Heads I push, tails I fold ($22)

[45suited]

[ QUOTE ]
If they all call top 7% it's -0.2%, I refuse to ever give people credit for folding 88+ and AJ+, it just doesn't happen often enough!

[/ QUOTE ]

Neither am I! Put the bigstack on a maniac range. Put everyone else on loose, set EM at 30%, the push is neutral.

This push is actually slightly better if all stacks call at a loose range than if they all call at an average range.

Am I missing something?

[wiggs73]

well, here's the reply from the guy that doesn't own sngpt.

he says it's a fold. fwiw.

[tigerite]

I don't trust in that stuff man, I'd rather just put them all on the same ranges, I'm not interested if some range where they all call the same and big stack calls more is +$EV because you can't guarantee that, there are inbetween ranges that are -$EV and that's more than enough for me to just fold it.

[45suited]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't trust in that stuff man, I'd rather just put them all on the same ranges, I'm not interested if some range where they all call the same and big stack calls more is +$EV because you can't guarantee that, there are inbetween ranges that are -$EV and that's more than enough for me to just fold it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough. You're the man when it comes to this stuff.

But this is waaaaaay closer than an easy fold or an insta fold.

If you put them all on the same range of top 10% but add 22-44 to bigstack's range, set EM at 30%, it's -0.1%.

Not arguing with you, of course, but this is not an insta fold in my book. More like a questionable push. 77 would be a certain push.

Thanks as always for your input.

[jeffraider]

I'd most likely fold here, but I fully agree that it can be close. Look at the stack sizes!

[tigerite]

[ QUOTE ]


Fair enough. You're the man when it comes to this stuff.

But this is waaaaaay closer than an easy fold or an insta fold.

If you put them all on the same range of top 10% but add 22-44 to bigstack's range, set EM at 30%, it's -0.1%.

Not arguing with you, of course, but this is not an insta fold in my book. More like a questionable push. 77 would be a certain push.

Thanks as always for your input.

[/ QUOTE ]

For me it's easy just because I think there's a better spot is all. And also because you rate to have much better skill than the vast majority on the table still left. If the blinds were going up in the next hand or two I might push, that said. Maybe "really" easy was stretching it, I'll instead say "somewhat" easy [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

By the way all 10% was -0.3%.. and adding 22-44 is the exact perfect range for your hand lol. I'd never go with that kinda range to skew the results in my favour, that's just me, though. And yes, 77 is a push.

[microbet]

I think I agree with Tigerite and 45suited eventhough they seem to be arguing about it.

[45suited]

I think that a very interesting dynamic exists here because of the stack sizes.

One thing though is when you check out the stacks, say that the bigstack calls me (or overpushes, whatever).

The stacks behind (maybe not the shortstack, but for sure the two healthy stacked blinds) are way less likely to then call with hands that contain further overcards or even with 77-99.

I am only considering this from a risk of ruin standpoint.

For example, I push, bigstack calls or overpushes with AK, AQ, whatever. MOST players in the blinds (sitting on 20+BBs) will then fold AT-AJ, ATs, possibly 77-99. You get the idea.

So... putting them ALL on a certain range is a bit tough because a bigstack call or overpush gives me insurance vs possibly 77-99 and more likely vs ATs, AJ, KQ, KJs, KQs. In fact, if the bigstack calls or overpushes, I can take all of the above holdings out of the equation when it comes to the blinds.

The blinds (sitting on 20+BB but having no FE pre-flop vs bigstack even if he just calls) would be risking over half their stacks vs a bigstack as well.

This argues more for the push, IMO.