You think this is a leak?
 

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t300 (4 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx

Hero (t1440)
SB (t3195)
BB (t2320)
UTG (t1045)

Preflop: Hero is Button with 9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].
<font color="#666666">3 folds</font>.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

That's an ugly situation, it depends on the calling standards of the blinds. Against tight players it's a leak, against loose ones it's not.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

Not at all, maaaaybe push if they have been giving the shortstack free walks and have tight calling standards, but it looks good to me.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

I'd push this. If BB was SB and SB was BB I would fold.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

Why must it be taken as a given that this is a push/fold situation? With T9s, I see merit in paying the t300 and seeing a flop.

You have 400 chips more than shorty/UTG (an important "block"), and he pays blinds ahead of you. If you call with T9s, i suppose you will then have to fold to a push from either blind (steal or legit), but that is a minority of times. So see a flop and use your superior poker skills Scuba. SB can do whatever he wants, complete or not, suprisingly often he does fold, maybe bottom 40% of hands(!). So if the BB does check and we see a 2/3 handed flop, you can pick your spots to make your bet or not,and with t1000 behind, THEN it must be push. But limping, you arent commiting to the pot, and you will flop the best hand 1 time in, uh, 3(?). And you make use of being the button, i'm sure you can take away a good chunk of pots when he flops bottom pair, or if you both miss. If he stop-and-goes you, well, only call if you are pretty damn sure you have him beat. Otherwise, fold.

Just a suggestion, an alternative. If limited to push/fold, yeah push seems OK, 450 chips helps...but i'd wait for a better spot. Remember shorty pays blidns next hand, not you. The stacks/positions, for me, dont make having t1900 than much better than your current t1400, for $equity in the tournament. I'd toss this and be thrilled if SB decides to push at BB...and even more if he gets called [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] That would jump your equity even more than having the t450 blinds.

BL'

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

I only read the first line of your post. But limping is pretty horrible imo. The blinds push way to often.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

Most times I would push this unless the table was very aggressive. But I think folding is OK with the short stack being in the BB the next hand.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I only read the first line of your post. But limping is pretty horrible imo. The blinds push way to often.

[/ QUOTE ]

They certainly do at $55/$109 but I'm not sure about the $22s. I suppose it has merit but seems a bit fancy to me.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

I push in this situation. I'm not scared of being called and busting out.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

what are you scared of? they are not priced in to call you and neither stack is huge enough to call with a mediocre hand. You win the blinds the majority of the times. And when you are called you still have a good chance to win the hand... what buy-in?

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why must it be taken as a given that this is a push/fold situation? With T9s, I see merit in paying the t300 and seeing a flop.

You have 400 chips more than shorty/UTG (an important "block"), and he pays blinds ahead of you. If you call with T9s, i suppose you will then have to fold to a push from either blind (steal or legit), but that is a minority of times. So see a flop and use your superior poker skills Scuba. SB can do whatever he wants, complete or not, suprisingly often he does fold, maybe bottom 40% of hands(!). So if the BB does check and we see a 2/3 handed flop, you can pick your spots to make your bet or not,and with t1000 behind, THEN it must be push. But limping, you arent commiting to the pot, and you will flop the best hand 1 time in, uh, 3(?). And you make use of being the button, i'm sure you can take away a good chunk of pots when he flops bottom pair, or if you both miss. If he stop-and-goes you, well, only call if you are pretty damn sure you have him beat. Otherwise, fold.

Just a suggestion, an alternative. If limited to push/fold, yeah push seems OK, 450 chips helps...but i'd wait for a better spot. Remember shorty pays blidns next hand, not you. The stacks/positions, for me, dont make having t1900 than much better than your current t1400, for $equity in the tournament. I'd toss this and be thrilled if SB decides to push at BB...and even more if he gets called [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] That would jump your equity even more than having the t450 blinds.

