Beyond Sklansky-Chubukov

[Gonso]

[ QUOTE ]
The SC ratings are flawed unless you are playing against a random hand. You should look up the rating of your hand against his calling range, which is what you are trying to do. This will determine your range to go allin with.

[/ QUOTE ]

They're not flawed, but you can exploit your opponent better if he is not playing perfectly. Figure out what his range is, and apply what you know correctly. Problem here is playing "perfectly" though, at least as asked:

[ QUOTE ]
However, the question I was asking was what should our all-in range be if we wanted to maximize our EV (assuming our opponent plays perfectly like you described).

[/ QUOTE ]

... I take it we're talking typical short stack jam/fold strategy only.

The equity issues above are balanced out by the frequency which an opposing player is able to correctly call a given hand.

[ QUOTE ]
This is why a hand like A9o does well in SC rating, even though it is dominated most of the time. 45s is a better allin hand imo while it does no do very well in SC ratings. This while A9o has a rating of 81.7 45s had only 4.85.

[/ QUOTE ]

A9 is a vastly, vastly better pushing hand than 54s, because almost any hand is correct to call 54s - it doesn't require much money in the pot for all hands to correctly call. The problem here is that you're putting a random hand on a range. If you're jamming from the SB you'd be treating his holding as a random hand anyway. If you saw a card or some kind of tell where you could guess a range like AA-KK, AK-AJ, KQs, then you already know you can do better than just working by the SCs. Otherwise, you could just as well see how A9o and 54s do against hands like 95, 55, 77, and seeing how much better A9o does.

Obligatory mention of SNG PT goes here. IF you're in this SS jam/fold scenario and can put ranges on opponent, mess with SNG PT.

[mvdgaag]

Maybe the word flawed was wrong, I'm not a native speaker. I mean they are not very suitable to use in many cases.

Here is why, and it also answers why I can put my opponent on a range.

I'm shortstack and he isn't, but I can still hurt him enough to call with descent hands. Therefore he will not call me with a random hand, he will choose to call me with a certain range of hands so it is correct to put him on a range. If he folds it does not matter what you hold, only if he calls. I think this range he calls with does (relatively) better against a weak ace, compared to a suited connector, since a weak ace will be very likely dominated while a suited connector is not. Same goes for weak kings or many not so great broadway hands.

In other words; the SC numbers are correct to use against a random hand, but they ignore that he is only going to call with a certain range and fold the rest. Therefore it is better to push with hands that do better against his plausible calling range than with hands that have good SC numbers. Many times these hands will be quite similar, but easily dominated hands, small pocket pairs and suited connectors will differ imo.

GL

PS: SNG PT is part of poker tracker? I'm using poker office, I might switch because I miss some features I'd like in PO...

[Gonso]

[ QUOTE ]
In other words; the SC numbers are correct to use against a random hand, but they ignore that he is only going to call with a certain range and fold the rest.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's all true - but with SC's, his calling range doesn't make a difference at all. You can correctly jam any hand if the effective stack is less than the SC number. Even if you are woefully behind when you've been (correctly) called with an easily-dominated hand such as A3o, it will be outweighed by all of the times your opponent cannot (correctly) call. He just won't get the hands he needs to call often enough, at least when talking long term probability.

SNG PT = Sit N' Go Power Tools, it's a stand-alone program, and it's perfect for what you're talking about. If you can put your opponent on a calling range, say you know his endgame tendencies, you can plug them in the calculator. http://sitngo-analyzer.com/feedback.html, you can use a limited version for free, but full version is worth every penny.

[RobNottsUk]

[ QUOTE ]
In other words; the SC numbers are correct to use against a random hand, but they ignore that he is only going to call with a certain range and fold the rest.

[/ QUOTE ]
They assume your opponent has perfect knowledge, and sees your cards, so will only make +ve EV calls!

It is opposite of random hand. It tells you something but not what you want exactly. It says, Push In with A9 is more profitable than folding, even if your opponent knows you have A9 not AK or AA..QQ.

So how can you do better by removing hands, based on a presumed calling range, that's adapted to an imperfect basket of hands?

Remember, S-C number only applies to SB v BB pushes, it says to divide for BSB play, open raising into 2 blinds.

If you're open raising on a steal from mid pos or cutoff in a tourney, then your risk running into many more Aces, that ppl call with, than SB v BB. So the general point, that fold equity play benefits from being a few % better, if you're called by big Aces and big pairs is true.

[Shandrax]

The problem with SC numbers is that they do not formulate a complete strategy that also includes bluffing.

[mvdgaag]

Gonso: Thanks for pointing out SNG PT! I'll have a look. I see how you can play a game theoretical perfect game with SC numbers, but it is very easy to figure out a better strategy by putting him on a calling range.

RobNotss: I see how you can put the big blind on a random hand and therefore assume a random hand. But still, when he calls your hand does matter when he folds it doesn't. That range is different. If perfect information for your opponent is assumed, yes a game theoretical optimal strategy would be best. But same as above; luckilly we can use better than optimal strategies, because our opponents are not seeing our cards and therefore making mistakes.

[RobNottsUk]

The opponent actually looks at your cards, before deciding what action to take! And it is still correct to move in pre-flop, so your hand does matter, and his perfect play, still offers you a profit.

How can you do better, by removing hands from S-C, when you have all the advantages SB v BB of BB not seeing your cards and making mistakes?