KJ on bubble. Is this a push?

[pergesu]

[ QUOTE ]
Regardless of the fact you've been quite a dick here, I'm going to respond in the hope that when you sober up you might actually open your mind and look at my reasoning, rather than just dismiss things because you think you already know everything, which you clearly don't.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think know I everyting. See my respone to curtains in another thread. And ship it.

[ QUOTE ]
First off, I never said "You should limp in", I merely suggested the possibility, gave some reasons why it might be okay, and opened it up to 'discussion'.

[/ QUOTE ]
You didn't? "I sure wouldn't push...You probably have the best hand out there so it seems wrong to me to let the BB off by folding it... I don't think a min raise is as bad a play as has been suggested, but the limp is better"

So you basically said, "Don't push, but don't fold...a min-raise isn't horrible, but a limp is better." The only way my feeble mind can interpret it is that you suggest to limp.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Saying "ignore ICM since there's a small astack" is RETARDED. ICM takse intso account theas smalle astk. If you don't wknow that, read about ICM. Befor eyou amek retardedc omments.

[/ QUOTE ]
I fully understand ICM. First, it doesn't account for position of blinds. The short stack being on the BB right now is very relevant, ICM doesn't know this information. ICM equities are calculated based on proportional stack sizes. It has many limitations, in particular when the blinds become very large realtive to the stacks it becomes very unreliable, because other factors are much more important than simply the sizes of the stacks in determining true equity. I think you should read about how ICM works. Do you even know the actual algorithm used to calculate the equities?

[/ QUOTE ]
Um, ICM DOES account for the blinds. It says, "When this dude folds, he'll have xxx chips. When he calls and doubles up, he'll have xxx chips. And it'll happen this percentage of the time. So the overall change in equity is xxx"

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Keep wodering. Casue a limp is HORRIBLE

[/ QUOTE ]
I was wondering, so I posted in the hope of some discussion. This is not very much use to anyone. Are you so good at poker that you no longer need to think about situations?

[/ QUOTE ]
I explain below in my original response why limping is horrible. In case it's not clear, it's because it invites one of the big stacks to jack your chips. Contrary to what you believe, losing 1/6 of your stack for no good reason at all is, in fact, stupid.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The prboelm is, your'e very likely to be ast best a 60/40 favorite. Better soemrone else doubele him upat than mea, yeah?

[/ QUOTE ]
You're only a probable 60/40 if the two big stacks fold (very unlikely). Letting someone else take care of him doesn't work if noone else does, does it? Since BB is committed, the other two will not be playing junk so could both fold very easily.

[/ QUOTE ]
When you limp, one of the big stacks pushes over the top of you. Now the small stack can't call, cause he's worried you might have an actual hand (you did limp into two big stacks on the bubble, in fact, so you've gotta be trapping with a monster, right?) And you can't call, cause you're risking your tourney on KJo, with a smaller stack in there. So you're right, the big stacks arne't gonna fold. Any non-moronic big stack will start laughing and push. It's just a matter of which one.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Unless he cliskes the "check" button. Iinstant free ride

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Huh? Howas is giving someone a frees loooka t the flop "irrelevant"? It'sa anyting butn irrelevant. btw, when he clicks check, it is infa cact a "walk", so yovue' done nothing tohter than give him better pot odds.

[/ QUOTE ]
No. He hasn't got a free ride since he hasn't been given any chips, just a look at a flop. So what, he was calling allin anyway, which allows him to see all 5 cards. The only difference is that he may now decide to fold on the flop with half his stack in. That's good.

[/ QUOTE ]
For this to happen, you have to have three retarded opponents. Big stack one doesn't push, for whatever stupid reason. Big stack two doesn't push, for whatever stupid reason. And small stack doesn't push your weak-ass UTG limp either, for some stupid reason.

