$16: Wacky awful bubble hand - Page 3

LordTacohead · #21 07-03-2006, 06:47 PM

I'm not invested in being right here, and I'm perfectly prepared to believe that I made a bad call. But does this equity modeling work if one player is essentially immune to the blinds? That's the unbalancing factor here that even makes this a question, because I'd never think of making this call otherwise. Can you really just ignore the effect that it has?

AMT · #22 07-03-2006, 06:53 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not invested in being right here, and I'm perfectly prepared to believe that I made a bad call. But does this equity modeling work if one player is essentially immune to the blinds? That's the unbalancing factor here that even makes this a question, because I'd never think of making this call otherwise. Can you really just ignore the effect that it has?

[/ QUOTE ]

no, but your problem is that no matter what the big stacks pushing range is here, youre at least -1.0 EV in SNGPT to make this call....and to be honest, though i dont know the full effect of shorty being kept on life support by BB:

1) its very possible other villain will get pissed and spite call and allow you to cruise into 2nd
2) you will undoubtebly pick up a hand that is more warranted to call here than QJo in this spot.
3) i dont think any situation resembling the big stack keeping disconnected shorty alive can account for 1% of -EV (often even more -EV) in making this call. that said, i still think its a fold.

Flight_Risk · #23 07-03-2006, 06:53 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not invested in being right here, and I'm perfectly prepared to believe that I made a bad call. But does this equity modeling work if one player is essentially immune to the blinds? That's the unbalancing factor here that even makes this a question, because I'd never think of making this call otherwise. Can you really just ignore the effect that it has?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is one of the main reasons why I liked the call, even though it hurts to make it.

Flight_Risk

LordTacohead · #24 07-03-2006, 07:14 PM

I like the second point the best. What would you call with here? If QJo is no good, I can believe that, but I think Sykes's range is too narrow and doesn't fully take the situation into account. As to the third point, I agree that we really don't know what effect this has on the math. If we did, this would be a really easy question, wouldn't it?

Sykes · #25 07-03-2006, 07:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I like the second point the best. What would you call with here? If QJo is no good, I can believe that, but I think Sykes's range is too narrow and doesn't fully take the situation into account. As to the third point, I agree that we really don't know what effect this has on the math. If we did, this would be a really easy question, wouldn't it?

[/ QUOTE ]

My range is too narrow? How is "He's pushing any 2 cards" narrow? BTW, if you're -EV to call a any 2 range here, you shouldn't be calling regardless of the guy being disconnected.

LordTacohead · #26 07-03-2006, 07:30 PM

Like I said, I'm perfectly willing to believe that QJ is no good here. But proper calling ranges change dramatically given the situation. If we were ITM and shorty was gone, this would be a good call. If we were five-handed and shorty was active, this would be a bad call, but significantly less bad than this call appears to be at first glance. If I were the shorty in this case, this call would be very slightly positive. This is not your average bubble situation, and I don't think that hitting up SNGPT here will give you the optimal range. You don't think that this is a peculiar play dynamic that should have some effect on our calling range?

Sykes · #27 07-03-2006, 07:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Like I said, I'm perfectly willing to believe that QJ is no good here. But proper calling ranges change dramatically given the situation. If we were ITM and shorty was gone, this would be a good call. If we were five-handed and shorty were active, this would be a bad call, but significantly less bad than this call appears to be at first glance. If I were the shorty in this case, this call would be very slightly positive. This is not your average bubble situation, and I don't think that hitting up SNGPT here will give you the optimal range. You don't think that this is a peculiar play dynamic that should have some effect on our calling range?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm going to say it again:

1. QJo is so bad of a call, it doesn't matter that shorty is disconnect and big stack can keep him alive.
2. You can pick up a better hand later.
3. BB might get frustrated and spite call with hands like A5o/KTo and get busted before you do.

Shillx · #28 07-03-2006, 07:35 PM

Don't call. You are not attacking this problem from the right angle as calling and doubling up doesn't help your cause. You have to starve the disconnected player if you want to improve your equity. So you fold this hand, fold the next hand and limp UTG. Play the blinds and now you are at 635 while the DC is at 320. Limp UTG + play blinds and you are at 135 while the DC player is all-in for 20 chips in the BB. That is the really the only way to overcome this situation.

LordTacohead · #29 07-03-2006, 07:37 PM

Gah, we must be talking past each other. I'm not defending QJo. I'm referring to the calling range you provided earlier of 88+, no AK. That's the range that I said seemed too tight, and that's why I say that you're ignoring the effect of the big stack protecting the short stack. That's the SNGPT answer, and it seems too tight to me. If I'm wrong about that, can you explain why? That is, why the big stack protecting the short stack would have no effect whatsoever on proper calling ranges.

microbet · #30 07-03-2006, 07:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Even though it hurts, I like the call. I've actually been in this spot several times.

Flight_Risk

[/ QUOTE ]

you're the worst. why should anyone listen to you?

[/ QUOTE ]

He's the worst?!?!? Hah!