Trickier Sit N Go Question

[leaponthis]

[ QUOTE ]
lol @ this thread. i mean really.


[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps with an attitude like this, one should be banned from the Sklansky forum.

[ QUOTE ]
moving in here with KJ is a fairly large mistake. it's probably even the worst option amongst the three

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not the point now is it?. Sklansky, normally asks revealing questions. Questions, that have answers that give insight into the thinking process involved in making ones decision. Given that, I (me personally) have concluded that there is a concept that covers situation's of this nature. Solving this problem in and of itself is of little value if it does not lead to something that one can bring to the table. Since you have come to the "challenge Sklansky" forum and made disparaging remarks about someone elses opinion, I believe that you should be more than willing to cough up the correct concept. Especially since you blatantly told David to come to your forum where better questions than his are asked all of the time. So what is it? What is the concept? Redeem yourself!

leaponthis


[/ QUOTE ]

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
Tell me why SB would merely call?
It would be an idiotic move since with a min raise it will put BB all in!!!
your logic is not realistic.

[/ QUOTE ]

He merely calls because it greatly increases the chances of BB losing and being all in next hand. If BB loses and wins the next hand hes still all in on his next BB.

[David Sklansky]

In perusing the thread I'm concerned that very few of you seem to be taking the EV of getting first or second place into account. And most seem to be considering KJ a random hand. That might not change anything but you can't be sure if you ignore those factors.

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?

[LozGrain]

call or raise? it matters so much on knowing from the game how the players are going to react. Both are correct answers

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
In perusing the thread I'm concerned that very few of you seem to be taking the EV of getting first or second place into account. And most seem to be considering KJ a random hand. That might not change anything but you can't be sure if you ignore those factors.

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 ]

All of the STT regulars who have chimed in here are accustomed to this mode of thought. Their answers are based on repeatedly analyzing similar situations with the independent chip model, which does a pretty good job of addressing your second paragraph there, since it's coming up with an estimate for your equity given the various chipstacks. It is not neglecting the payouts for first and second, however much you think it may be. All of these regulars are saying call, and that's almost certainly correct.

ICM generally predicts when there's a shortstack so close to busting, and even more so when you're way behind in the chase for the top two, that you should be very, very hesitant to get it in. KJ is generally a pretty crappy hand to do so with; you really need a crushing edge here to want to get in with, say, the big stack. Getting the big stack to help you knock out the shorty is also a pretty big advantage here, and calling allows the big stack to try and do that without giving the BB a way of squirreling out by folding once you're committed all-in with the big stack.

In terms of mathematical/quantitative analysis of its niche, I think it's hard to beat the STT forum here. Short-stacked bubble situations are what it does.

[citanul]

david,

also, if you really wanted us to give you precise answers you would have at some point quantified what a "large" stack is, even if it just meant > X bbs.

leap,

the point is that this "revealing question" has been asked, and answered, about a zillion times on this message board. it's an interesting situation, and concept, if you've never seen it before, but once you see it once, basically, you've seen it.

c

[Sherman]

I don't get this thread. I haven't played poker in two months and haven't played an SNG in over three, yet somehow this seems like a typical SNG push or fold situation. I don't remember what the buy-in is supposed to be but that certainly is a factor (assuming opponents are unknown).

With the information given, I lean towards folding. I find calling to leave you with way way too many precarious situations.

[Phanekim]

this is as good of a response as it gets.

[TC Franks]

It's important to get something out of these SNG's so I could see folding. Still, if moving all-in is enough to force out the SB, then you're forcing the BB into action. My play is raising all-in.

If he folds, he's practically giving you third so he almost has to call. Even if you lose the hand, you still have one more chance to double up. Chances are, the two cards you have now are better than the two cards he is being forced to play.

Now, the one aside, I'm assuming the SB has about 5,000 chips and the $1,100 all-in would be enough to force him out. Say he had twice that, he might gamble, BB might fold, and then you're out for any SNG money if SB beats you.

But by betting first and moving all-in, you get some first-in vigorish against the SB. I think he may even lay down small pairs, A-weak kicker, the kind of hands that you want out. (Again, if he had about $10,000, I don't think that would be the case, but a fifth of his stack, hopefully it would be enough.) I would say in a typical SnG he's going to have about $5,000/$6,000 and he's not going to want to fall behind the other guy with that amount just protecting his small blind.

I'd say all-in, hope to get out the SB, and force action against the BB. Take him out and then get ready to battle the big boyz!

If you lose to BB, you could still just about catch back up to third by doubling up in one hand, but odds say you should be up on the BB. If he folds, he has only $100 left and will have to double up a couple times to be a threat for third.

[leaponthis]

[ QUOTE ]
when there's a shortstack so close to busting, and even more so when you're way behind in the chase for the top two, that you should be very, very hesitant to get it in

[/ QUOTE ]

I like this reply and believe that the above is a good beginning to a general concept. I believe that it should begin with something like "In a structured payout (x,y,z) SNG, with 4 players left and stacks of ~ A,B,C,D one should..."

Can you find concepts expressed in this manner on the STT forum? If so have they been accumulated in something like a FAQ thread?

leaponthis