BL'

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is 1) you might get raised and 2) even with your description (which ignores raises), this play seems only marginally +cEV and high variance, which means it's -EV in a structured payout tourny.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

Don't see how you can push this. What if you knew that you would get AA the very next hand. Would you push this T9s now? Hell would you even push with A9s here?

Well this is essentially the same thing. UTG is going to have to take a -EV gamble at some point, and guess who the main beneficiary is? Figure that sneaking into the $$$ is worth about 3% of the prize pool and there is no way that you should be pushing this hand. You will be lucky to get any value from it let alone anything close to 3% of the pool. Pass up on +EV gambles (if this is even +EV to begin with, which is questionable at best) to exploit bigger +EV gambles later (namely watching UTG flip for his tourney life). That is the name of the game.

Brad

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

According to your logic UTG could also get AA next hand and in that case he is not flipping for his life. It almost sounds to me like you are satisfied at just post and fold till u make the money.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

I'm generally raising these hands in the $22s. It really depends on hand ranges, as Tigerite says. I'm probably worried more about what my table image as the time for affecting those ranges though.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

[ QUOTE ]
what are you scared of? they are not priced in to call you and neither stack is huge enough to call with a mediocre hand. You win the blinds the majority of the times. And when you are called you still have a good chance to win the hand... what buy-in?

[/ QUOTE ]

$33

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Don't see how you can push this. What if you knew that you would get AA the very next hand. Would you push this T9s now? Hell would you even push with A9s here?

Well this is essentially the same thing. UTG is going to have to take a -EV gamble at some point, and guess who the main beneficiary is? Figure that sneaking into the $$$ is worth about 3% of the prize pool and there is no way that you should be pushing this hand. You will be lucky to get any value from it let alone anything close to 3% of the pool. Pass up on +EV gambles (if this is even +EV to begin with, which is questionable at best) to exploit bigger +EV gambles later (namely watching UTG flip for his tourney life). That is the name of the game.

Brad

[/ QUOTE ]

I posted this because it turns out this has a +0.9% expected value against Eastbay's default lag calling ranges. That's awfully high to pass up. I didn't know how big a value this was until I reviewed.

BTW, this is a $33 buyin.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I posted this because it turns out this has a +0.9% expected value against Eastbay's default lag calling ranges. That's awfully high to pass up. I didn't know how big a value this was until I reviewed.

BTW, this is a $33 buyin.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think those calling ranges are too tight. You can't see SB or BB calling with KTs? I've seen that call a ton of times. How about A2s? Or 33? Or JTs? All calls I've seen. If you change the settings to maniac for both you get -0.9%. Maniac for 1 and loose for the other and you get -0.1%.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

If the table is aggressive I'm pushing while I've got the chance. If the table is tight I'm pushing. Give shorty 200 less chips and I think about folding.

There is a leak here but I'm not sure who's it is.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

I fold there. I tend to put most oppenants on either Loose or Maniac setting. Even under Average setting, SNGPT gives this a +0.2 wich is not enough for a push. So only way you can push in this spot is if you put the two big stacks in the blinds behind you on Tight setting. I think that is very unrealistic, expecially in a $33.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

For those advocating giving looser ranges to BB (and SB) I think that's very wrong. At low BIs, 33s included, people simply do not call very loosely when there chip standing can go from ITM to 4th. BB has a lot to lose here and if you havent been pushing like a maniac up until now, then, this push should be very +EV off the top of my head. I wouldnt put BB on maniac calling range ever here.

I couldnt imagine a hand like KT calling here.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

[ QUOTE ]
For those advocating giving looser ranges to BB (and SB) I think that's very wrong. At low BIs, 33s included, people simply do not call very loosely when there chip standing can go from ITM to 4th. BB has a lot to lose here and if you havent been pushing like a maniac up until now, then, this push should be very +EV off the top of my head. I wouldnt put BB on maniac calling range ever here.

I couldnt imagine a hand like KT calling here.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is exactly what I was thinking.

If they call and lose, they're in trouble. They don't want to take that chance right now. Not with a shroty.

