Slightly -cEV move to become chip leader. $4 + .40 180sng stars
 

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t300 (8 handed) Poker Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums)

Hero (t7545)
Button (t10950)
SB (t1827)
BB (t4120)
UTG (t2100)
UTG+1 (t13540)
MP1 (t8525)
MP2 (t7630)

Preflop: Hero is CO with J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].
<font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, UTG+1 calls t300, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises to t1000</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Button raises to t1700</font>, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, UTG+1 folds, Hero calls t700.

Flop: (t3850) 9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">Button bets t4500</font>, Hero ?

Villain has been loose-passive and there are about 30 people left.

Preflop: I think this steal play is kind of meh...but I figured I could at least isolate the limper if not get him to fold. People were limp-folding so much that I decided to take advantage of it this hand. After button min3bets, it's pretty easy to tell he has KK+ and will likely stack off with it. I called here what do you think?

Flop: I realize that with the money already in the pot and my hand, pushing all-in (about 5800 total) would be -EV chipwise. Also, if you account for the fact that the people in this play horribly, do you jump on this chance to triple up our stack? If I was to win this one, it would catapult me to the FT. But then again, we still have about 20BBs behind to play with if we fold.

Re: Slightly -cEV move to become chip leader. $4 + .40 180sng stars
 

I pretty much hate your play.

Your PF bluff-into-the-table-chip-leader raise is useless. There's t950 in the pot, and your small raise gives the OR 2.7 : 1 on a call.

Calling the extra t700 against an perceived overpair - and bringing your stack below 20BB ... I guess a case could be made for it, even though I don't think you're going to outflop the re-raiser often enough to make it profitable.

On the flop you can't call. The odds are just not there. If you seriously consider committing your chips here I guess you could open-push, in the faint hope of folding an unlikely AK.

Re: Slightly -cEV move to become chip leader. $4 + .40 180sng stars
 

Mathmatically, it is basically costing you 5845 to win ~10,000 (need antes for exact amount). So you need to have about 37% equity to break even.

You have 34.24% equity against what you think his range is:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 34.242% 34.24% 00.00% 4068 0.00 { JhTd }
Hand 1: 65.758% 65.76% 00.00% 7812 0.00 { KK+ }

So mathematically, the call costs you ~419 chips.

I think making a call here is defensible. It is very slightly -EV (it is slightly more -EV if he has QQ too, but obv. better if he does this with AK). And winning this pot will be a big advantage for a good player. That is, your chip stack gains major amounts in functional utility. You ought to be able to abuse the bubble as a big chip stack. Something that is often hard to do as a medium chip stack.

So I say calling is fine.

Sherman

Re: Slightly -cEV move to become chip leader. $4 + .40 180sng stars
 

If you can put QQ in his range this becomes a clear fold.

Re: Slightly -cEV move to become chip leader. $4 + .40 180sng stars
 

this looks like pocket 10's or better. fold

Re: Slightly -cEV move to become chip leader. $4 + .40 180sng stars
 

possibly the easiest preflop fold you will ever encounter.

Re: Slightly -cEV move to become chip leader. $4 + .40 180sng stars
 

[ QUOTE ]
If you can put QQ in his range this becomes a clear fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 30.774% 30.77% 00.00% 5484 0.00 { JhTd }
Hand 1: 69.226% 69.23% 00.00% 12336 0.00 { QQ+ }


With QQ in his range we now have an EV of -969.49, or about -1K.

But I am still not sure I agree. The guy is not asking about cEV. We all know it is -cEV. The math is right there in front of us. What we don't know is if it is really -$EV.

The question is, can we make more money in the long run by taking a shot here. If we don't take a shot here, we are likely to have a medium stack on the bubble. Everyone knows that stealing with a medium stack is hard and you are the constant target of steals.

However, if we get a big stack, we can abuse the medium stacks on the bubble. We can cruise ITM, build our chip stack, and make a good run at the FT.

If we lose, we are out.

But how much $EV do we lose when we lose? What is probability of making the top 3 if we don't take the shot here? It really comes down to answering these questions.

