Protecting your hand against very loose callers

[PrayingMantis]

This is something I've been thinking about during the last few days. I will be happy to get any feedback and thoughts about it.

Basically, when we talk about NL, there's the concept of protecting your hand, i.e., playing very strong when you're ahead, to charge draws. This is obviously right for ring games. It can be absolutely right for many tourney situations.

But what about those SNGs, when you're surrounded with fish, who are willing to call everything? And I'm not talking about 5.5-11$ level, but also about 22$ and apparently 33$.

These are examples from medium stages of an SNG. You get AK, raise 4XBB, get 2 callers. flop K high, and a flush draw. You push, one caller, same stack as yours, with a flush draw. You have 2/3 chance of winning it.

Later, if you survive, you get QQ. Raise nicely. One caller, stack a little shorter than yours. Flop: 67J. You push. He calls. He has 89. Again, You have about 2/3 chance of winining it.

Now you're short stacked. Get JJ. push. One caller, a little bigger than you. He's not intimidated, never heard of any "gap". He calls it with A4o, and again, you're only a little better than 1:2 to win it.

And so on. You make it 2 times, against opponents about your size, there's a 5/9 chance you lose one of them (and probably bust, or close to it). This is more than 1/2.

You play strong 3 times, get a caller each time for a 1/3 chance draw, and your probability of surviving *all* is a mere 0.3. That's bad.

I know this has been discussed before on the former tourney forum. But now I'm specifically talking about SNGs with loose callers and a structure that in a few levels will bring the blinds to eat your stack. You must play strong. Not many other options.

So, how do you protect your hand without risking your survival so often?

PrayingMantis

[eastbay]

* Play tighter and don't bluff, ever. Since you're very likely to have to show down the best hand, you want to get a big edge and make a fortune on it.

Basically forget that Dutch Boyd nonsense about surviving multiple all-ins. The problem with that reasoning is that once you double-up, unless you've been squandering your chips the next all-in should not be for all of your chips. If you win twice, it becomes even more true.

eastbay

[Pitcher]

Hi Folks,

Excellent post. I think this makes these games very much of a crapshoot. Here is a perfect example. $50 Sit N Go down to 5 players. I am shortstacked and blinds are 100-200 and then went up to 150-300. I start playing very aggressive to get back into things. 2-3 of the players left are willing to call any all in with Ax. I make two semi-steals with A-9o and AJs. One player busts out and it is down to 4. I see the top stack call an all in with A4 (he lost, but still had biggest stack). I am getting a bit more cautious on the bubble. I decide to go all in with JJ on the button. I have 1300 chips with 150/300 blinds. I figure I will be called with any Ax with the liklihood that A2 - A10 coming up. That makes me a 7-3 favorite. I get called and lose to A-3. These players never even consider the Gap Concept and that they are 7-3 underdogs. I just can't see folding this hand though. So I think you pretty much have to live with the consequences.

Pitcher.

[Guy McSucker]

[ QUOTE ]

You play strong 3 times, get a caller each time for a 1/3 chance draw, and your probability of surviving *all* is a mere 0.3. That's bad.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's a 0.3 chance of multiplying your stack by 8. I'll take it.

Guy.

[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
That's a 0.3 chance of multiplying your stack by 8. I'll take it.


[/ QUOTE ]

It's always nice to hear someone who looks at the upside of things. You are obviously right, but when you bust a few times in a row against several very loose callers, you begin asking questions.

Anyway, I will take your point a step further, to calculate the general EV of these strong protection moves against very loose callers, in an SNG.

It's a 22$, 2-tables SNG. Let's say you have 3 all-in confrontations, in all of them you are 1:2 favorite. For the simplicity of things, I'll assume the opponent on each all-in have the same stack as yours.

So, it's 0.3 you bust, and 0.7 you multiply your original stack by 8. In Stars, This brings you to 12,000, which is about half the chips in the game. It means that you win 1st or 2nd place. I'll assume equal spread between them. 1st pays 142, second pays 108. Net = 120 and 86. avarage net = 103.

(103 X 0.3) - (22 X 0.7) = 15.5

This is more than 70% ROI.

Wow, very nice.

I guess this is the mathematical proof of why fishy SNGs are so good for your bankroll...

And it's clear that the variance is much bigger here, with only 30% in-the-money, and no 3rd and 4th places.

Interesting.


PrayingMantis

[Utah]

Well, if you keep getting yourself in situations where you are a 2/3 favorite then you should be happy.

Basically, if players are willing to gamble with crap then set them in. Its that simple. Your tourney expectation will rise dramatically but so will your deviation.

[Utah]

but when you bust a few times in a row against several very loose callers, you begin asking questions.

Absolutely. I dont just begin to ask questions, I begin to test the breakability on my keyboards (btw - IBM makes a very strong keyboard - but as I found non unbreakable RIP).

I track all my tourneys and all my allin situations and this really helps me see the larger picture. It always seems like you are getting sucked out on the All-in situations. This is because when you win it is a non event because you were supposed to win but when you lose it is a disaster. This has a magnifying effect. Tracking helps prevent this.