I think their calling ranges have to be pretty tight here.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

I used to fold this pretty much 100% of the time. Now I push this perhaps 2/3. I am convinced it was a bigger leak earlier.

Shorty doesn't even have to double up for you to get in trouble. All he needs is a walk.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

I think I push this, if I have any read whatsoever that these guys aren't calling loose. SB has to worry that the BB will wake up with a big hand behind, and the BB will be crippled if he calls you and loses. What's your image like?

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think I push this, if I have any read whatsoever that these guys aren't calling loose. SB has to worry that the BB will wake up with a big hand behind, and the BB will be crippled if he calls you and loses. What's your image like?

[/ QUOTE ]

Point of the post is not to be tournament specific. I meant it to be more universal.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

In a vacuum I'd push, if that's what you're getting at.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think I push this, if I have any read whatsoever that these guys aren't calling loose. SB has to worry that the BB will wake up with a big hand behind, and the BB will be crippled if he calls you and loses. What's your image like?

[/ QUOTE ]


Point of the post is not to be tournament specific. I meant it to be more universal.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would universally push here. Its more of a "drip drip", not a leak perhaps.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

[ QUOTE ]
In a vacuum I'd push, if that's what you're getting at.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL, this is a discussion hand. I often think about the bubble in terms of stack management and specifically in terms of relative stack management. This hand was counter-intuitive to me.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

[ QUOTE ]

Point of the post is not to be tournament specific. I meant it to be more universal.

[/ QUOTE ]

Shorthanded poker is meaningless without reads. This should be obvious, David Sklansky style*.

<font color="white">*(and it's not close, do you see why?)</font>

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I fold there. I tend to put most oppenants on either Loose or Maniac setting. Even under Average setting, SNGPT gives this a +0.2 wich is not enough for a push. So only way you can push in this spot is if you put the two big stacks in the blinds behind you on Tight setting. I think that is very unrealistic, expecially in a $33.

[/ QUOTE ]

You sure buddy? Try putting in the correct blinds...

Iffy situation- at first I thought this was an easy push but the more I look at it the more dependent on reads/table image this becomes. If you've been pushing the last few orbits or anyone has said any comments about you pushing- fold easily. If you've been quiet, the shorty has been pushing or getting walks... I push here.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Point of the post is not to be tournament specific. I meant it to be more universal.

[/ QUOTE ]

Shorthanded poker is meaningless without reads. This should be obvious, David Sklansky style*.

<font color="white">*(and it's not close, do you see why?)</font>

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand what you're saying, thus my opinion is that you would say, if my image was _______, then I would act in this fashion, otherwise, I would __________.

I didn't want to talk about, ok, in this situation, I would play it this way because ________.

Overall, mathematically, it's +EV. The magnitude is what through me off. I had not realized this before. In fact, it's so big, I think it's something I need to do more. I agree, if I'm in a war with BB over some trivial suckout earlier, I'm more likely to fold this.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

I'll let others elaborate.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

[ QUOTE ]

I understand what you're saying, thus my opinion is that you would say, if my image was _______, then I would act in this fashion, otherwise, I would __________.

I didn't want to talk about, ok, in this situation, I would play it this way because ________.

Overall, mathematically, it's +EV. The magnitude is what through me off. I had not realized this before. In fact, it's so big, I think it's something I need to do more. I agree, if I'm in a war with BB over some trivial suckout earlier, I'm more likely to fold this.

[/ QUOTE ]

How are you going to say it's mathematically +EV overall? This IS situation dependent.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I understand what you're saying, thus my opinion is that you would say, if my image was _______, then I would act in this fashion, otherwise, I would __________.

I didn't want to talk about, ok, in this situation, I would play it this way because ________.

Overall, mathematically, it's +EV. The magnitude is what through me off. I had not realized this before. In fact, it's so big, I think it's something I need to do more. I agree, if I'm in a war with BB over some trivial suckout earlier, I'm more likely to fold this.