Yeah, I like my chances at that. I can [censored] Angelina Jolie when all the planets align perfectly, too.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ot you encourange them to steal tyour [censored]. Seriously, if there's a small tsatck and soemone limps, I pusn with the quickness. "BIATCH, YOU CAN'T CALL, CAUS THERE's A SMALLIE. SHIP IT BATCH" For real, I've got as coueple greats expalenes from doatyday. Limping = chipc draing

[/ QUOTE ]
Mostly unintelligible, but the point was that a big stack pushing over you is not a bad thing if it makes the BB fold himself down to 1BB. See my other response above.

[/ QUOTE ]
Unintelligible to someone who doesn't understand any kind of basic SNG strategy. But here's a bit of info that will improve your hourly rate a ton: First big stack in to push any two cards is the one making the right play. Losing 1/6 of your stack IS a big problem. Plus, if a big stack is willing to push over a limper, he's going to push into the small stack anyway, right? At least if he's the retarded opponent you think he is, and will only push a good hand. A decent opponent will push any two when you limp, but maybe fewer hands (maybe) when you don't. But according to you, a push means a good hand so you can fold...so guess what, he's gonna push at the limper anyway. Great job losing 1/6 of your stack via weak play.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Call if eh calls....fold if he folds. There must be someon logic I'm missing, btut hits seem,s earatraded. If he calls, you're not gonna bea fvery good favorite. At all. In fact thaer's a decent chance you're a dog. But if he folds...the you fold? Why, casue now you wkno the big stack has you beat?

No. If big tsack pushes, you have to fold, regardless of teh action. You can't risk your tourney with that smallie all-in with a hadns as weak as KJo, when one gusy has set you all-in, and antoher has agladyly aalled. This is just anti-tourney sthireoyr, and, put simply, is reatrded. This is why you don't adlimp in the first place.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes you are missing some logic. If the BB calls then you can overcall much more easily, since you have him outchipped and therefore the only way you can bubble is if BB makes the best hand, big stack makes the second best hand, and you the third best hand. This won't happen often at all.

[/ QUOTE ]
Uh...the way to bust is by having the big stack beat you. Simple as that. Smallie doesn't need to beat biggie. I realize you're talking about bubbling, but wtf is the point of getting third? There's no point, because one tourney win makes up for three 3rd place finishes. I'm not in the "let's make the money" mode. I like to win, cause that's what makes money. When a big stack pushes, a smallie calls, and you overcall, that's how you don't finish first.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wow. Not only do youa think a min-raise with 6 BB is a solid play, but you thiank a limp is BETTER?! Maybe if you got aces or kings. Thent rap. But wtf...making some kingd of bullshit trap play with KJo? That's a recipe for disaster.

[/ QUOTE ]
Don't twist my words. I never said min-raising was a solid play. And I would never do it or advocate doing it. I was merely saying that it's not as horrible as it may first appear, for the same reasons that a limp isn't either.

[/ QUOTE ]
You said it wasn't bad. And you've said that a limp is the best play, by suggesting there are no better alternatives. With this particular hand, you can push or fold. Simple as that. A limp or min-raise gets pwned by even a marginally not horrible big stack. So you either fold and save your chips, or push and don't give someone the chance the bully you off your hand. Which I imagine you're not too proud of, considering it's KJo...unless you're a $22 donk that sees two pretty cards and decides he's got the nuts.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm sorry I've been so harsh to your post, but it looks lieke incredibly horribel advice to me. Sseriously, even a durnik 19 year-old can ripf it aprart with absolteuyl not probelems at all. Cause its' truly hirrrobiel.

[/ QUOTE ]
Don't apologise, I don't really mind what you think. As I said, it wasn't advice, it was discussion. You didn't rip anything apart, you just saw something that your instinct disagreed with and decided to blast it instead of thinking about it. Next time at least read the reasoning and respond, rather than just saying things are retarded. Or just don't post drunk.

[/ QUOTE ]
I thought about it, thus my comments. What's the point of posting anything without thinking about it? Believe it or not, it's not possible for me to make a post out of instinct. Simply by breaking a post into certain parts and responding separately, I have to put a certain amount of logic into it. And my drunk ideas make way more sense than your sober ones. Ship it batch.

