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

[wagon30]

There are some problems with your math. The BB has already posted the blinds, then he raises to 17617, which lead you to double count. So the amount you can win 23267 is wrong. I guess it should be 17617+1500+1050=20167. If this is the case though, the converter messed up the final pot size. Because, 20167+17617=37784. Hope you can sort this out. This is a pretty small error though and won't effect your bottom line much, just thought you should know.

It wasn't totally clear in your post, but the 32% (i think 31.1% if my correction is right) you estimated also applies to the short stacks. Though since you would be getting odds to call the short stacks, it might be slightly larger.

So what range would it take to reraise you 32% of the time, well, there are 5 players left (not including BB, which we already took into account). So, if they are equally likely to push (which they aren't, but you can fool with that). Then on average they need to push 32/5 = 6.4% of hands, so if everybody pushes 77+,AQ+,AJs. You break even. It seems likely they'll push more often than that. Plus, someone could just call. I don't think you'll be able to play this hand out of position against someone with a much stronger hand without it being -EV, which may hurt your bottom line too. Also, against this range you are like a 2.7 to 1 dog, so the effect from above doesn't count since you are better off folding than calling if the other short stacks ranges are actually this tight.

[nath]

[ QUOTE ]
So standard bullying as big stack on a tight table with any two, and then you have odds to call.

[/ QUOTE ]

This can be used in many more places than people think it can.

[nath]

[ QUOTE ]
There are some problems with your math. The BB has already posted the blinds, then he raises to 17617, which lead you to double count. So the amount you can win 23267 is wrong. I guess it should be 17617+1500+1050=20167.

[/ QUOTE ]
The sad thing is that the first time I wrote this post I got all the math completely wrong and had to go back and rewrite it.
I should just stick to being a mystical philosopher-sage of tournament poker and let others do the math.

[pineapple888]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So standard bullying as big stack on a tight table with any two, and then you have odds to call.

[/ QUOTE ]

This can be used in many more places than people think it can.

[/ QUOTE ]

In that case, nice post. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[wagon30]

After making a similar math mistake at another site, someone showed me a trick. Take the total pot*your equity-the chips you put in. Then you can just multiply that by .21. Of course, that would have possibly lead me to a mistake, because it looks like the converter messed up the pot size. But, ((37784*.3488)-17617)*.21, I think is a little easier way to think about it.

Anyway, do you really think people are folding hands like AT and 66?

[nath]

[ QUOTE ]
Hey I just read a book called Freakonomics.

[/ QUOTE ]
Hmm, what a coincidence.

[ QUOTE ]
The math you presented was nice to see.

[/ QUOTE ]
It was nice for me to see, too. I hadn't taken the time to do it before. I just assumed that because moves like these worked and I won tournaments that they must be profitable.

[ QUOTE ]
lol at the possible misuses of the advice in this thread. I think one thing to understand is that the OP did not advocate making a -ev play such as raising UTG with weak hands to set up a +ev play, such as the call you make because you have to. This is very situational.

[/ QUOTE ]
Indeed. I used to raise much more willy-nilly than I do now; now I at least have to believe the initial raise can be profitable.

[ QUOTE ]
final word for now: I love how bb calls with 33, and you have a coinflip.

[/ QUOTE ]

Me too. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[DLizzle]

speaking of willy-nilly, I went through this stage where my late game tourney strategy was like steal the blinds every single time it folds to you. This was directly after me realizing, hey if I'm raising QJ on the button and will fold to a push, I'll get the same result if I raise with 47, but unfortunately before I realized, hey, the sb has barely anything left, the aggressive bb has a huge stack and will play back at me often, so it's not a good spot to steal. Nearing the end of tournaments, it becomes less about cards and more about situations. I'm sure that's been said before, but I think a player really has to 'see the light' and think about why and how it should be applied.

This point isn't exactly what the first post deals with, but it certainly is hugely important to understand the freakonomics of tournaments.

Also, I think you better copyright 'freakonomics of tournaments'. I'm looking forward to the many spinoff threads in coming weeks.

[Jason Strasser (strassa2)]

nath,

with an m of 3, your range seems totally off to me. He only plays 21% of hands? yeah right!

[nath]

[ QUOTE ]
nath,

with an m of 3, your range seems totally off to me. He only plays 21% of hands? yeah right!

[/ QUOTE ]

Against an UTG raise? If he was the open raiser, he might be pushing virtually anything. It seems like he might push more, and against me, he probably should, but I couldn't think of a better range to assign him. I suppose you could stretch it into even weaker aces, some of the suited kings, and such, but I still don't think he's taking, say, 98s, and pushing it over my raise.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
nath,

with an m of 3, your range seems totally off to me. He only plays 21% of hands? yeah right!

[/ QUOTE ]

Against an UTG raise? If he was the open raiser, he might be pushing virtually anything. It seems like he might push more, and against me, he probably should, but I couldn't think of a better range to assign him. I suppose you could stretch it into even weaker aces, some of the suited kings, and such, but I still don't think he's taking, say, 98s, and pushing it over my raise.

[/ QUOTE ]
well w/ that stack, i dont think the utg raise really matters too much. especially when u are the raiser w/ ur "wreckless play" to the untrained eye [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]. its all about getting lucky for villain right now, so i dont thnk his range is affected

the way ur thinking, u really remind me of gus hansen. trying to find spots that are +EV that nobody would ever think of. i try to find these holes as well, but im not sure if this one is +EV

still a great post whether i agree w/ it or not..it really got me thinking