The Freakonomics of Tournaments: A Preview (74s UTG at final table) - Page 2

skier_5 · #11 07-05-2006, 12:12 AM

great post. are you suggesting that you can profitably raise almost any two here?

nath, are you making your HH from last night available? i'd love to see it.

Chrisman886 · #12 07-05-2006, 12:19 AM

What a donk, you forgot to river a 6.

Oh, and very interesting. Thank you.

jafeather · #13 07-05-2006, 12:47 AM

Intriguing and informative. How do you always pull these great posts off?

Here's where I stand. You've, without a doubt, convinced me to change my PF style. I see myself daily changing up my PF play and seeing success in it. I see your posts basically broken down into two different categories:
A)Here's why my PF play is not as stupid as you may think, and here's the math to prove it.
B)I've made my typical PF play (when it's not a push) and now I'm in a tough post-flop situation, and want to check my line.

So here's my request {and if it's already out there and I've missed it, I'm sorry....please direct me to the post(s).} I would like to see a post, or series of, regarding similar mathematical concepts during post-flop play.

I feel like your PF raising strategy is very productive, but I find myself often not sure where I stand/what to do post-flop, and would like to see your lines laid out in numbers.

(Basically I'm saying I feel your posts (especially, and among others) moving me from effective TAG to effective LAG, but my post-flop LAG play is a constant hold-up...help!!!)

EnderIII · #14 07-05-2006, 12:54 AM

Very nice post and interesting allusion. My prediction is that this will spawn misapplications and misunderstandings on par with Gigabet theories and stop and go's.

What range do you think the 4 stacks you can't call ( I assume you don't want to call the button, but admit to not having done the math) push with? Less than 8% i assume given your break even calculation. I think the read on these four players is a huge part of this and i'll trust that you were spot on. Given the two and a half shortstacks, it would be difficult for most players to push a wide range unless they were more concerned with top 3 than moving up a couple spots.

Interestingly (or perhaps not) it seems as if the 90k stack would probably have the tighest reraising range.

Thanks again.

NHFunkii · #15 07-05-2006, 01:10 AM

while this is a good post with lots of very good analysis...

I really do think you're reraised significantly more than 32% of the time here. Also note that you have to call the sb and probably the button if they reraise, which is pretty ugly. I just don't see this being a +EV play.

Vuron00 · #16 07-05-2006, 01:14 AM

This really isn't that bad.

You're simply playing your big stack and using your read of the table as folding to most of your raises. You can fold to a reraise from anyfrom from BB and it doesn't effect your stack.

As you showed, the only person you call is BB, and don't really mind calling.

Seems like a decent play when you have that kind of stack. Of course, you are starting to sound like Gigabet.

Edit: I only agree with play because of your read on the table. If you've got a table that is even half aggressive, than I don't make this play.

skier_5 · #17 07-05-2006, 01:40 AM

[ QUOTE ]
while this is a good post with lots of very good analysis...

I really do think you're reraised significantly more than 32% of the time here. Also note that you have to call the sb and probably the button if they reraise, which is pretty ugly. I just don't see this being a +EV play.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree, the table was playing very very tight. I doubt anyone was raising him without a strong hand, except for perhaps me and we all know how that turned out. [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]

and nath, the more I think about it, the more I like your call there.

nath · #18 07-05-2006, 01:43 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I really do think you're reraised significantly more than 32% of the time here.

[/ QUOTE ]
I really don't. I was opening almost literally every pot that was folded to me and they kept folding.

[ QUOTE ]
Also note that you have to call the sb and probably the button if they reraise, which is pretty ugly. I just don't see this being a +EV play.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it's that ugly. Their ranges might be tighter but it's a similar result. I think the pot odds relative to their hand ranges will be fairly close again.

The main reason I posted this was not for the specific hand but to illustrate concepts behind my play. I'm well known as the luckiest tournament poker player on the planet, it seems, yet somehow I keep winning. I'm sure it's probably just luck and it'll run out soon, but just in case it isn't, I'm trying to give back a little of my thought processes, even when I don't always understand them.

tubasteve · #19 07-05-2006, 02:05 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I really do think you're reraised significantly more than 32% of the time here.

[/ QUOTE ]
I really don't. I was opening almost literally every pot that was folded to me and they kept folding.

[ QUOTE ]
Also note that you have to call the sb and probably the button if they reraise, which is pretty ugly. I just don't see this being a +EV play.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it's that ugly. Their ranges might be tighter but it's a similar result. I think the pot odds relative to their hand ranges will be fairly close again.

The main reason I posted this was not for the specific hand but to illustrate concepts behind my play. I'm well known as the luckiest tournament poker player on the planet, it seems, yet somehow I keep winning. I'm sure it's probably just luck and it'll run out soon, but just in case it isn't, I'm trying to give back a little of my thought processes, even when I don't always understand them.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you really want to prove yourself, lend me your luckbox and then show the world your pure pwnage skillz.

pineapple888 · #20 07-05-2006, 02:39 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I really do think you're reraised significantly more than 32% of the time here.

[/ QUOTE ]
I really don't. I was opening almost literally every pot that was folded to me and they kept folding.

[ QUOTE ]
Also note that you have to call the sb and probably the button if they reraise, which is pretty ugly. I just don't see this being a +EV play.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it's that ugly. Their ranges might be tighter but it's a similar result. I think the pot odds relative to their hand ranges will be fairly close again.

The main reason I posted this was not for the specific hand but to illustrate concepts behind my play. I'm well known as the luckiest tournament poker player on the planet, it seems, yet somehow I keep winning. I'm sure it's probably just luck and it'll run out soon, but just in case it isn't, I'm trying to give back a little of my thought processes, even when I don't always understand them.

[/ QUOTE ]

So standard bullying as big stack on a tight table with any two, and then you have odds to call. Nothing personal but this doesn't seem exactly revolutionary. Of course, I've been in the STT world where this comes up at least once a set, maybe it's not so well known in MTT.