I like big stacks and I can't not lie

[shaundeeb]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think there are many good spots for that DJK but image how many even better spots there will be with our newly founded 35bb stack with a great laggy image.

[/ QUOTE ]

When you say great spots do you mean like opening more/stealing or getting paid off on our big hands? If we call here and showdown 25o, I would think we would get repopped even more than usual on our mp/lp opens, which would hinder our ability to utilize our 35 bb stack. I do agree that we will get paid off more than usual on our big hands, but I'm not sure if that is enough to justify taking this significantly -cEV gamble.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I thought that the best part with a 35-40bb stack is it's perfect for 4bet shoving. Which I do a lot.

[shaundeeb]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
adanthar I took like 25 seconds before calling doing quick math in my head so they def know it wasn't a misclick.

[/ QUOTE ]
There is something wrong with your math then.

[/ QUOTE ]

as I stated earlier I concluded it was slightly -Cev like a very small margine and yes this sounds donkish but I think it deserves some merit with a hand like this as I don't think any of them ever have 22-55 in thier range the coldcallers that is so I think it's even more likely my hand does slighly better then pokerstove calcs dictate. and math can't solve for the future only playing soo many tourneys you get a feel for whats right and I felt this table my ev of a 30-35 bb stack at this stage is huge. If I fold here the chances of me getting to that stacksize any time soon is slim to none. By the time I get my stack to that level the blinds will have gone up once or twice and what would of been a 30-35bb stack is now 15-20. Taking an early gamble will pay off exponetially at this inflection point of a tourney.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
He said often with myself on stars and other sites my name is shaundeeb pt stats mean little because people know how nutty I can be and play back at me lighter then normal. If I ever was an unknown on a site like stars I would really like to know the advantages to it since I've been told by soo many they prefer playing as an unknown whether live or online.

[/ QUOTE ]

I love my account name so much

[MLG]

shaun,
i agree with the fact that at certain points there is a 2nd order value to chips, i started a thread about it that's in the anthology. I also agree with Sklansky though that there are certain chips stacks when short where each chip you have is worth more than 1 chip because it is easier to get your chips in with an edge with those stacks. I just don't think this is even close to a situation where the first factor outweighs the second. In theory though I think its a very interesting topic/question that is poorly represented by this hand which is pretty much pure spew.

p.s. Theoretical issues like these are why I still find tournaments incredibly fascinating.

[betgo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
adanthar I took like 25 seconds before calling doing quick math in my head so they def know it wasn't a misclick.

[/ QUOTE ]
There is something wrong with your math then.

[/ QUOTE ]

as I stated earlier I concluded it was slightly -Cev like a very small margine and yes this sounds donkish but I think it deserves some merit with a hand like this as I don't think any of them ever have 22-55 in thier range the coldcallers that is so I think it's even more likely my hand does slighly better then pokerstove calcs dictate. and math can't solve for the future only playing soo many tourneys you get a feel for whats right and I felt this table my ev of a 30-35 bb stack at this stage is huge. If I fold here the chances of me getting to that stacksize any time soon is slim to none. By the time I get my stack to that level the blinds will have gone up once or twice and what would of been a 30-35bb stack is now 15-20. Taking an early gamble will pay off exponetially at this inflection point of a tourney.

[/ QUOTE ]
As I said, your math was way off. This is not slightly cEV-. If you had 52s it would be slightly cEV-.

[agrffrod]

[ QUOTE ]
adanthar I took like 25 seconds before calling doing quick math in my head so they def know it wasn't a misclick.

[/ QUOTE ]

You took like 4 seconds. Def didn't timebank. FWIW.

Also I think you're overestimating my range here, I'm getting called by one of the other 3 in the pot like 3/4 the time. People in 100r don't fold.

[djk123]

I don't think anybody ever included 22-55 in their ranges tho when doing the calcs to begin with.

[betgo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
adanthar I took like 25 seconds before calling doing quick math in my head so they def know it wasn't a misclick.

[/ QUOTE ]

You took like 4 seconds. Def didn't timebank. FWIW.

Also I think you're overestimating my range here, I'm getting called by one of the other 3 in the pot like 3/4 the time. People in 100r don't fold.

[/ QUOTE ]
I know everyone says that the 100r is such a tough tournament, but I have done very well in it playing real solidly for the first 2 1/2 hours. There is a lot of bad LAG play, similar in some ways to low buyin online rebuys. I think OP's play on this hand is an example of the bad loose play you see.

I don't think getting another caller is that detrimental to OP's cEV, but I agree it happens most of the time. I think it is expected that OP needs something between a top 60% and top 20% hand to call, although no one expects ATC as played, so OP's call is not going to deter anyone from calling.

[shaundeeb]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think anybody ever included 22-55 in their ranges tho when doing the calcs to begin with.

[/ QUOTE ]

Im saying for the coldcallers the whole more likely 2or 5s left in deck.

[Todd Terry]

[ QUOTE ]
I can't tell if people are joking or not in this thread, but this is just spew. Assuming the other 3 players folded 100% of the time, we'd need like 29.7% equity, but we dont have enough equity against any reasonable range. Also, realistically UTG is going to call a certain % of the time. Say utg is opening 22+,ATs+,AJo+,KQ and calling 99+,AQ+. He'd be calling just under half of the time, and we only have 17-18% vs utg's range and a top 10% hand for the other guy. Also, when utg calls, he is only adding 2080 chips to our pot, but drastically reducing our equity.


[/ QUOTE ]

If these opening and calling ranges are reasonable for UTG, which they seem to be, then shoving ATC from the button is hugely +cEV (+527), assuming no other callers (which seems relatively safe here):

Folding 53.4% of the time, Calling 46.6%
Random vs. {99+, AQ+} = .276

cEV = .534 (2700+450) + .466 (.276*(1800+450+6920)+.724(-6920) = 527

That is why I gave the squeezer a much wider range than most of you are willing to, and why I think Shaun's play is slightly, rather than significantly, -cEV.