20+2 fold AK on bubble?

[lastchance]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You fold AK here because it is ICM correct. Losing an automatic 20% for third place means you need to be a heavy favorite (over 60% to call), and even AK doesn't get that. Meh.


[/ QUOTE ]

How is AK not going to be a 60% favorite against the SB pushing range. When did we all become such pussies that we are folding AK like this.

This is why I make money playing SnG's. By pushing any two from the SB in this exact situation everytime.

[/ QUOTE ]
And you can also make money folding AK in this spot all day long, because getting into a 60/40 spot, or even a 66/33 spot sucks here, because you are on the bubble, and doubling up your chances of first only increases your ROI so much.

[45suited]

I think that this is a call. Here's why:

With the blinds this high, nothing is really guaranteed. If the shorties double up, they are right back in the game. Granted, they are down to 2 and 3 BBs respectively, but it's not as if it's out of the question that they come back ITM. Things can change very quickly with the blinds this high.

I'm not passing up a likely big edge here. This isn't just a "play for first" line of reasoning. The point is that, while an ITM finish is likely, it is not guaranteed.

Now, consider SBs pushing range. If he's been tight, it is almost better for you. He may well be pushing a dominated hand. Something to consider. Anyway, I call here.

Consider this scenario: You fold here. Next hand, you're in the SB, it's folded to you. You push into shortie. He wins the hand, doubles up. Now he has 1760 and you are in a dogfight. ITM is not guaranteed here! Take this edge and call!

[ChrisV]

This is classic ICM. This is actually right on the borderline between fold and call. It depends what hand set you give the villain. If he has a random hand, it's a call, but he's unlikely to have that. With a more normal set of allin hands, it's pretty much a fold. It's really close either way though, the numbers are 30.1% vs the restricted range, 30.6% fold, and 30.9% vs a random hand. I'm kind of surprised because I was expecting this one to turn out to be a call, given you aren't quite allin, etc etc.

[45suited]

Chris, what about what I was saying about the size of the blinds? I think that people are way overestimating the certainty that we will ITM by folding here.

It is entirely possible that if we fold here, it is folded to us next hand in the SB, we get some random garbage and shortie doubles up to 1760. ITM, while pretty likely, is hardly guaranteed in this spot even if we fold.

[ChrisV]

[ QUOTE ]
If everyone is gonna fold AK here why would I not push every time?

[/ QUOTE ]

Now you're understanding high limit SNGs! [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

The bubble is a game of brinksmanship... The only thing that limits your being able to push in these situations every time is the rationality of your opponents. Your opponent folding is the best thing for both of you the vast majority of the time, but can you rely on him to make that choice?

In all this, your opponent is well aware that you're taking advantage of him. But if he tries to punish you, it hurts him too.

This particular hand is pretty close, but the principle is one of the most important things in SNGs.

[ChrisV]

You seem very concerned with making it ITM... do you think your chances of making it ITM are better than 63% here? Cause that's the chance you'll win this hand if you call...

ITM or OOTM isn't exactly the issue... we just want to maximise equity.

The size of the blinds is a problem for the short stacks, not for you. Bigger blinds are good for the big stacks because they cramp the short stacks.

[45suited]

[ QUOTE ]
You seem very concerned with making it ITM...

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I'm actually not. My point is that making ITM is the rationale used by many people for folding here. My point is twofold:

1) The main rationale (folding because ITM is somehow guaranteed) is flawed in this case because it's not nearly as certain as first might appear and

2) The size of the blinds DO matter. It actually takes away some of our advantage because in the next hand, it is so likely that the shortstack (if he has half a brain) is calling with any two. The blinds are huge and allow the shorties to get right back into it.

Haven't you guys noticed this: We fold here, we're down t2590. Next hand, if it's folded to us, we push, and shortie calls (as he undoubtedly will), we have t1710, shortie has t1760. In one hand. Poof! The blinds in this case put pressure on all of us very quickly.

[45suited]

I'm bumping this one for the morning crowd because I think that it's very interesting and not as clear cut as first might appear. Or I'm just an idiot. Either one is very possible.



[ QUOTE ]
I have to fold this right?


NL Texas Hold'em $20 Buy-in + $2 Entry Fee Level:8 Blinds(200/400)

Seat 2 is the button
Total number of players : 4
Seat 2: Pseudobluff ( $1370 )
Seat 8: ezhik ( $2760 )
Seat 9: jassad1 ( $2990 )
Seat 10: GRIMREAPA36 ( $880 )

Blinds(200/400)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to jassad1 [ Kc Ah ]
GRIMREAPA36 folds.
Pseudobluff folds.
ezhik is all-In [2560]
jassad1: ugh
Your time bank will become active in less than 20 seconds. If you do not want it to be used, please act now.
pseudobluff: call
jassad1 folds.
ezhik does not show cards.
ezhik wins 3160 chips
jassad1: good push


AcidReign

[/ QUOTE ]

[schwza]

[ QUOTE ]
This is classic ICM. This is actually right on the borderline between fold and call. It depends what hand set you give the villain. If he has a random hand, it's a call, but he's unlikely to have that. With a more normal set of allin hands, it's pretty much a fold. It's really close either way though, the numbers are 30.1% vs the restricted range, 30.6% fold, and 30.9% vs a random hand. I'm kind of surprised because I was expecting this one to turn out to be a call, given you aren't quite allin, etc etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

chris, if you don't mind running the numbers, what SD % do you need here?

also, what is your restricted range here?

[nWirb]

Like previous posters said, ITM is very far from guaranteed here.
I might call this, but I think it's very close.