lies in the trouble ICM has when stacks are very short compared to the blinds.

[/ QUOTE ]

wanna fill the rest of us in too?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well it's more that I just didn't want to type it out rather then keeping a secret or something.

Does SNGPT consider the order of blind movement around the table and factor that into their stack equity? I didn't think it did but I could be wrong, that alone would easily be enough to make my point.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah...good point. It doesnt. When blinds are this high, I like to think of equity going around the table like a "wave". You are at the crest when you are UTG...meaning your cash equity is a little higher. ICM calcs dont see this distortion.

[schwza]

[ QUOTE ]
Does SNGPT consider the order of blind movement around the table and factor that into their stack equity? I didn't think it did but I could be wrong, that alone would easily be enough to make my point.

[/ QUOTE ]

huh? if shorty were utg right now (so bb next) then i'd agree, but here he's basically average in terms of paying blinds. i think it's the size rather than the location of the blinds.

[FlyWf]

Well, if SNGPT is underrating hero's equity that means it's overrating someone else's. There are only three suspects.

It's the shorty. ICM dramatically overvalues <2BB stack equity. Nobody folds to him in the BB, he can't fold to a push no matter what cards he holds, multiple people will coldcall his push... ICM doesn't know that. It thinks he has 300 chips and everybody else has a lot more. But there's a big difference between having a 10BB stack of 300 and a 2 BB stack of 300. With the 10BB stack, you can steal blinds. You can fold. You can almost try to play postflop with 10BB.

[Degen]

i fold this 100% of the time

[Apathy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Does SNGPT consider the order of blind movement around the table and factor that into their stack equity? I didn't think it did but I could be wrong, that alone would easily be enough to make my point.

[/ QUOTE ]

huh? if shorty were utg right now (so bb next) then i'd agree, but here he's basically average in terms of paying blinds. i think it's the size rather than the location of the blinds.

[/ QUOTE ]

you're not getting it, it's more about his position relative to YOU and to the blinds, as in he will hit them first meaning that you should give yourself more equity then SNGPT says you have and and less then it says shorty has. I'm sorry if this isn't clear enough it's all in this thread to figure out.

[microbet]

[ QUOTE ]
Does SNGPT consider the order of blind movement around the table and factor that into their stack equity? I didn't think it did but I could be wrong, that alone would easily be enough to make my point.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have a newer version of it, but I think the new version does do something about accounting for the position of the blinds.

edit: I would fold too (unless BB was way too tight). ICM also is not very good when anyone is near one big blind.