3-way calling action on the bubble

[Bigwig]

[ QUOTE ]
If.....button wins,

[/ QUOTE ]

If man, if.

[Gramps]

[ QUOTE ]
Would you still call if the short stack had folded?

[/ QUOTE ]

There's no way in hell I'm calling if the short stack folds. His call + my having him outchipped is the only reason I'm calling and forcing the button to beat two hands (mine a pretty respectable one 3-way) in order for him to not finish 4th. Yes, if the button wins and UTG beats me I'm gone (and if the button wins and I beat UTG, I'm down to about 600 chips and now 3rd place has >3,000 chips), but if the button beats UTG (and I would have lost to the button and UTG if I had called), I'm outchipped by > 2:1 by 3rd place (now button), I have little fold equity, and am semi-up sh-t creek anyhow.

I believe by calling I'll get 3rd place right there about 60% of the time, and will beat both UTG and the button a little over 30% of the time (giving me >3,000 chips).

I think the % of 3rd places is very close, maybe a few percent more if I fold. The question is the distribution of 1sts/2nds. I don't know that it makes up for it (or that you even have more 1st/2nds by calling), but I think it's probably close at worst.

[bugstud]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Would you still call if the short stack had folded?

[/ QUOTE ]

There's no way in hell I'm calling if the short stack folds. His call + my having him outchipped is the only reason I'm calling and forcing the button to beat two hands (mine a pretty respectable one 3-way) in order for him to not finish 4th. Yes, if the button wins and UTG beats me I'm gone (and if the button wins and I beat UTG, I'm down to about 600 chips and now 3rd place has >3,000 chips), but if the button beats UTG (and I would have lost to the button and UTG if I had called), I'm outchipped by > 2:1 by 3rd place (now button), I have little fold equity, and am semi-up sh-t creek anyhow.

I believe by calling I'll get 3rd place right there about 60% of the time, and will beat both UTG and the button a little over 30% of the time (giving me >3,000 chips).

I think the % of 3rd places is very close, maybe a few percent more if I fold. The question is the distribution of 1sts/2nds. I don't know that it makes up for it (or that you even have more 1st/2nds by calling), but I think it's probably close at worst.

[/ QUOTE ]

had anyone plugged this into eastbay's thing to give some ranges on what you should call with, if K9s isn't in it?

[Gramps]

[ QUOTE ]
If.....button wins,


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



If man, if.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't quite understand the point. I have more chips than the button at the start of the hand. If the button doesn't win (whether it's 2nd out of 3, or 3rd out of 3)...I get 3rd place at worst. What's bad about that?

If I fold and the button loses to UTG, I am outchipped by >3:1 by the 2nd place player and will finsih 3rd the vast majority of the time. So...my $EV is slightly higher the times I fold and UTG beats the button (and I would have lost to UTG also), but close to 20% of the time my calling will be the de facto reason the button lost, and I'll have >3,000 chips (with at least 3rd place locked).

I think the argument that the reward doesn't quite justify the risk may be valid, but I think everyone is way overestimating the size of the risk here. Folding leaves me in a sh-tty spot here (unless UTG beats the button, in which case I would have gotten 3rd at worst by calling anyhow).

[ChoicestHops]

Very bad call. Let the Button go heads up with the chip leader. If he loses, your're in the money. Good chance button did lose, he was probably afraid to be eaten by the blinds and could have been playing anything to try to catch up.

You still have three more rounds until the blind gets you, and I'd rather put the others all in on another round instead.

Bottom line, this is too much of a gamble. If Button loses you're in the money, and you may definitely get a better hand than K9s to make a hit on the remaining two players.

[eastbay]

Why not do it right, with some assumed calling ranges, pokerstove, and a $EV calculation based on the weighted possible outcomes from ICM?

I'm getting curious about this one, but I don't have the patience to dink with pokerstove's interface, which I find clumsy as heck. Is it my imagination or can you not just key in hand ranges, but have to select them from that goofy grid menu?

eastbay

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]

had anyone plugged this into eastbay's thing to give some ranges on what you should call with, if K9s isn't in it?

[/ QUOTE ]

No 3-way action my analysis tool yet (on the way, though). The outcome matrix is immense and difficult to precompute (and very slow to compute on the fly).

eastbay

[microbet]

No math in the post yet? Good. Eastbay's tool isn't ready for this operation yet, so I'm gonna have to use dethgrind's site, pokerstove, a calculator, and some time.

You assume UTG has a very wide range. I'll go with any two cards. That is certainly possible from some players. Button could easily fold, hoping hero will do something stupid and BB shouldn't want any piece of the all-in here.

If you assume button knows UTG could go with any two, you are giving button a lot of credit. If you are going to give them that much credit, I'm going to say they will only call with hands that are +$EV for them if they put UTG on any two and assume hero and BB will fold. (For this I can use Eastbay's tool.)

Button's range is A3+, A2s+, K8o+, K5s+, Q9o+, Q8s+, J9s+, 44+.

This is really too complicated for pokerstove too. It is taking forever. I'll need a supercomputer to do it. Anyway, I'm going to wait until the result looks pretty good and round it off.

Button will beat UTG approx 63% of the time with that range.
Hero will beat UTG 58% of the time.
Button will beat hero 59% of the time.
All together now Button wins 41%, Hero wins 33%, UTG wins 26% (approx.)

I. You fold.
a) Button wins $EV = .135
b) UTG wins $EV = .251

Total = .63 x .135 + .37 x .251 = .178

II. You call
a) Button wins main pot, hero wins side pot $EV = .0737
b) Button wins main pot, UTG wins side pot $EV = 0
c) Hero wins pot $EV = .344
d) UTG wins $EV = .2

Total = (.41 x .58 x .0737) + (.33 x .344) + (.26 x .2) = .183

Ok, maybe I made a mistake, but given my interpretation of your assumptions it looks like a decent call.

If I make button tight [22+, A9s+, AT+, KJs+, KQo], the distribution is more like 45%-30%-25% and your total $EV comes out to more like .172 making it a fold.
..
Just a couple quick estimates on if UTG had a wide range, but not crap and $EV goes down to like .168.

I've certainly misused significant figures and the picture is fuzzier than I've presented.

Lemme know where I screwed up.

edit: BTW, this was not in response to Eastbay's challenge 37 minutes ago. That wasn't there when I started. I was going to look at what hands would be a good call for hero if you put villians on tighter ranges, but I ain't gonna do it. Too much work. I suspect KQ, 55+, A7+ or so would be good as long as UTG has a loose range.

[microbet]

I've never been able to get it to work by keying it in. Ridiculous.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]

This is really too complicated for pokerstove too. It is taking forever. I'll need a supercomputer to do it. Anyway, I'm going to wait until the result looks pretty good and round it off.


[/ QUOTE ]

Is the Monte Carlo option helpful?

eastbay