You need to estimate your tournament equity (in $, not chips) right now. How much do you expect to make on average with this chip stack at this point in the tournament? Now how much tournament equity do you have if you win in this spot and get up to 15K in chips? Multiply that number by our equity (which is somewhere between 30-34%). Now subtract from that number our current equity in the tournament (calculated before). Is the number still positive? If it is, we should take a shot here.

It is as simple as that. It is not about cEV at this point folks. It is about $EV. It is about why we play the tournament.

Sherman

Re: Slightly -cEV move to become chip leader. $4 + .40 180sng stars
 

[ QUOTE ]
possibly the easiest preflop fold you will ever encounter.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? Show me the math b/c I don't believe you (unless you are talking about the first time around). We have to call 700 in a pot of 3100. We also have 5800 behind in implied odds b/c villain has turned his hand over.

I'm pretty confident that if we never stick it in on the flop without two pair or better we are correct to call PF.

Sherman

Re: Slightly -cEV move to become chip leader. $4 + .40 180sng stars
 

being the chip leader is overrated when the bb is only 300 chips, wait for a better spot i think


edit oh and hes has a hand here almost everytime, he just put half his stack in

Re: Slightly -cEV move to become chip leader. $4 + .40 180sng stars
 

[ QUOTE ]

(unless you are talking about the first time around)


[/ QUOTE ]
Yes I mean the first time around... it's obvious that the big stack who is already in this pot is NOT going away, and by making this play, hero is thinking in his head "I better hit a straight" which is the same thought process the other 4/180 donks go through when they get any two sooted cards and hope to hit a flush... -EV all around.

Re: Slightly -cEV move to become chip leader. $4 + .40 180sng stars
 

Umm why would we knowingly make -cEV plays in a $4/180 again?

I guess if I misclicked my way into the flop situation I would call if already in the money due to the flat payout from 10-18. Big stack pwning factor in small stakes tournies is pretty close to zero.

Re: Slightly -cEV move to become chip leader. $4 + .40 180sng stars
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

(unless you are talking about the first time around)


[/ QUOTE ]
Yes I mean the first time around... it's obvious that the big stack who is already in this pot is NOT going away, and by making this play, hero is thinking in his head "I better hit a straight" which is the same thought process the other 4/180 donks go through when they get any two sooted cards and hope to hit a flush... -EV all around.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. There Hero is trying to steal. He is trying to get the big stack (limper) to fold PF or to fold to a c-bet on the flop where hero will have position. It is certainly a defensible play. Although I woudl raise more PF if I was going to try it.

The other big stack at the table foiled his plans b/c he picked up a big hand and min-raised. The original bigstack (limper) then folded.

And Hero was getting the odds to call PF. Other than making a smallish raise, I don't see much wrong with Hero's PF play. You could argue that his stack size doesn't work well for the play he is trying to make. And that is fine. But I don't fault his thought process for trying to steal...how could anyone who wasn't at the table?

Sherman

Re: Slightly -cEV move to become chip leader. $4 + .40 180sng stars
 

[ QUOTE ]
Umm why would we knowingly make -cEV plays in a $4/180 again?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because it might be +$EV. Are my posts even visible to anyone? If not, Mods please make my posts visible.

I'm not saying Hero is correct to make a -cEV play here, I am just saying that it might be and simply dismissing it as wrong is surely a mistake.

Like I said before. Hero needs to do some simple estimation and math to determine if this play is +$EV.

1) Determine your $EV if you win the pot in this spot. Multiply that number by your equity in this pot (.30-.36).

2) Estimate your current $EV ($EV if you folded).

3) Subtract 2 from 1. If the number is positive, you should make the play.

What makes this hand interesting is that even though the math is out there, no one really knows what these estimates are. My point is that saying, "this is -cEV, this is stupid." is just wrong. Tournaments aren't about winning chips. They are about winning money. Sometimes cEV = $EV. Sometimes it doesn't.

Until someone can come up with accurate estimates to 1 and 2, you CANNOT have an answer to OP's question and be 100% sure it is accurate. Numbers 1 and 2 is where the debate on this hand should begin.

Sherman

Re: Slightly -cEV move to become chip leader. $4 + .40 180sng stars
 

By stack sizes I assume 30-40 left or so eh. Sure there are cEV/$EV distortions in tournaments but not at that point.

