Satellite on the bubble - push into minraiser with KK?

And by the way, that was my thought process before I looked at the results.

[Black Aces 518]

If he's calling the push with A8 preflop he sure isn't folding 99.

this doesn't seem right to me. Specifically, that the big stack has only a 96% chance of winning... I would put this at more like 99.9% assuming he's folding 100% of the time. It is tough to imagine a situation where the big stack here doesn't win, and 4% of the time seems like a heck of a lot.

[reecelights]

96% is probably right, if he intends to play his very big hands but nothing else. The mid sized stacks will take even fewer chances than he will, but will not hesitate to steal his blinds (closing in on 10% of his stack size) two of every 7 hands if they know he is inactive. His stack will dwindle, his equity will fall.

[betgo]

[ QUOTE ]
96% is probably right, if he intends to play his very big hands but nothing else. The mid sized stacks will take even fewer chances than he will, but will not hesitate to steal his blinds (closing in on 10% of his stack size) two of every 7 hands if they know he is inactive. His stack will dwindle, his equity will fall.

[/ QUOTE ]

96% is close with good play against good players. With a bunch of fish miniraising with A8o as big stacks, someone will probably bust themselves out before he becaomes a small stack if he posts and folds.

I minraised because there were people to act after me that could bust me. And if one of them wanted to play, I'd fold in a second.

I wanted to put pressure on the small stacks when they were in the blinds whenever I had a decent hand, so we could get someone out. I didn't want everyone to fold to the SS, so they'd get a walk-over with 24o.

I agree that ICM isn't the final answer to the question of the real value of a stack. It's an approximation. It neglects player skill, position and so on. But it's the best there is, as far as I know.

[betgo]

[ QUOTE ]
I minraised because there were people to act after me that could bust me. And if one of them wanted to play, I'd fold in a second.

I wanted to put pressure on the small stacks when they were in the blinds whenever I had a decent hand, so we could get someone out. I didn't want everyone to fold to the SS, so they'd get a walk-over with 24o.

I agree that ICM isn't the final answer to the question of the real value of a stack. It's an approximation. It neglects player skill, position and so on. But it's the best there is, as far as I know.

[/ QUOTE ]

You shouldn't be playing at all at this point, except in exceptional circumstances. All you have to do is wait for someone to bust out.

[ QUOTE ]
You shouldn't be playing at all at this point, except in exceptional circumstances. All you have to do is wait for someone to bust out.

[/ QUOTE ]

I sort of agree. But if everyone thinks that way, then noone will bust out because the short stacks can just go all-in against the large stacks and noone will want to play against them. They'll wait for someone else to take up the gauntlet.

So it's in the larger stacks interest - as a group - to do some sort of implicit collusion and start picking on the short stacks to make it as hard for them to survive as possible. Of course the smartest thing to do - as a large stack - is to just sit back and let one of the others take that risk.

[betgo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You shouldn't be playing at all at this point, except in exceptional circumstances. All you have to do is wait for someone to bust out.

[/ QUOTE ]

I sort of agree. But if everyone thinks that way, then noone will bust out because the short stacks can just go all-in against the large stacks and noone will want to play against them. They'll wait for someone else to take up the gauntlet.

So it's in the larger stacks interest - as a group - to do some sort of implicit collusion and start picking on the short stacks to make it as hard for them to survive as possible. Of course the smartest thing to do - as a large stack - is to just sit back and let one of the others take that risk.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you are going to do a good deed and bust someone out.

Since everyone isn't taking the approach of waiting for the short stacks to bust out, I don't see the point of you as a the biggest stack getting involved.

Except for really big tournaments, the play in these is way to loose later on. I won a seat in a $150 tournament by folding in the blinds knowing I would be the smallest stack with 15 players left for 14 seats and knowing I could only play ante for 6 more hands. Sure enough, the 2nd biggest stack and the tournament leader go allin against each other. The 2nd biggest stack busts out when his KK is beaten by AK.

[ QUOTE ]
So you are going to do a good deed and bust someone out.

Since everyone isn't taking the approach of waiting for the short stacks to bust out, I don't see the point of you as a the biggest stack getting involved.

Except for really big tournaments, the play in these is way to loose later on. I won a seat in a $150 tournament by folding in the blinds knowing I would be the smallest stack with 15 players left for 14 seats and knowing I could only play ante for 6 more hands. Sure enough, the 2nd biggest stack and the tournament leader go allin against each other. The 2nd biggest stack busts out when his KK is beaten by AK.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're right. I shouldn't have gotten involved. It's probably better to wait for exceptional hands or for the short stacks to go up against each other. They're the ones that need to settle it. Not me.

In your example, it's much better for the two large stacks to team up on you. Going all-in against each other is lose/lose for them, since the real winner in such a hand is you.