[Ixnert]

As much as I wasn't fond of the limp idea at first glance, it's growing on me.

Assume that all of your opponents are actual thinking players. A stretch, I know, but bear with me.

If you fold, one of the big stacks will almost certainly push into the BB, and the BB will almost certainly (and correctly) call. The big stack should be pushing nearly, if not precisely, any two, so the BB is probably about 50/50 to double up (possible double plus the SB, if the button is the pusher).

Net result: 50% chance that BB is eliminated. 50% chance that BB doubles up to 960 or 1060 chips. You still have 1280.

If you limp, one of the big stacks will again almost certainly push, this time over top of you. BB will assume that either you have a monster or you're a total donk. He won't call in either case without a monster of his own (if you have a monster, he might not have the right odds even with his small stack; if you're a donk, you might call the push and give him a decent chance of slipping into third). Once the BB has folded, you fold as well.

You've moved from 1280 chips to 1080. BB has moved from 480 to 280. One of the big stacks, more or less irrelevantly, has gained 400 or 500 chips.

Next hand, either one of the big stacks raises into the blinds (and the SB calls all-in and you fold) or you call the certain 80 chip raise from the shortie SB. In either case, you can assume that the shortie is no better than 50/50 (before the cards are dealt) to double up. So, 50% chance (at least) that the SB is eliminated and 50% chance (at most) that the SB doubles up and ends up with 560 chips.

Net result: 50% of the time, SB is eliminated. Of that portion, some of the time you eliminate him and end up with 1360, the rest of the time, someone else eliminates him and you've got 880. 50% of the time, SB survives with ~560 chips; if he doubled through you, you have 800; if he doubled through someone else, you have 880. Either way, even when he survives, he's still on the ropes, and even if you are, the blinds hit him before they do you -- the onus is on him to do something.

The point here is that you're spending some of your chips to induce what is almost certainly a mistake by the BB (in FToP terms, in that, given his stack size, he would very likely take his chances and call if he could see your cards). And the worst possible case, barring those rare times when the BB looks down and finds a monster, still leaves you ahead of him. (And just looking at my stack relative to the shortie, given the choice, I'd rather be ahead of him 880 to 560 than 1280 to 1060 (since 1060 is actually enough to work with a bit, even with 100/200 blinds, whereas 560 really is still pushing with the first vaguely interesting-looking hand).

So I'm not necessarily convinced of any sort of general applicability, but in this exact situation, and assuming opponents that are not donks, I think there's a case to be made.

[kamrann]

You continue to twist my words, claim I said things I didn't, you're wrong/misunderstanding the point about ICM, you contradict yourself and your general attitude sucks. I can't be bothered to respond to all your rants because they don't deserve it and you're clearly someone who prefers arguing to discussing and learning things anyway.

I'll just say two things.

Regarding the hand. You are still completely missing the crux of my original post. Ixnert hit on it in the first line of his penultimate paragraph. The parts of your argument that are not founded on rubbish are founded on the premise that if you limp, a big stack pushes, BB folds and you fold, this is very bad. However this is very clearly not bad, since you have caused the short stack to lose half his chips at a much smaller relative cost to yourself. Your chances of finishing 3rd have almost doubled, whilst your chances of 2nd and 1st have dropped only a small amount. This is huge. In a sense you are tricking the BB into making a horrible fold by making him think that you may bust yourself, only to fold yourself after he does. You keep insisting that this is a waste of 200 chips without opening your eyes to see that it a use of 200 chips to great effect, you are merely using them to increase your equity in an unorthodox way. I would go so far as to say that if I knew that if I limped a big stack would push and the BB would fold, but if I folded/pushed the hand would play out as normal, then it would be correct to limp. If you just want to dismiss this again as a 'waste of 200 chips' without thinking about it properly, thats fine by me.

Regarding your attitude. http://www.thepokerforum.com/ubbcgi/...=009799#000000
Thats a post made by someone with class. Read it, try to learn to be less arrogant and disrespectful.

[J Chap]

For additional discussion re: KJ, see my thread on the diff between TT and JJ.

