Trickier Sit N Go Question

[freemoney]

Exact stack sizes are important if you really want a detailed answer to the question. Assuming the current SB has the largest stack I am going to answer the question. If you fold as the button with KJ, the SB can fold a ton of hands right now and keep the BB alive. The next hand he can push as the button. The SB will fold nearly everything if he is good and so will the BB. Now you are in the BB and are getting pushed into every time by either big stack UTG or SB in hand.

Raising is awful because it allows SB to call and BB to fold but this has been gone over.

If you have no idea why calling is the best option it still is because the others are awful against competent SnG players.

[bones]

As cit, freemoney, etc have pointed out, this question is really basic for good sng players. Assuming the payout structure is a standard 5/3/2, pushing is really really bad.

David,

KJ is not a random hand and nobody with half a brain is suggesting that it is. That's why we're calling rather than folding.

[jogsxyz]

The problem is too complex. First solve an easier problem.
Assume button goes all-in and solve BB's strategy.

Assume button goes all-in.
Case 1. SB folds.
BB has a EV of 0.0145 by folding.
BB plays and loses for EV of 0.
BB plays and wins for EV of 0.2091

145x=(1-x)2091
145x=2091-2091x
2236x=2091
x=2091/2236=0.936

BB should only fold if he has less than 7.4% of winning.
Every two card holding has better than 7.4% of winning against any range of hands which include a non pair.
Therefore BB must play any two.

Case 2. SB calls.
2a. BB folds.
BB's EV is 0.0125 if button wins.
BB's EV is 0.20 + 0.0037 if SB wins.

Here BB must guess whether SB is more rational than
button. BB's EV range should be 0.08 to 0.14

2b. BB calls also.
BB's EV is zero if he loses.
BB wins and button beats SB.
BB's EV is 0.2222
BB wins and SB beats button.
BB's EV is 0.20+.0694.

BB wins about 18.5% of the time with a random hand.
BB's EV will vary from 0.04 to 0.07.

So the best strategy for BB is to call if SB folds.
Would need an extremely strong hand to call if
SB calls.

[Jbrochu]

[ QUOTE ]

Why are all these people who never post in STTF arguing with multiple people who have posted thousands of times in STTF?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure, but it gives me hope for the future profitability of S&G's.

[leaponthis]

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:

Why are all these people who never post in STTF arguing with multiple people who have posted thousands of times in STTF?

I'm not sure, but it gives me hope for the future profitability of S&G's.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure that it shows that Sklansky doesn't think much of that forum or those that post there. He might be right. Just an opinion.

leaponthis

[citanul]

leap,

are you really trolling the special sklansky forum? impressive. i thought i saw a post in which you said you had an account which was banned from the other forums. has it been revealed which lost poster you are? when i first came across that mention i was hoping that you were abdul. abdul never appeared to be a jerk previously. edit: vince? really?

ta

citanul

[leaponthis]

[ QUOTE ]
abdul never appeared to be a jerk previously

[/ QUOTE ]

First I will tell you that David Sklansky knows who I am. Second, I find it ludicrous that 2 + 2 managment picks people like you to moderate forums. You come up here to this forum, tell the only poster allowed to start threads, DAVID SKLANSKY, that basically his question is a stupid one and he could find better questions on your STT forum. Then you insult another poster by "lol" at his opinion. And then you have the balls to call me a troll because I sarcastically reply to one of your forum posting buddies that follows your lead and claims that we up here on the Sklansky forum should be ashamed of ourselves for not listening to those from the STT forum. Are you serious?

If you want to know the name of this banned poster ask David. I'm sure that if he respects you he will tell you my name. If not it my be because he considers you a troll. Just an opinion. One other thing, I was banned for calling another poster a name not quite as insulting as a "jerk."
But you are a moderator. What a joke.

leaponthis

[ChrisV]

Hi,

The answer is call.

DS:

[ QUOTE ]
Also, here is an interesting way to analyze the problem. Seperate them into six cases (unfortunately not equally likely) as far as who would win and who would come in second and third. Given each of these permutations, which is the best play and by how much. See what I'm getting at?

