Adding volatility to early levels of 4/180's

[Deadnutz]

I've been thinking about pushing smaller edges early in the 4/180's recently. I have two main reasons for this:

1) The first hour is full of horrible players that
will stack off 72BB's to win 76.5 with 2 face
cards.
2) The demographic shifts somewhat to more nits and
flop-hitters in the 2nd hour when blind stealing
can add signifiacntly to your stack.

Even during the first level, my standard play is to push 10+'s, AK when anyone shows interest in the pot. I know this play is tournament specific, but it's hugely cev here.
I would estimate that my average opponents calling AI range, once they have raised 3bb in the first level, to be
10+, A10o+, KJs+. Some are tighter, some looser, but this is about right.

Interesting thing to note is that I don't think I've ever been called by a pair worse than 10's in this spot. I think these players honeslty believe it's better to call 72BB's to win 76.5 with A10o or KQ than with 88.

This being the case, shouldn't I add more pairs to my pushing range? Them calling with 2 overs to my pair getting 1.06 to 1 is a mistake even if they new my exact hand was a small pair. Obviously they are making an even bigger mistake if they knew my range.

Adding more pairs will definitely increase my chances of getting knocked out early. But I feel that pushing these small edges early will be +$ev.

Since many of the worst players get knocked out early- but many of them double or triple before they do- I want to maximize my winnings against them when I get invloved in a hand. So If I can play a 3K stack aginst their 3K stack, I'll profit more.

Then when the blinds increase, I can use a bigger stack to take advantage of the nits and flop hitters that are left.

I feel that when you are top 5 in chips with 40 or so left,
it seems pretty easy to make ft's by just blind stealing from the right people. So I'm trying to find more ways to get to the top 5 early- yet still making +cev plays.

Good addition to early level play?

[seke2]

Interesting observation. Let me make sure I followed that. Essentially, you're suggesting the typical opponent has a flaw that they will more often call with 2 broadway as opposed to mid/small pairs, even when the small pair has roughly the same (or greater) "value" than the two-broadway hand.

This is pretty obvious, but worth noting...there are a lot more possible 2-broadway hand combinations than pair hand combinations, so you may just be overreading frequencies here--your opponents might be just as willing to call with 66 as they are with ATo, but they have ATo more often, so you start thinking when they fold, it's because they have 66...in reality, they might an offsuit ace-rag or some random two suited (these are 4/180 opponents after all).

I'd be curious to hear from other 4/180 types on this, actually. This is a really interesting theory, if it's true, because it suggests that our opponents are making significant hand valuation errors in terms of underplaying certain parts of their range and overplaying others, which means the sort of typical pokerstove analysis we do might need to be modified to adjust for what our opponents are doing as opposed to hand values in a vacuum.

[Mingdu]

What is your ROI now? You looking for a few more points?

I found that by being a little more patient when shortstacked has paid big dividends for me.

Pushing the smaller pairs will get you knocked out/doubled up earlier. Wouldn't be worth it for me because I feel (may be true or not) that I can now outplay others when the blinds start to rise.

I think your villian calling range is much too tight ... I had 53o call my JJ allin the other day. Thrilled to see it because I know that makes $$$ for me in the long run.

I love it when that happens in a hand I'm not in ... because I know some of those chips are coming my way eventually. If I still have a seat in the game

[Mingdu]

[ QUOTE ]

Interesting thing to note is that I don't think I've ever been called by a pair worse than 10's in this spot. I think these players honeslty believe it's better to call 72BB's to win 76.5 with A10o or KQ than with 88.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have tried to make sense of the play at that level but it mixes lack of any knowledge with a disregard for the "measly" $4.40 ... In the first hour I expect my allins will all be called and play accordingly.

[Deadnutz]

Seke,

Yes, you followed my thinking correctly. I actually think these players are more likely to make a 3bb raise with 2 big cards as opposed to 66-99. The average 4/180 tends to limp with those. So just by the fact that they raised, I can cut down their chances of having a mid pair. Which would make my pushes with mid-pairs even more correct.

I really think that when people raise with 2 big cards, then see a push, they think "he must have a medium pair and doesn't want a call" so then they call with 2 overs, even though they are not getting the odds to call with them.
They are there to gamble afterall! LOL

[Deadnutz]

Mingdu,

My ROI since I have been playing 4/180's almost exclusively
is around 90%. But, as always I'm looking to add to that byincreasing my chances of winning the tourney.

[seke2]

Well, I don't know much of the 4/180 thinking, but I used to play in some free bar league type places, and I'd often hear people with the "I put you on a small pair" when they called my pushes with bizarre crap like KJ or JT (and obv sucked out on my AK/AQ whatever). I think there is some degree of prevalance among bad players to think their opponents making big raises have middle/small pairs.

By the way, a lot of those guys minraise small pairs too, but come to think of it, yeah, you don't see as many 3xBB opens with mid/small pairs from players you think of as being.

But again, the caveat here is just that you want to keep in mind those guys might be just as happy to call with 66 as they are with AT, they just have AT more often because it's dealt more often, so you might just be weighing anecdotal evidence incorrectly.

Now if you did some actual analysis on this and provided data to prove your theory, you might have found a very exploitable edge.

[Jeff76]

My experience in 4/180s is that players love to call pushes. They will limp/call or raise/call with 44, 9Ts, QJ, A2, or any other garbage.

Heck, I was at the final two tables with 20BBs and a 15BB guy limped in early position. I pushed with AA (I felt like he'd call with anything he'd limp with) and he did- with A3.

This is why I usually don't "resteal" in 4/180s. Rather I "value push" with stuff like KQ, QJ, or 55 because you get called so often by garbage hands. If I feel I'll be flipping or ahead of villains range even slightly, I push and expect to be called.

[JoeyJoJo Shabadu]

[ QUOTE ]
I really think that when people raise with 2 big cards, then see a push, they think "he must have a medium pair and doesn't want a call" so then they call with 2 overs, even though they are not getting the odds to call with them.
They are there to gamble afterall! LOL

[/ QUOTE ]

That's exactly what the early AI donks think. Have to say I've noticed the same and started to call more AI early with middle pairs or even push... give them exactly what they want!... not on stars but PP... stars would be worse for this I assume... like PP used to be.

Some people are just degenerates that shoud be playing blackjack or pick a number instead.

[CybrPunk]

I understand your thinking in these situations, deadnutz, but you also have to realize that a lot of the EV generated in these situations comes from fold equity. Since you say yourself that people don't fold in these tournaments, I don't think adding variance to your early game is the best way to extract long-term value from them. In all honesty, you don't want to end up coinflipping for your stack in the first orbit with a medium pair. This is especially true if you figure to be one of the best players in the field. You can almost certainly find better spots than a 50/50 to get all the chips in the middle versus these guys.