[/ QUOTE ]

How are you going to say it's mathematically +EV overall? This IS situation dependent.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's official. I've turned this post into crap.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

Scuba,

You have to few BBs and shorty isn't short enough to not push here IMO. Now if SB or BB is a calling maniac or you're pushing everything perhaps my opinion changes...but c'mon, you're gonna hurt either one of them if they call and lose - plenty of FE here considering the amount of blinds at stake.

Yugoslav

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

I push, but that's because I don't think either of the blinds will call as much as they should (probably because they put me on a tighter range in this position). They're probably thinking that I wouldn't risk my whole stack, with the blinds about to hit the short stack, without a good hand. So, they won't imagine that I'd push T9s, so they'll have pretty tight calling ranges.

This is probably all wrong. The blinds should expect me to push a pretty wide range and be looser with their calling range. But, I don't think that's how it actually works at these levels.

My guess, without having tried to find an equilibrium, is that T9s is just about at the bottom of the theoretical equilibrium pushing range. But, that perfect practical play from the button will mean pushing more than you should because the BB will call less often than he should.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

[ QUOTE ]

My guess, without having tried to find an equilibrium, is that T9s is just about at the bottom of the theoretical equilibrium pushing range. But, that perfect practical play from the button will mean pushing more than you should because the BB will call less often than he should.

[/ QUOTE ]

Given the EV number I provided, I think your guess is off.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

Im sure, you try putting in the correct blinds.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Don't see how you can push this. What if you knew that you would get AA the very next hand. Would you push this T9s now? Hell would you even push with A9s here?

Well this is essentially the same thing. UTG is going to have to take a -EV gamble at some point, and guess who the main beneficiary is? Figure that sneaking into the $$$ is worth about 3% of the prize pool and there is no way that you should be pushing this hand. You will be lucky to get any value from it let alone anything close to 3% of the pool. Pass up on +EV gambles (if this is even +EV to begin with, which is questionable at best) to exploit bigger +EV gambles later (namely watching UTG flip for his tourney life). That is the name of the game.

Brad

[/ QUOTE ]

I posted this because it turns out this has a +0.9% expected value against Eastbay's default lag calling ranges. That's awfully high to pass up. I didn't know how big a value this was until I reviewed.

BTW, this is a $33 buyin.

[/ QUOTE ]

This post is bothersome to me because it isn't the 1st time that I have come up with different numbers then the rest of you. Okay just to see if I'm getting this all right here...

They both call with 22+/A2+/KQ/KJs (this is the loose button for me). You are on the button and both bigger stacks are in the blinds. It tells me that pushing here is -0.7% compared to folding. If they both call with 77+/A9+ (the average button) it now becomes +1.4% to push.

There is no way that they are calling with 77+/A9+ here. The 1st range appears to be pretty reasonable and that is why I can't understand pushing.

So what gives here? Tell me what I'm doing wrong. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Brad

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

[ QUOTE ]
They both call with 22+/A2+/KQ/KJs (this is the loose button for me). You are on the button and both bigger stacks are in the blinds. It tells me that pushing here is -0.7% compared to folding. If they both call with 77+/A9+ (the average button) it now becomes +1.4% to push.

[/ QUOTE ]

Using your range and 0% discount for the blinds, I also get -0.7%. However, the "loose" button for me is 44+,A7s+,A9o+,KJs+ and I always discount some for the blinds (usually the 50% default). I wish someone would explain the blind discounting so I could better understand which setting might be best.

BTW, the "average" button is 66+,ATs+,AJo+ for me. I'm using v1.19-test13 and have not changed the default ranges.

Re: You think this is a leak?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I posted this because it turns out this has a +0.9% expected value against Eastbay's default lag calling ranges. That's awfully high to pass up. I didn't know how big a value this was until I reviewed.

[/ QUOTE ]
I get the same +0.9% when blind discounting is turned off. With 50% discounting, it's only +0.2%. Discount them 100% and this becomes -0.7%. I guess it becomes very important to understand blind discounting.