SNG Quiz - Page 10

dfscott · #91 06-04-2005, 08:25 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I'm still trying to sort all this out. Could someone please help my understand why BB would fold AK if he knew SB was pushing any two?

If he folds, ICM shows him with 31.48% equity in the prize pool.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct.

[ QUOTE ]
If opponent is pushing with any two, AK is a pretty good favorite against that range, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not as much as you might think. Against any two, AKo is 65.3% to win. The 65% of the time you call and win, your ICM value is now 44.6%. The 45% of the time you call and lose, it's 0%. So, by calling, your EV is:

(.65 * 44.6) + (.45 * 0) = 29.2%, which is less than what you get by folding.

[ QUOTE ]
The trouble I am having with ICM is that in trying to calculate the BB's resultant prize pool equity if he calls and wins, I'm getting a result that seems counterintuitive. It shows a 6000-chip stack at 44.6% equity against two 1000-chip stacks.

Unless I'm interpreting something wrong here, it seems to me that this puts the opponents, collectively, as a favorite against the big stack. That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. It means that the BB will finish second/third more often than first. Can this be correct?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, it is. This is why deals that allocate the prize pool by stack size are very biased towards the big stacks. It also explains why your last few chips are worth more than your 2nd thousand chips.

[ QUOTE ]

Here's a question for you: if the SB pushed with AQo and then tabled his cards, what would the BB do with AK? My intuition says that he should call (and I would expect that yours does, too). How are you doing the math to come up with the answer to a question like this? Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

The math on this is pretty easy. AK is a 74.4% favorite over AQ. So, you're still at 46.6% if you win, but there's now a 74.4% chance of getting to that 46.6%.

(.744 * 44.6) = 32.2%, which is more than what you have left if you fold by 1.7%, which is generally accepted to be more than enough to call.

Rotating Rabbit · #92 06-04-2005, 09:22 PM

Right. Basically its like the gap concept magnified up a few notches on account of if you lose the hand you get 0? Thanks for the explanation. Interesting reading your AKo calculation in a post below also.

dfscott · #93 06-04-2005, 10:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Right. Basically its like the gap concept magnified up a few notches on account of if you lose the hand you get 0? Thanks for the explanation. Interesting reading your AKo calculation in a post below also.

[/ QUOTE ]

Glad to help. Lots of poker is counter-intuitive, but SnGs are more counter-intuitive than most types, which is one of the things that makes it so profitable.

ilya · #94 06-04-2005, 10:12 PM

The maximum equity you can have in a standard Party tournament is 50% of the prize pool.

dfscott · #95 06-04-2005, 10:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The maximum equity you can have in a standard Party tournament is 50% of the prize pool.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point -- I forgot to mention that. You'd think that winning is 100%, but first place is only half the money.

freemoney · #96 06-04-2005, 10:17 PM

no its the truth, isnt it funny how a successful 109er and a successful 215er Nick are both saying that ome of the answers arrived to on this forum should be taken with a grain of salt yet every player with an ROI of 3% at 10+1 so steadfastly denies anything other than the ICM

pergesu · #97 06-04-2005, 10:24 PM

That's cause the only proof the 3% $11ers see is ICM. Nick comes along and says, "That's horrible," "what an awful play," "you guys are all wrong," yet I've never seen him say "and this is why..." You say, "Lots of successful players would do this, which is contradictory to ICM," but don't explain how it's better than the conclusion reached by ICM.

Why do us peons stand behind the answers we reach with ICM? Cause curtains, eastbay et al come to those answers, and show us how they do it. I act on the best information I can find. Until someone tells me WHY an alternate play is better, I can't give it any substantial value.

Moonsugar · #98 06-04-2005, 11:36 PM

According to my work if SB will push with any two then I in BB should call with 99 or any higher pair. But that is it. No other card combinations. What are your arguments for calling with a broader range (if that is in fact what you are arguing)?

If you call SB with broader range to discourage SB from pushing with any 2, it doesn't matter. There is no defence because of the dead money in the pot and the way tournies are paid.

Or do you believe ICM to be flawed in this case? Or maybe every case?

One thing which should be worked on and I think we overlook because of the simplicity of all-in prices: pushing with any 2 is a profitable strategy but is it the BEST strategy? That strategy would include smaller raises, which I notice that you do in the endgame. Maybe this is what you hint at and one I have been working on.

Nick B. · #99 06-05-2005, 01:25 AM

[ QUOTE ]
According to my work if SB will push with any two then I in BB should call with 99 or any higher pair. But that is it. No other card combinations. What are your arguments for calling with a broader range (if that is in fact what you are arguing)?

If you call SB with broader range to discourage SB from pushing with any 2, it doesn't matter. There is no defence because of the dead money in the pot and the way tournies are paid.

Or do you believe ICM to be flawed in this case? Or maybe every case?

One thing which should be worked on and I think we overlook because of the simplicity of all-in prices: pushing with any 2 is a profitable strategy but is it the BEST strategy? That strategy would include smaller raises, which I notice that you do in the endgame. Maybe this is what you hint at and one I have been working on.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't arguing anything. I just don't think it is proper strategy to push any 2 into the other equal stack. I would definitely be pushing AQ as well as a number of other playable hands. My calling range would definitely wider than KK+. I don't have any ICM numbers or anything because I don't use that to back it up. I think it is more profitable to wait 1 hand and push with a short stacked BB with a much smaller risk of busting.

beeyjay · #**100** 06-05-2005, 01:35 AM

I'm really confused as to what you back this up with. You say you think its more profitable to wait a hand. I think people are trying to prove to you mathematically that this thought is wrong. Why would you want to wait a hand? so you can push into 2 people instead of 1? or so you can push into the small stack who is probably opening up his calling standards because he has to make a stand at some point?

I think this post may come off with a negative tone but thats really not what I'm going for. I just want an explanation for disagreeing with everybody else and the math.