Contention of Snyder's "Very Short" hands

[MattHH]

Let me first start off by saying that I read Snyder's PTF book and think it is a very good book. However, I was reviewing Snyder's "Very Short" preflop hands and I found what may be an error. He defines very short as 11-20 big blinds.

Snyder recommends you raise or reraise all-in with 77+ any two face cards, and KT. However, he doesn't mention Ax which holds up better than all of the combinations of face cards (other than pairs). If you are going to reraise all in you are usually going to be against one or two opponents and it seems to me that even A2o would be better than KQs.

Maybe this is just a lesson in taking all books advice with a grain of salt or maybe I am missing something... [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[JesseB_11]

While A2 is indeed a favourite over KQ. KQ has more equity against pairs while A low is 70/30 dog against them

[LCposter]

I haven't read the book, but based on your post, I definitely disagree with his suggestion. Many two face card hands are ok for trying to steal in an unopened pot, but are not very good for a re-raise, because of domination. For example, if you re-raise with QJ, and the original raiser has AQ, KQ, AJ, or KJ, you're in bad shape. I would rather re-raise with a hand like 76s (assuming that you think there is a good chance the original raiser will fold) so that if called, you likely had two live cards and most of your straight cards are still live too.

But domination is also why Ace-rag isn't very good. If someone calls, it is likely with a good ace (AK, AQ, AJ) or a pocket pair. Ax doesn't fair well against either one. Against a better ace only your rag is live, and against the pocket pairs, pairing your rag usually doesn't help. At least with two face cards you're flipping against pairs, and there is a better chance you're not dominated (i.e. KJ v. AQ, etc.)

It's not an exact science, because you have to look at the stack sizes, who's stealing/passive, your image, etc. but generally the best hands in these situations are 66+/AT+/KQ. These aren't enough hands, of course, but I'd recommend expanding that range with smaller pairs and suited connectors and one-gappers rather than weaker As, Ks, and Qs.

[Pokerfarian]

Hand 0: 68.171% 66.71% 01.46% 1370726508 30018660.00 { 77+, ATs+, KQs, AJo+, KQo }
Hand 1: 31.829% 30.37% 01.46% 624000972 30018660.00 { A2o }

Hand 0: 61.085% 56.55% 04.53% 367986128 29478038.00 { 77+, ATs+, KQs, AJo+, KQo }
Hand 1: 38.915% 34.38% 04.53% 223733316 29478038.00 { KQs }

Hand 0: 67.853% 67.24% 00.62% 1395377760 12780492.00 { 77+, ATs+, KQs, AJo+, KQo }
Hand 1: 32.147% 31.53% 00.62% 654373704 12780492.00 { KTo }

Hand 0: 67.390% 67.10% 00.29% 519359440 2216248.00 { 77+, ATs+, KQs, AJo+, KQo }
Hand 1: 32.610% 32.32% 00.29% 250169472 2216248.00 { 76s }

Conclusions: KQs >> A2o against a fairly typical tightish range. Random broadway cards like KTo do similarly to A2o. Reasons: A2o is dominated by all Ax that are calling you, KQ does better against AJ-. KQ/KT also do better against pairs. A2 does better against KQ/KJ but there aren't many of them. 76s is overrated by some people & doesn't do much better than A2, partly because domination isn't as super bad is it seems & partly because 76s is in such bad shape against overpairs. It's still a decent restealing hand though.

Finally, don't take the "always" 'resteal' with 11-20BBs with these hands approach. There are many situations (tight villains whose range just crushes you, villian being slightly too short for you to have FE, villian opening for 4x so he's never folding if you shove 12BB, etc) where it's just wrong. I don't have the book but from extracts I've seen & discussions there does seem to be a lot of debatable points in this sort've area. But he is definitely right in that KQs>A2o.

[CobraGoat]

Who is this Snyder and what is this book you speak of?

[levAA]

Arnold Synder "The Poker Tournament Formula" - is a recipe-book for tournaments with fast increasing blind structures - such as turbos.

http://www.amazon.com/Poker-Tournament-F...7715&sr=8-2

There have been some discussions about this book in the books-forum. I read it and didn't like it, cause it teaches a very rigid play. Still for a beginner, who plays turbos it may be quite useful.

[helter skelter]

[ QUOTE ]
I was reviewing Snyder's "Very Short" preflop hands and I found what may be an error. He defines very short as 11-20 big blinds.

Snyder recommends you raise or reraise all-in with 77+ any two face cards, and KT. However, he doesn't mention Ax which holds up better than all of the combinations of face cards (other than pairs). If you are going to reraise all in you are usually going to be against one or two opponents and it seems to me that even A2o would be better than KQs.



[/ QUOTE ]

He says that with this size stack, you are close to the exit door. He describes these as stronger than average hands and to raise or re-raise allin regardless of the activity in front of you. Presumably A rag is not a stronger than the average hand.

I have a problem with this advice too, especially with the re-raising part, because with the marginal face card hands, you are basically behind if you are called, and you are likely to be called. But I also think it applies to Ace rag. Ace rag has become my least favorite hand, since it seems to usually be called by a pocket pair or big A.

Another problem is the structure. According to his chart, the online turbos (5 min rounds) would fall under the no skill catagory and not be worth playing because they are too fast (ie, crapshoot).

The online 15 min round would be medium, so you would apply his strategy 80% supposedly. That leaves 8-12 min rounds being the perfect structure to apply his strategies. I play on Stars, so I only see a few tourneys with 10 min rounds.

You didn't say how fast the tourney was you are playing in, but I'm guessing he might say you shouldn't be playing in the turbos, and if you are in a medium or slow tourney, you would adjust the starting hands accordingly.

There is much more that can be debated about in his book, but I am just addressing this specific question here. I am still experimenting with his advice, myself.

[Pokerfarian]

Strategy really shouldn't/should be affected very little by the speed of the blinds, which is why despite not having read Snyder's book it really doesn't sound great. Shoving in situation (x,y,z) is either +EV or -EV whether the blinds will be 1 zillion/2 zillion or 1/2 in 20 minutes

[helter skelter]

In a nutshell, Snyder says it does matter because the likelihood of you seeing a better hand than the one you are holding before getting short-stacked or blinded off depends on how fast the tourney is.

[MattHH]

Thanks for the responses. I guess what is missing in the book is the "why" of the hands he suggests. The "what" is there, but not the "why". I need to find a book that has the "why" in it. I have the Full Tilt book and the Harrington books, but I just got them so havent read them yet. Hopefully that will help.