[/ QUOTE ]

lol, you're trying to reinvent the wheel here. This is exactly how the Independent Chip Model works and is how the STT forum has been analysing SNGs for a good three years now.

I posted an explanation of how the ICM works here.

Now, on to a little analysis. I was going to write a massive essay working out the exact equities for pushing, folding and calling, but actually it isn't necessary. Here are the ICM equities for a bunch of possible situations. The resulting stacks are given, with your stack in bold. I'm assuming a Pstars-style SNG, with 13500 chips in play, although I haven't used antes. I'm also assuming both "big stacks" are equal, with 5,850.

You raise, SB folds, you win (2100/5550/5850): 0.269
You raise, SB folds, you lose (400/5550/5850/1700): 0.057
You raise, SB calls, BB folds, you win (2800/4750/5850/100): 0.284
You fold, SB raises, SB loses (1100/5150/5850/1400): 0.135
You fold, SB raises, SB wins (1100/6550/5850): 0.238

From these numbers we can discern what is important in this situation. All of the outcomes where the BB doesn't win are quite close in equity. It doesn't matter that much whether you win or SB wins - the difference is only 0.031 in equity. Even doubling up against the SB and knocking BB down to 100 only gets you an extra 0.015 on top of that.

In contrast, the outcomes where BB wins the pot are extremely bad. BB winning against SB is over 0.1 worse than SB winning against BB, and if BB beats you the situation is much worse again.

It follows that your focus should be on preventing BB winning the pot, not on winning it yourself. Once you think about it like that, call is an obvious choice. You're happy to have SB in the pot so that you can achieve your primary goal of making BB lose.

Here are the equities for a 3-way allin:

BB wins, you win side pot (800/4750/5850/2100): 0.093
SB wins: 0.2
You win: (2900/4750/5850): 0.293

As you can see, BB winning the main pot and SB winning the side pot is obviously horrible for you, but you winning the side pot isn't all that bad, and all the outcomes where BB doesn't win are very good.

Some STTFers have also mentioned the importance of preventing a large-stacked SB from folding to the BB in an effort to prolong the bubble. For the uninitiated, briefly, the big stack has a massive advantage on the bubble when there's a short stack because he can steal blinds from the other stacks with impunity. Therefore it's sometimes worth making plays that sacrifice equity to "mother" the short stack and keep him alive so the bubble is prolonged.

I don't think this is such a situation and I think the SB should put BB allin with ATC. The reason is that it will be difficult to prolong the bubble much with TWO short stacks around. There will be a few players who will try that play, though, which is another advantage to calling over folding.

LandonM,

[ QUOTE ]
Man, why is it that I'm obviously just so wrong here, yet I keep on winning these darn things to the tune of not having to work a real job?
Oh, yeah. It's because of the thinking above. I thank you and people like you most sincerely.

[/ QUOTE ]

A few months ago I made $25,000 from SNGs in a single month. I'm guessing citanul has done better. Please don't assume you're smarter than everyone else in a forum chock full of smart people.

[leaponthis]

[ QUOTE ]
Please don't assume you're smarter than everyone else in a forum chock full of smart people.

[/ QUOTE ]

Does this go for David Sklansky too? It's his question and his "reinventing the wheel" that you refer too. I bet he thinks he's smarter than your whole forum put together. If so, he's probably right. Just a guess.

leaponthis

[ChrisV]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please don't assume you're smarter than everyone else in a forum chock full of smart people.

[/ QUOTE ]

Does this go for David Sklansky too? It's his question and his "reinventing the wheel" that you refer too. I bet he thinks he's smarter than your whole forum put together. If so, he's probably right. Just a guess.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jesus you're an idiot. The "think you're smarter" dig was because the poster was ridiculing the opinions of some extremely good SNG players. Sklansky on the other hand was just posing a question. Do you see the difference?

Regarding the "reinventing the wheel" part, while that's exactly what Sklansky was doing, he was also 100% correct about how to analyse SNGs. In other words, he and the STT forum are in complete agreement about that.

If you're going to troll, at least make it more entertaining than this inane drivel.