Interesting situation (I think)

[rci97]

Here's a question that came up in a game today. I have a feeling I'm going to get a bunch of people calling me stupid...

Down to 6 players. Blinds 50 and 100. The chip leader has t3300. I have t2600. The remaining players are shortstacked (remaining 2100 divided fairly evenly among the other 4 players). The relevant info:

UTG t600
UTG+1 t3300
Hero t2600 (Ks,Kd)

UTG goes all-in. UTG+1 goes all-in. Hero?

Now, obviously, I'm only concerned with the chip leader's all in. I "know" that I've got him beat, but I'm concerned about the ~28% chance that if he has an ace, he'll suck out on me or the 20% chance he'll flop a set with a lower pair. All the other players are really short stacked. Is a fold here ridiculously tight? I called an won (chip leader had jacks, UTG had 7's), but I don't know if, in this situation, it was stupid to take the chance. Do any math experts have any thoughts about this situation?

[ChrisV]

No way, the allin is completely obvious. You sound like Phil Hellmuth. You just don't get better spots to invest your money than a 70-75% win.

[rci97]

I knew the all in was obvious. I knew that I had the chip leader beat. That's why I called. My question is this: simply based upon the chip stacks, even if chip leader's cards were face up, due to the low stacks of the other players, would there be any mathematical justification for for folding? Again, I realize that the answer is probably obvious, but I wanted the opinions of some math experts.

[lorinda]

In a 50-30-20 payout there would be no justification in folding. (Assuming Ax for the opponent)

Taking it to obviously false levels, you are turning a far from certain $20 and turning it into a very likely $30 minimum.

If the prize structure was a weird one, say 35-33-32 it is possible that there would be a way to justify it.

Lori

[ChrisV]

I know what the question is. The answer is still that allin is obvious. You get first a ridiculously high percentage of the time when you win this hand. Look at the situation - You with 8 million chips and 5 short stacks all desperately trying to hang on into the money. Even if you were guaranteed third if you folded, I very much doubt it would be right to fold.

*sigh* OK, OK, let's ICM Calculator it....

By the way, just noticed, with the stacks as given there isn't 2100 to be divided between the remaining players, there's only 1500. I'll assume this is correct...

Scenario 1: You lose to chip leader - 23%. Equity: 0% of prize pool

Scenario 2: You beat chip leader, lose to UTG - 23%. Stacks:

UTG: 1800
UTG+1: 700
You: 4000
Other players: 475 each

ICM calculator says your equity: 35.36% of prize pool.

Scenario 3: You beat both of them - 54%. Stacks:

UTG+1: 700
You: 5800
Other players: 475 each

ICM calculator says your equity: 40.04% of prize pool.

If you fold, scenario 1: UTG wins (call this 40% of the time) - ICM says your equity 0.2772.

scenario 2: UTG loses (60%) ICM says 30.00%.

Call: (.23*0) + (.23*35.36) + (.54*40.04) = 29.75%
Fold: (.4*27.72) + (.6*30.00) = 29.09%

Thus the ICM says it's narrowly a call. However the ICM is grossly underestimating your equity when you win, as it doesn't take into account the scared play of the other players as the bubble approaches. The ICM doesn't factor in the bullying value of having a large stack.

[rci97]

Thanks for the responses.... By the way, when I said 2100 divided between the other 4 players, this included the one that was all in for 600. Like I said, I did call. It was more a question of at what point would a fold be appropriate even knowing that I had the best hand. Don't worry - I'm not one of these people that would start on of those stupid "should I fold my aces here" debates. I just thought that it was fairly interesting and if the low stacks were all lower (like say 4 of them with 400 apiece), it would have been even more interesting.

[ChrisV]

I screwed up the calculation the first time anyway - the other stacks should have had 475 apiece.

With the revised numbers, the drop in number of players helps the fold and the ICM calls it as:

Call: 30.035%
Fold: 30.616%

I'm overruling the ICM here though since, as I mentioned, it underestimates the value of a large stack.

[rachelwxm]

I agree it is somewhat surprisingly close if big stack has Ax according to ICM but the fact he might have other hands like smaller pair or KJ KQ justify the call. Also ICM does not price in the added benefit of becoming a big stack at bubble.

[e_fermat]

I had a somewhat similar situation that was closer to the bubble:

Poker Stars Turbo $25+2 No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t200 (5 handed), Ante 25

SB (t1200)
Hero (t2950)
UTG (t215)
UTG+1 (t2320)
Button (t7535)


Preflop : Hero is BB with 10[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 5 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img].

UTG folds, UTG+1 calls, Button folds, SB completes, <font color="red"> Hero checks</font>.

Flop: 10[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]
SB all-in, <font color="red">Hero??</font>

Ok, so now I've got top-pair and 4-flush. I can't imagine SB having an overpair and only completing from SB. The big problem is giant stack is yet to act (I have no read on him except he has been aggressive with good hands to accumulate his stack). If giant stack takes out SB, then on the next hand UTG is all-in in the BB and I'm basically ITM. Do I fold, just call the all-in or go all-in myself hoping to keep giant stack out?

(I did go all-in myself and lost to giant stack on an A on the turn).

[tigerite]

Er? Giant stack, the button, folded preflop. You have the other guy covered don't you? The UTG+1 chap. It's a must push for me. If UTG+1 wants to risk his tourney on 6 outs, fine.