True Gigabet's Dilemma Spot?

[Austiger]

I'd like to see the math on the 35% and -2.6% numbers.

[abarber]

IIRC, didn't Gigabet leave himself enough chips to play? I wouldn't say 1k is "enough" here.

[Hand_Crasher]

I fold this preflop, anyone else?

[Gramps]

If you're going to call the resteal, just push PF instead. Often times the best play is the least fancy one. There could be valid reasons for stealing and calling the resteal loose too, but it's a very fine line, and you're probably going to make many more mistakes (like this one) than it's worth.

[jonkeponke]

Gigabet dillema applies to MTTs not SNGs.

Unless I have absolutely no clue what it is.

.....fold the hand btw. raising pf isn't bad, but fold to the reshove.

[donkeykong2]

if you wanted to call, why didnt you just push?

[Finnisher]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd like to see the math on the 35% and -2.6% numbers.

[/ QUOTE ]
Folding is 20.5%, call/win is 34.11%, call/lose is 9.18% (just plug the stacks after the different outcomes of this hand to an ICM-calc). JTs has about 35% equity vs the sort of range SB is probably shoving here. So the EV of calling is .35*34.11 + .65*9.18 = 17.9 which is 2.6 less than folding. That's the same thing as a -2.6% call in SNGPT.

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry, I'm stubid. What are you really saying, in English (or Swedish )

[/ QUOTE ]
I guess it's sort of implied $EV odds. Calling is -EV in a vacuum but taking future hands into the equation calling might be +EV. We'd just have to win extra $EV when we get the big stack on the bubble to overcome the immediate -EVness, in this case we'd have to outdo the ICM numbers by an extra 2.6%-points to make the call profitable. Since we probably won't outdo ICM with the 1k stack after losing (at least not by much), we have to gain the extra when we win and have the big stack on the bubble. But if we gain extra only when we win, which is 35% of the time, we have to gain 2.6%/0.35 = 7.4% on avg after winning the hand.

So the new "implied" EVcall = 0.35*(34.11+7.4) + 0.65*9.18 = 20.5 which is also the (immediate) EVfold -> call=fold. But there's no way we can bully the bubble to make an extra 7.4% and calling really isn't an option, at least without considering meta-game and the possible EV-gain even further in the future by calling loose.

This is even more confusing now with the implied [censored] and all cos it kinda assumes that ICM=truth when actually the implied values are the real values. There just isn't a calculator for that [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[Slim Pickens]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No, not really.

[/ QUOTE ]

Er what did I miss Slim? Admittedly, I haven't checked the math, but Finnisher is surely good enough not to screw it up?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm saying no to the OP. I didn't check the math but it seems like it should be about right. It's a bad spot to put yourself in and I'm saying there's no way you'll make up 2.5% or whatever when you win compared to the opportunities presented if you fold.

[Pudge714]

The two problems with this (outside of being massively -CEV)
1. You are in an awful chip position if you lose.
2. If you win stacks aren't very good for pwning because there aren't any massive shorties and villains can still call with like AJ because they don't get bubble implications.

[Shillx]

Don't [censored] yourself over and shove PF. I'm shoving much much deeper then this. JTs is huge in this spot.