|
|
#31
10-04-2005, 07:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: The point
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Yeah yeah yeah I just dont see how I can limp then fold. That was my buggaboo. It's not like they are only pushing with 99+.... You gotta call any all in I'd think with the blinds as padding to the pot. Thats my problem... -Jason [/ QUOTE ] Let's assume you are always going to call a raise. Does it therefore follow that you are ALWAYS best to just open-push? It seems to me that there are certain hands, most notably low pairs, that will not call an all-in, but will give you action if you limp or raise a smaller amount. With a relatively short stack, you probably should welcome action in a favorable situation, rather than simply trying to maximize your chance of winning the blinds. Look at it this way. There are times when check-calling is more profitable on the river than simply betting out. Isn't limping UTG, with the intention of calling a raise, a similar situation? Sometimes it could be right for the same reasons. [/ QUOTE ] I get your point BUT I think that limp-calling gets you far more races with AT/KJs type hands here than it gets you dominated situations. In those cases the 3k in blinds and 700 in antes are far to valuable to encourage action. And thats what this particular spot comes down to: 3700 in the pot, 20k stack, and 6 other folks. However... This push begs the question.... is 88 any different from 22 here? With the exception of maybe 88 itself, you get the same calls and are in the same spot. I mean 22 "feels" like a fold to me, but it should feel the same as 88 here. So does that make 22 a push? If not, why? Everett 
|
|
#32
10-04-2005, 07:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The point
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Yeah yeah yeah I just dont see how I can limp then fold. That was my buggaboo. It's not like they are only pushing with 99+.... You gotta call any all in I'd think with the blinds as padding to the pot. Thats my problem... -Jason [/ QUOTE ] Let's assume you are always going to call a raise. Does it therefore follow that you are ALWAYS best to just open-push? It seems to me that there are certain hands, most notably low pairs, that will not call an all-in, but will give you action if you limp or raise a smaller amount. With a relatively short stack, you probably should welcome action in a favorable situation, rather than simply trying to maximize your chance of winning the blinds. Look at it this way. There are times when check-calling is more profitable on the river than simply betting out. Isn't limping UTG, with the intention of calling a raise, a similar situation? Sometimes it could be right for the same reasons. [/ QUOTE ] But i think at this point what you want is to pick the route that has the highest rate of success, just limping while it may encourage action from smaller pairs, you'll find yourself in awkward spots on the flop and you just dont have that much room to manuever w/ that stack size. Maybe i'm just paranoid about playing flops w/ a small stack.
|
|
#33
10-04-2005, 08:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The point
[ QUOTE ]
This push begs the question.... is 88 any different from 22 here? With the exception of maybe 88 itself, you get the same calls and are in the same spot. I mean 22 "feels" like a fold to me, but it should feel the same as 88 here. So does that make 22 a push? If not, why? [/ QUOTE ] About 5% of the time, the board will turn out to be two pair. That is probably good for 88. Say the board is JJ44x, or TT55x, etc. In those cases your PP will supersede the bottom pair and make your hand good -- assuming that neither of you connect with the board. But just about all two-pair boards are disastrous for 22. Now both players have the same two pair and you've got a pitiful 2 kicker. You don't get to chop the pot. No, no, no! By the time you've digested this, a smug little bot is telling you: "You finished 22nd. Thanks for playing!" Obviously this is not a super-common outcome. But it's not freakishly rare either. I'd factor it into your thinking.
|
|
#35
10-04-2005, 08:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The point
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] This push begs the question.... is 88 any different from 22 here? With the exception of maybe 88 itself, you get the same calls and are in the same spot. I mean 22 "feels" like a fold to me, but it should feel the same as 88 here. So does that make 22 a push? If not, why? [/ QUOTE ] About 5% of the time, the board will turn out to be two pair. That is probably good for 88. Say the board is JJ44x, or TT55x, etc. In those cases your PP will supersede the bottom pair and make your hand good -- assuming that neither of you connect with the board. But just about all two-pair boards are disastrous for 22. Now both players have the same two pair and you've got a pitiful 2 kicker. You don't get to chop the pot. No, no, no! By the time you've digested this, a smug little bot is telling you: "You finished 22nd. Thanks for playing!" Obviously this is not a super-common outcome. But it's not freakishly rare either. I'd factor it into your thinking. [/ QUOTE ] Well obviously 22 has a lower expectation than 88. But if it's only like 3%, then that's not really enough to make pushing 22 wrong and 88 correct. I'm just wondering if all of the posters that advocate pushing 88 would have said to fold 22. I really think that if my OP had 22 instead of 88 some "push" people would say fold. You see what I'm getting at. So... everyone agree to push ducks here as well? What about 54s? According to pokerstove, with a 88+ AJ+ calling range, 88 is 39%, 22 is 36%, and 54s is 33%. I mean they all fare roughly the same when called. Everett
|
|
#36
10-04-2005, 08:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The point
I'd take that 3% difference seriously.
Pushing is a make-or-break moment for the entire tournament. Let's say for argument's sake that you play this situation 30 times and the difference between pushing with 88 and 22 matters only once. That's still enough to change your ROI meaningfully. It's conceptually the same as a 3% difference in rake. Do we exaggerate the difference in our minds? Maybe. Should we ignore it? No.
|
|
#37
10-04-2005, 09:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The point
[ QUOTE ]
I'd take that 3% difference seriously. Pushing is a make-or-break moment for the entire tournament. Let's say for argument's sake that you play this situation 30 times and the difference between pushing with 88 and 22 matters only once. That's still enough to change your ROI meaningfully. It's conceptually the same as a 3% difference in rake. Do we exaggerate the difference in our minds? Maybe. Should we ignore it? No. [/ QUOTE ] Again, missing the point. Yes, there is a difference. Yes, 3% is not 0%. But is it enough of a difference to make 88 a push and 22 a fold? That's my question. If they were 15% apart then it would be a lot clearer. I don't think 3% is enough, but I want to hear some thoughts. Everett
|
|
#38
10-05-2005, 03:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The point
Since this is a low buy-in tourney, if you push, I think the small stacks will sometimes look you up with smaller pairs, making 8s a much more powerful hand than 2s (I speak from the experience of having my 5s smashed by 7s).
Will
|
|
#39
10-05-2005, 03:50 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Yes, I limped UTG with 10 BBs
Alright, gonna take a stab at doing the math for this.
Since it's 7 handed i'll make calling ranges a little loose. 77+,AJs+,AJo+, calls the push, which is 7% of hands. 65% it folds to your push. So pushing, no matter what you have, wins 3700, 65% of the time. 3700 * .65 = 2405 88 When called, 88 will have 42% equity. .42 * 23287 = 9780.54 .58 * -19587 = -11360.46 -1579.92 * .35 = -552.97 2405 - 552.97 = +1852 chips on average... Pretty good. 22 When called 22 will have 35% equity so .35* 23287 = 8150 .65* -19587 = -127331 = -4581 2405 - 4581 = -2176 chips on average. ---- Eh? Guess 22's not as equal to 88 as i thought.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
