Isolating with the Gigabet Dilemma (long)

[MLG]

I'd be pretty interested in some specific examples of how you "manipulate" the table's stack sizes. Are we talking about deciding who you steal/resteal against, who you make loose calls/tight folds against, or something else?

[Freudian]

[ QUOTE ]

You are goofy, you have no idea what you are talking about. Give me an example of a final table where I exited late due to a risky play?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure. It is a pretty pointless affair though since one is immune to critique by claiming to have a read for making the decision. So with the full expectation of you telling me that I have no clue what I am talking about:

Five Diamond Classic. You probably have something around 2 million chips here.

"Patrik Antonius has the button in seat 2, Dicken raises to $300,000, Pedersen moves all in for $1.2 million from the small blind, and Dicken calls with Q-J. Pedersen shows Ah-Js, and he's in a dominating position to double up here.

The flop comes Ac-9c-9d, and Pedersen solidifies his lead with a pair of aces. Dicken needs something runner-runner to survive, but the turn card is the 3s, and he is drawing dead. (The meaningless river card is the 5s.) Rehne Pedersen doubles up to over $2.5 million in chips."

This hand took a big chunk of your stack, with the exit half an hour later after a push with pocked fours. When I read your OP I thought about this hand. It is no doubt a risky play. It is no doubt -EV.

[bugman68]

To make sure I am correct about this, you wouldnt isolate the short stacks when your stack size is well above the avg line of blocks correct?

[Lloyd]

Worst case scenario this is clearly dependent on the range of hands we put the villain on. If both the villain and hero have been aggressive it's easy to put him on a range of 2 broadway, pairs, Ax and the hero has over 40% equity - good enough to call. I don't think this was the Gigabet Dilemma in action, just a decision based on a hand range and pot odds.

[bugman68]

from reading that hand history this isnt even close to the theory we are talking about gig raised to 300k blinds 100/200k. He wasnt calling 900k more for -ev with two broadway he was calling completely on a range of hands pot odds evaluation. Please pick another hand this one doesnt work.

[Gigabet]

[ QUOTE ]
This hand took a big chunk of your stack, with the exit half an hour later after a push with pocked fours. When I read your OP I thought about this hand. It is no doubt a risky play. It is no doubt -EV.




[/ QUOTE ]

Freudian,

You are talking about a hand that the lowest level amateur can play. There is no advanced tactics going on here.

I see that you spend time on 2+2, but do you really play the game? I am not intending on being offensive, but you are giving an example that is a very easy call. It may look bad, because he had me dominated, however, I definitely had proper odds before I made the call. Even if you exclude the added equity that you gain from a money jump from busting a player, I am still getting the correct odds. However, even if I wasn't, I could definitely get my money in with way the worst of it in this spot, and still come out ahead in the long run. My equity in the tournament almost doubles when the next player busts out.

Really Freudian, this is not something that you can question on my play, go define it for yourself. You really think that my knowledge is that lacking that I cannot do even the simple math, while I am in a hand to figure whether to call or not?

If you want me to defend my play, which you clearly think that I need to do....I will defend it, I don't have anything else to do. But please pick a situation where it isn't obvious that the correct play was made.

Rehne just pushed with A8, so his range was obviously at least as low as the top 23%. Stopping right there, and saying that he isn't pushing with more hands, there is well over the amount of dead money that I need in the middle to make the call very profitable.

Coincedentally, when I did the math at the table, as it was happening, I used the top 23% as his range of reraise hands in that position. So the A8 hand at least validates that my read on him was dead on.

I played with him the whole entire previous day, and 23% would be the correct number for the rehne who was playing the day before. However, he had almost 2 million more chips the previous day, and lower blind levels. I really think that he was coming over my late pos raise with alot more than the top 23% on the final day. But based on what happened that day, 23% is about as high as I can go, since I never saw anything he turned over.

[Lloyd]

This might be slightly off topic but can you quickly run through the math on this hand, as you would do so at the table (without any of the tools we have at home).

[Freudian]

You asked me for an example of risky play that led eventually to your exit. I gave you one. If you don't even concede it is a risky play getting over half of your stack in the middle in a 40/60 situation it is pointless discussing.

[Lloyd]

[ QUOTE ]
You asked me for an example of risky play that led eventually to your exit. I gave you one. If you don't even concede it is a risky play it is pointless discussing.

[/ QUOTE ]
Then it's pointless. While there's certainly risk involved it appeared that it was at worst a neutral EV decision if not slightly +EV. Since he was compensated for the risk your only argument is that he shouldn't make what he thinks is a +EV call. This decision simply just doesn't apply to what we're trying to discuss here.

[Exitonly]

how'd you get that A8 means he's pushing 23% of hands?

And you seem to have some specific knowledge about 23% of hands, you said thats what you assumed for your table math. Dunnno, it's not a simple number that you'd want at the table, so theres gotta be something special about it.