ICM & adjusting against weak players?

[StregaChess]

My question is around how successful pushing affects your calling range or your willingness to pull the trigger on low +EV situations again and again.

For the sake of argument let’s create the following background.

Let’s say you are on the bubble, 4 people, 3 get paid. You’ve noticed one OK player and the other two seem to be lame fish. The player you feel is strongest is sitting directly to your right, so if he is good he’s going to push into you a fair percent of time and you’ll be stuck. Stack sizes you and the strong guy each have about 4,500 chips, one of the lamers has 2,000 the other has about 2500.

So that’s the background…

Here’s what you see happening, a couple of orbits you realize the strong guy is not as good as you though or else he’s really running dry.
You see +EV and you take it every time.

So, the problem is you’ve done this 2 times in a row and now you are faced with a 3rd situation where its +EV to push.
Do you do so? Do you have concerns with pushing into weak players over and over?
At what point do you start to either adjust the calling range or adjust what level +EV you’ll pull the trigger on. (Possibly the same thing but a different way of thinking it out in your head?)

In general what is the minimum +EV situation you’ll pull the trigger on with 4 people, does it change with 6 people?

Another way to state all this is with consecutive hands this is the range….

1st time I push with a min of +EV .2
2nd time > +EV .4
3rd time > +EV .95



In general I’ve been pulling the trigger maybe 3 times in row max, but start to get a little gun shy if folks are missing their chances. I’ve backed off if I can create action between the two small stacks and if my “GUT” tells me I better let these fish breath. I hate to use “gut” and feelings in poker so hence my questions.

[pineapple888]

[ QUOTE ]
I hate to use “gut” and feelings in poker

[/ QUOTE ]

Then maybe you should stick to chess. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

In poker, your actions will affect your opponent's future actions. Much of the skill of the game involves puzzling out these changes and creating advantageous situations when possible.

Otherwise your questions are way too general to answer usefully.

[StregaChess]

[ QUOTE ]


In poker, your actions will affect your opponent's future actions. Much of the skill of the game involves puzzling out these changes and creating advantageous situations when possible.

Otherwise your questions are way too general to answer usefully.

[/ QUOTE ]

I respectfully agree and disagree…..

Disagree:
If the general theory of crushing SNG’s is play tight early and pushbot late is correct this questions should be addressable in some sort of general method.


Agree:
Yes my question might be too general to address, so how should it be asked to obtain the desired outcome?

[lastchance]

Just keep readjusting ranges, expect to get spite-called.

It happens, just make sure to be careful, and don't pass up something too +EV.

[StregaChess]

[ QUOTE ]
make sure to be careful, and don't pass up something too +EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

too = > +EV .5 ?

[pineapple888]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


In poker, your actions will affect your opponent's future actions. Much of the skill of the game involves puzzling out these changes and creating advantageous situations when possible.

Otherwise your questions are way too general to answer usefully.

[/ QUOTE ]

I respectfully agree and disagree…..

Disagree:
If the general theory of crushing SNG’s is play tight early and pushbot late is correct this questions should be addressable in some sort of general method.


Agree:
Yes my question might be too general to address, so how should it be asked to obtain the desired outcome?

[/ QUOTE ]

1.) There is no general method for playing STTs. We have guidelines, many of which are based on reading your opponents, much of which depends on gut feel and intuition.

2.) Not being psychic, I have no idea how to rephrase your question so that it is asking what you what to ask.

3.) In SNGPT if your opponents are stupid and therefore more likely to bust each other out assign a higher minimum edge because you can often just fold into the money. If they are smart and like to push but don't like to call, assign a lower minimum edge because you have to take any edge you can find.

[bluefeet]

To be honest, I'm not good enough to distinguish between a +.1, +.4, +.6 when the games are running. Intuitively I am mindful of potential callers adjusting ranges as the bubble unfolds.

To answer your question - no. I'm not purposefully trying to adjust a 'minimum edge' in these situations...simply the ranges of those behind. I have no doubt that errors are made on both sides, when this adjustment is >/< necessary.

[StregaChess]

[ QUOTE ]
.) In SNGPT if your opponents are stupid and therefore more likely to bust each other out assign a higher minimum edge because you can often just fold into the money. If they are smart and like to push but don't like to call, assign a lower minimum edge because you have to take any edge you can find.


[/ QUOTE ]

pineapple, thanks.. that's pretty useful and I think you've actually answered the question I was looking for that it is a gray area and that it's where the "poker" comes into the SNG's tight/push plan....

[StregaChess]

[ QUOTE ]
To be honest, I'm not good enough to distinguish between a +.1, +.4, +.6 when the games are running.
made on both sides, when this adjustment is >/< necessary.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe you'll think this is a waste of time however.... with bubble trainer before I answer, I assign a value and make note of that against the correct answer. Often I'm pretty damn close, what I'm learning is that when I miss I can miss BIG TIME.... and making note of those is a learning experience that I think will plug up some holes.