Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Tournament Poker > One-table Tournaments

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 12-28-2005, 05:17 PM
ilya ilya is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Party Poker
Posts: 460
Default Re: Theory: Approach to Very Short Stack Play

I think this is an important question and I also haven't spent as much time as I should have thinking about it.

One obvious observation:

When you're short, but not so short that you've run out of FE, it's often correct to push a very weak hand even when you will be first to act next hand and your next hand figures, on average, to be significantly stronger. This of course is because you have one fewer player to go through if you push now, and this is usually more valuable than having a stronger hand.

However, when your stack has fallen under 2xbb, this may flip. It may now be more valuable to have the stronger hand than to have fewer players to go through, simply because you figure to get called anyway, unless perhaps the BB has something like 2.5-3.5xbb after posting. So compared to a 4-5xbb short-stack situation, I tend to give a lot less weight to position and a lot more weight to the strength of my hand and the BB's chip position.

Well, this seems real obvious to me, but I'll post it anyway for 2 reasons. 1, it might seem more wrong than obvious to someone else, in which case i'll learn something. 2, i never got to be the Section Guy in college.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-28-2005, 11:36 PM
Degen Degen is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Re-stealing
Posts: 1,064
Default Re: Theory: Approach to Very Short Stack Play

I didn't see anybody in this thread refute why Darse's strategy does not apply here. People just gave what they would do, but without much explanation for why (mathematically as opposed to opinion).

BB should be calling w/ any two right here (granted people do not always do what they are supposed to).

Don't have a lot of time right now to think this through and give a better reply but I'd sure like to see a math guy go to town on this one. IMO disproving my claim that this apply's to an SNG is the same as disproving Darse's claim that it applys to a MTT. The principles are the same (huge pot odds, waiting for the money, you bust your dead etc).
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-28-2005, 11:44 PM
downtown downtown is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 33
Default Re: Theory: Approach to Very Short Stack Play

[ QUOTE ]
I didn't see anybody in this thread refute why Darse's strategy does not apply here. People just gave what they would do, but without much explanation for why (mathematically as opposed to opinion).

BB should be calling w/ any two right here (granted people do not always do what they are supposed to).

Don't have a lot of time right now to think this through and give a better reply but I'd sure like to see a math guy go to town on this one. IMO disproving my claim that this apply's to an SNG is the same as disproving Darse's claim that it applys to a MTT. The principles are the same (huge pot odds, waiting for the money, you bust your dead etc).

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm right there with you Degen. I would like to see it proved or disproved as well.

Here is something I was thinking about as far as this concept in MTT v. STT goes. Unless the MTT is very small, or every table on the bubble is observed by each participant, the avg. size stack that busts may not be paying much if any attention to what's happening with the short stack, which is massively +EV for the shorty's survival. However, in a STT that shorty is sitting right there, and everyone knows it. It's the fundamental reason we're able to abuse the bubble so effectively, but it also means that we are unlikely to reap the same benefits Darse writes about.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-29-2005, 01:42 AM
ZeroPointMachine ZeroPointMachine is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 136
Default Re: Theory: Approach to Very Short Stack Play

See what you think of this concept.

I believe that ICM overstates your EVfold in these super shortstack situations. When you have ~2 BB and a few hands between you and the BB it is a given that you are calling from the big blind if you don’t push first. Right? I would argue that the true Evfold from UTG is actually the EV of calling from the BB. You pickup a tiny bit of EV for each position better than UTG due to the chance of picking up a real hand.

Calculating the EV of calling from your future BB hand is difficult, but a couple of examples give a pretty good idea of what your looking at.

Here’s a fairly optimistic scenario for your 499t stack in the 300 BB. You get put all-in by one player with a top 50% hand. Your random hand has 35% chance of winning and an EV of 12.9% if you win. This gives you an EV of 4.5% equity.

Against two players who put you in and check it down things are worse even if they only have top 50% hands. Your random hand has only an 18% of winning and an EV of 21.2% if you win. This gives you an EV of 3.8% equity.

These numbers are way below the 6.1% equity you supposedly had by folding in the cutoff.

In the hand from OP if you put the BB on a call any 2 range and the SB and BTN on “maniac” you still get an EV for pushing of 5.8%. I suggest that this is far greater than your “real” EV for folding.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-29-2005, 04:48 AM
caretaker1 caretaker1 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 73
Default Re: Theory: Approach to Very Short Stack Play

[ QUOTE ]
In a spot like this, I sometimes like to get in behind an open-pusher with any two, usually giving me a chance to triple up or better. Of course, I'll still open-push any ace, faces, etc. I think pushing the K2 is fine. It's one of the next three hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm big on that as well, chance to triple against one opponent.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-29-2005, 05:36 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Theory: Approach to Very Short Stack Play

I don't like the K2 push from the CO either.

I'm perplexed by your statement that SNGPT says that it's a good push... I don't see it, though maybe I entered something wrong.

For BB calling any two, SB maniac, Button maniac, it's -EV. It's possible that these hand ranges are incorrect, but I think that it can be argued that they are at least reasonable.

An interesting thing about this is that if BB is any two, SB is any two, and Button is maniac--- it's +EV.

The OP says "Now in retrospect, I realize that it is likely that I will be called in more than one spot here being so short, and therefore I may need to be stronger Than K2o to push here."

This appears to be wrong. The more spots that you get called in, the more +EV it becomes.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-29-2005, 11:14 AM
tigerite tigerite is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 360
Default Re: Theory: Approach to Very Short Stack Play

[ QUOTE ]
I didn't see anybody in this thread refute why Darse's strategy does not apply here. People just gave what they would do, but without much explanation for why (mathematically as opposed to opinion).

BB should be calling w/ any two right here (granted people do not always do what they are supposed to).

Don't have a lot of time right now to think this through and give a better reply but I'd sure like to see a math guy go to town on this one. IMO disproving my claim that this apply's to an SNG is the same as disproving Darse's claim that it applys to a MTT. The principles are the same (huge pot odds, waiting for the money, you bust your dead etc).

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, in this situation, it really is unexploitable to push, because whatever they call with it's +$EV for the Hero, so if we are to argue that a push is wrong (and the only alternative is to fold, of course) then we have to come up with some kind of argument whereby folding will be more +$EV. If it was on the bubble, then perhaps, maybe, I could see some kind of argument for it as two stacks might get into a battle later on in the piece, and one might knock the other out giving us ITM by default - and doubling from 499 to just over 1k wouldn't help us a great lot anyway. The problem is, this is still 5 handed, and we are two people away from that situation.. so we need chips, very quickly, or else we're going to be out anyway. Solving this mathematically is pretty damn tough because the next hand we're going to be in the same boat - possibly even worse - than in this hand (and a large proportion of the time with a hand that isn't as strong as well), and then there's the BB which is in the lap of the gods as well. Unless they are very weak players who will fold to the BB because they don't want to "double the short stack up" (we've all seen tables like that I am sure), then it's imperative to make a move before the BB hits us. For that reason I'd move in now, simply because there are no guarantees for the next two hands, and realistically, the next hand is our best chance bar this one. Kx is good enough, and I'd push without much of a thought.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.