Preflop is fricking horrible; steal that gives everyone odds to call. Then smooth of the 3bet OOP when your hand is basically 65o sucks; It is not going to be profitable 20 BB deep. There are maths out there I think it was around 15-1 implied to call with UCs. Flop plan is to check/call AI so basically now AK commits and is delighted to realize they are ahead.

So in conclusion I am comfortable dismissing this play as -cEV/-$EV/stinking awful without seeing any more fancy-pants maths tyvm mkay

Re: Slightly -cEV move to become chip leader. $4 + .40 180sng stars
 

Komplex,

You are cleary not reading the posts in this thread. In the OP, he tells us there are around 30 left. That means the bubble is coming soon.

Having big stack on the bubble is obv. more EV than having a medium stack on the bubble.

PF is not horrible with the exception of the raise size. He has to call the bet. Even if villain turns over AA he has to call the bet. His pot odds alonge are almost good enough to call. Plus implied odds, and the PF call is trivially easy.

I don't get it. Why don't we spend time thinking about the important questions to answer in this thread instead of ignoring them by saying, "PF bad, calling is -cEV so fold."? Why?

Sherman

Re: Slightly -cEV move to become chip leader. $4 + .40 180sng stars
 

I agree with Sherman... The raise size is horrible, but Hero has to call the extra 700. Also, the raise in itself is of course viable since Hero said opponents were limp-folding a lot. I think I'd rather save my chips for some re-stealing from the blinds, but raising here is certainly not bad.

On the flop, I call (shove) for all the reasons Sherman stated. Having a stack to abuse the bubble with is very +EV, especially in tournaments were opponents let themselves be abused without resistance.

Re: Slightly -cEV move to become chip leader. $4 + .40 180sng stars
 

OK I see where you are coming from sherman but in this particular case the move is both -$EV and -cEV.

You can't ignore the terrible pre-flop play, because this shows that the OP isn't very good, so the utility of a big stack goes way down. In fact, if he's making bad "steal" plays like this with his stack, I'd say if he gets a big stack he's going to piss it all away pretty quickly trying to bully.

Secondly, I think you need to fold to the re-raise pre-flop. If were all in, we'd have the odds to call, but the chance of flopping a hand good enough to continue with is about 1 in 20, and we dont have the implied odds for that, not even close. So even if we "outplay" the other guy on the flop - which is extremely difficult with his tight range, we have a lot of equity to make up.

So yeah, I think its just bad on every street.

Re: Slightly -cEV move to become chip leader. $4 + .40 180sng stars
 

really bad hand/tourney selection for the topic but whatever If you play this hand to this flop open shove it at least too shallow to c/shove over any decent cbet

Re: Slightly -cEV move to become chip leader. $4 + .40 180sng stars
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Umm why would we knowingly make -cEV plays in a $4/180 again?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because it might be +$EV. Are my posts even visible to anyone? If not, Mods please make my posts visible.

I'm not saying Hero is correct to make a -cEV play here, I am just saying that it might be and simply dismissing it as wrong is surely a mistake.

Like I said before. Hero needs to do some simple estimation and math to determine if this play is +$EV.

1) Determine your $EV if you win the pot in this spot. Multiply that number by your equity in this pot (.30-.36).

2) Estimate your current $EV ($EV if you folded).

3) Subtract 2 from 1. If the number is positive, you should make the play.

Sometimes cEV = $EV. Sometimes it doesn't.

Sherman

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand you point, but i disagree with the timing.

This is a 4/180 regular tournament. Hero is got 20+BB. He will have more than 10BBs in next 2 blind levels - thats about 30 minutes of hands... huge number.

I play really lots $12/180 turbos. By the time it reaches bubble blinds are about ~1200, with average stacks of 13500. They have learned me the value of even 2BB stacks. In this exact spot in turbos, blinds will rise in 10 minutes making you shortstacked.

With that kind of pressure to get a good hand and double up, we can discuss making this kind of moves. Right here it's too early. But what worries me the most is the really unfavorable success percentage for this move.

Re: Slightly -cEV move to become chip leader. $4 + .40 180sng stars
 

[ QUOTE ]
really bad hand/tourney selection for the topic but whatever If you play this hand to this flop open shove it at least too shallow to c/shove over any decent cbet

[/ QUOTE ]