|
|
|
|
#3
12-28-2005, 03:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Follow up
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Ok time to delete my ORIGINAL POST [/ QUOTE ] sry, you posted follow-up while I was writing my post. folding as the other short stack would be silly. [/ QUOTE ] OK, I call BS!!! Switch the stacks and run the numbers both ways. Any range that you put SB pushing, the call is going to be more +$EV with the larger stack. I'm really not sure how the assumption that BB will call with such a large range developed. If I posted this hand and asked what range I should push into average 33 players I don't think anybody would be quoting equilibrium percentages. The fact that these players fold too many hands is the reason they are so exploitable. 
|
|
#4
12-28-2005, 03:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Follow up
zeropointmachine, the thing is that in general the SB will be pushing less from the SB when there is another shortstack outside of the blinds, whereas when the main opponent is in the BB, many will push 100% of the time.
I definitely believe its correct to call as the shortstack from the BB but correct to fold as the 2nd stack in the BB. Yes its true that any range you put for the SB it will be SLIGHTLY more +EV to call K3o as the big stack, my whole point is that the SB will push signifigantly less when its the big stack in the BB, at least this is what my estimate would be.
|
|
#5
12-28-2005, 04:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Follow up
[ QUOTE ]
zeropointmachine, the thing is that in general the SB will be pushing less from the SB when there is another shortstack outside of the blinds, whereas when the main opponent is in the BB, many will push 100% of the time. I definitely believe its correct to call as the shortstack from the BB but correct to fold as the 2nd stack in the BB. Yes its true that any range you put for the SB it will be SLIGHTLY more +EV to call K3o as the big stack, my whole point is that the SB will push signifigantly less when its the big stack in the BB, at least this is what my estimate would be. [/ QUOTE ] Okay, maybe I'm letting SNGPT presets screw with my thinking here. I'm can see stretching the calling range of a comfortable big stack and a desperate small stack, but I'm not as comfortable stretching for a middle stack that would become the small stack if he loses. I just think there was a leap of logic in this hand that assumed both players were playing perfectly and assuming that their opponents were playing perfectly. Obviosly, against an unknown I would not call here. However, I would never put an average (or even "decent") player on a calling range that would keep me from pushing at least 70% from the SB here. If I knew he knew that I knew that he knew it becomes a heads-up equilibrium problem. But I didn't grasp that from the original post.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
