Colin Moshman Pushing Tables

[stevi3p]

if this table is assumed to apply when there are at least 5 or 6 left in the tournament and against "average opponents" who all have you covered then i can see the value in them as a guiding principle (presumably these caveats are made clear in the book). I suspect most STTFers already have a pretty good intition around this, although I find the focus on suited Kings and suited connectors very thought-provoking and may suggest I have a leak.

[ QUOTE ]
I will be looking to expand/improve on this table, for future editions or simply to have as a useful chart for STTFers. So feedback on any aspect of these tables is quite welcome.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think it would be useful to have a separate set of tables for the bubble being very specific re: other players' stack size and calling tendancies - it is here where push/fold decisions are (a) more complicated and (b) more important. Clearly this would have to be example-driver rather than comprehensive but could still be useful. I would find it helpful to have this available at a glance rather than have to run SnG Wizard each time to get more intuition.

Thanks

Steve

[Slim Pickens]

I'm a little lost in the 3 BB pushing table. Should I assume 22+ and all suited connectors are in that button range as well as what's mentioned?

[IFoldPktOnes]

[ QUOTE ]

These tables are certainly not absolute, since other relevant factors (most importantly opponent calling ranges) are not considered in these condensed tables. Instead I just wanted to give a basic guideline for the hands you should be looking to push when short-stacked at various positions.

I will be looking to expand/improve on this table, for future editions or simply to have as a useful chart for STTFers. So feedback on any aspect of these tables is quite welcome.


[/ QUOTE ]
I agree that any pushing tables can only be used as rough guidelines, so I shouldn't have been so picky above. Just looking at the above range I would suggest more medium cards.

Something like {22+,A2s+,K4s+,Q6s+,J7s+,T7s+,96s+,86s+,75s+,65s,5 4s,A7o+,KTo+,QTo+,JTo} for a 30% range (this is based off the assumption callers need >=50% equity).

[Collin Moshman]

Hi Guys,

Slim, the 22+ omission in the the 3 BB pushing section is a definite error -- thank you for pointing that out.

Stevi, I agree that the bubble deserves its own section, and probably near-bubble as well (e.g., 5 players, but one is miniscule-stacked).

Perhaps we could create a sticky using the book tables as a template to work from, then allowing posters to expand/modify for conditions such as (near-)bubble and other situations where calling ranges are believed to be particularly wide/narrow. I will ask 2+2 if putting these tables up on STTF is valid, i.e., no copyright issues.

Thanks for all feedback so far.

Best Regards,
Collin

[Slim Pickens]

There may be a few other similar omissions in the tables. You might want to take a look to make sure nothing at the bottom of your intended ranges got left out. The top end should be obvious though and it's probably safe to assume informed readers can figure that out.

I think the idea of creating default "push tables" is fairly silly. We have the tools (SNGPT/SNGWhiz, lots of ICM calculators, and PokerStove) such that even a beginner can make simple push/fold decisions the most accurate way. There's really no substitute for putting opponents on calling ranges and seeing if a particular push is +$EV as those ranges change, your hand changes, and the limiting stack size changes.

[Jan]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the idea of creating default "push tables" is fairly silly. We have the tools (SNGPT/SNGWhiz, lots of ICM calculators, and PokerStove) such that even a beginner can make simple push/fold decisions the most accurate way. There's really no substitute for putting opponents on calling ranges and seeing if a particular push is +$EV as those ranges change, your hand changes, and the limiting stack size changes.

[/ QUOTE ]

But can you do this while at the table? I find there really isn't enough time during the play of a hand to enter in stack sizes, push/call ranges, etc.

Or am I missing something?

[ymu]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the idea of creating default "push tables" is fairly silly. We have the tools (SNGPT/SNGWhiz, lots of ICM calculators, and PokerStove) such that even a beginner can make simple push/fold decisions the most accurate way. There's really no substitute for putting opponents on calling ranges and seeing if a particular push is +$EV as those ranges change, your hand changes, and the limiting stack size changes.

[/ QUOTE ]

But can you do this while at the table? I find there really isn't enough time during the play of a hand to enter in stack sizes, push/call ranges, etc.

Or am I missing something?

[/ QUOTE ]
Well that's the point really. It's not easy to do the maths at the table - if it was then we could use tables to do it for us ...

Whether or not a push is good depends on so many things, and the only way you're realistically going to be able to make that judgement at the table is to practice away from it. Take a random hand and work out the correct pushing range, then change stack sizes or calling ranges and do it again. The tables might be a helpful jumping off point, but they can't tell you how to adjust for the conditions.

[Slim Pickens]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the idea of creating default "push tables" is fairly silly. We have the tools (SNGPT/SNGWhiz, lots of ICM calculators, and PokerStove) such that even a beginner can make simple push/fold decisions the most accurate way. There's really no substitute for putting opponents on calling ranges and seeing if a particular push is +$EV as those ranges change, your hand changes, and the limiting stack size changes.

[/ QUOTE ]

But can you do this while at the table? I find there really isn't enough time during the play of a hand to enter in stack sizes, push/call ranges, etc.

Or am I missing something?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the tables make good examples. It's also my opinion that too many parameters go into even simple push/fold calculations to make it possible for a human to play profitably from charts. The pushing tables are a good way of showing how changing one parameter, like position, changes the ideal pushing range. Assuming the exact conditions used to generate any one table are accurate enough to be used generally in-game is assuming way too much.

[Rhett]

My playing ability improved dramatically after I sat down and made tables like this. I was much sloppier, however. I always just estimated what top percent of KS hand rankings you need to push in certain situations. At low level sngs, you see situations where people should push any 2 cards, but routinely fold. You also see situations where people should push the top 50% roughly, but will only push the top 5%. Understanding these tables will stop someone from making drastic mistakes routinely like that.

I think that Colin suggested, and it would be an incredible resources to make more elaborate tables with calculations explained.

[curtains]

tables seem ok but Q9s should almost certainly be ranked higher than K4s.