Lollipops and pixi stix,
J Chap

[kamrann]

It's context dependent. I meant fine shape in the sense that you're still ok, despite the worst possible outcome happening. Whereas in the other case, I was saying it was bad in relation to other outcomes, because it was a likely outcome. Of course I'm not saying it's better to have 800 chips than 1000.

[Ixnert]

Also, interestingly, under the circumstances, if you buy the premise that it's correct (or at least reasonable) to limp here, it would be correct with any two cards (minus those you actually want to raise), since you have no intention of playing the flop.

Despite my theorizing, I'm still a bit dubious about all of it -- it's not a slam dunk that it's worth 200 of your chips to induce that mistake from the BB. But it seems like an interesting concept, and not an obviously terrible idea -- it's almost certainly worth *some* non-zero number of your chips, so it's really just a question of degree.

[LinusKS]

The idea that the BB is auto-folding after Hero limps and Button raises is wrong.

BB can see that many big stacks would make this play with any two. He can also see that if he folds he'll have 280 chips, and 180 after he pays the sb.

On the other hand, if he calls, he can nearly triple up. And he has to figure after the Button's raise, the Hero's liable to fold, leaving a nice overlay.

Given that the Button figures to make this cheap play with a wide range of hands, BB is 100% correct to call with any decent cards (any pair, Ax, facecards, maybe some others).

Ironically, that's why limping probably isn't a good play - the big stack will steal with crap cards, the BB will call, Hero folds, and BB triples up.

[RobGW]

Kamrann,

I read this entire post and I think you have a couple of valid points.

#1. Pergesu is being a dick.

#2. Limping in is a viable alternative. Even if big stack pushes, BB folds, and you have to fold it is not a waste of 200 chips (and there is no quarantee button will push. Just because a good player would does not mean this big stack will. God knows I've seen some horrible bubble players) Since everyone wants to go by ICM then lets try it. Check out your EV now vs. when you limp fold assuming BB folds to a button push. It actually goes up slightly.

I am still not sure if I would limp here but its not as bad a play as many have said. For me it would depend on how the big stacks are playing. If I knew they would raise, I'd probably fold and save the 200 chips. If I thought they would join and try to help get BB out then I would limp in.

I love to have people challenge the accepted norms of play. Just because a good player or ICM for that matter says "I fold here" doesn't necessarily mean its always the correct play. There are exceptions based on reads. It also shows that you are thinking about the game unlike others who just accept what they here or read as gospel.

[ilya]

Limping > minraising > folding > pushing IMO

Big stacks suck, so what if they should push any 2, doesn't mean they will.

Anyway, even if one of the big stacks pushes, BB will likely fold, and it's an ok result. As kamrann, I think, has pointed out.

Basically it's like the middle class paying taxes to the ruling class to keep the working class down.

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
Ignore SNGPT - ICM no good here since short stack is so small relative to BB and is currently in the BB.

I sure wouldn't push, however I wonder if a limp isn't a decent play here. The problem with folding is that you really don't want it to fold to the SB who decides he's going to put shorty allin with his T3o and double him up. And folds all around is also a bad result for you. You probably have the best hand out there so it seems wrong to me to let the BB off by folding it and giving him a better shot at surviving by not having to beat your hand.

If you limp the BB doesn't get a free ride, and you probably encourage one or both of the big stacks in to try to help beat him. The fact that you allow him to see a flop is irrelevant since he's calling allin to a raise anyway, and it's way better than giving him a walk. If one of the big stacks tries a move by pushing behind your limp, then thats fine. Either shorty calls and you can call also if you choose knowing that it's highly unlikely you'll finish 4th, or he folds and you can happily fold also knowing it only cost you 200 chips to cut him in half down to 1 BB, which I think is a very good deal for you, you've definitely increased your equity by doing so.

For the same reasons I don't think a min raise is as bad a play as has been suggested, but the limp is better because it hasn't affected your stack so much should a big stack force you out and then shorty proceeds to get lucky and hang on a bit longer.

Thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't like limping, too exotic for me.