Chip Ferguson’s Turbo SNG Article

[Collin Moshman]

http://www.twoplustwo.com/magazine/c...guson0607.html

This is really a great article, because even the most “mundane” situations are not dismissed as beneath discussion. The reason this is so important is that the optimal play in SNGs is often counter-intuitive due to the distinctive 3-places-paid structure.

This also seemed like a particularly tough game, with many players surviving into the high blind phase. Anyway, let’s look at a couple of hands Chip discusses.

Hand 21: Solid discussion of why a low-mid pocket pair should rarely be played for a raise out of position – calling and raising are both problematic, and so Chip correctly advocates a fold via process of elimination.

Hand 28: This hand leads to my one question for Chip: even though none of your opponents are regulars, does this mean you aren’t trying to get reads as the SNG progresses (either manually or with software)? I agree that shoving is out here, if for no other reason than ICM-type calculations show it to be -Equity. A smaller raise is also pretty weak. But unless I believe the BB to be an aggressive player, I will usually open-complete with effective stacks of ~13 BB’s holding a suited queen.

A slightly similar phenomenon occurs with Hand 37. Generally I’m folding there too, but then Chip introduces the hypothetical of a UTG limp. Now if UTG limps in this spot, reads are very important. Against a tight-aggressive player, say 9/7/x, I would find a UTG limp very suspicious and probably just fold. Against a loose-passive player, shoving looks good. And against a total unknown, I might raise to 650 or so. That is why even basic reads can be so helpful.

Hand 63: Solid description of unexploitable play. This is a very important concept, so make sure you understand what Chip means when he calls a shove unexploitable.

Hand 74: I think Chip is being a little tough on himself here – I actually think this is a pretty solid shove. First, the SB is absolutely capable of folding to this shove, which – as Chip notes – is huge. The reason the SB might fold is empirical; risk-averse players who just want to money are capable of making some pretty horrible bubble folds. Also, the BB will usually fold all but a premium hand here even when the SB calls (this instance being an exception). And so even when the SB calls and wins, the new stack distributions are just fine because the bubble’s still going on and the two potential bubble boys are directly to Chip’s left making for many profitable future pushing opportunities. There are some meta-concerns when people see you pushing a trash hand and widen their calling ranges a little, but few players have the courage to act on these reads to the extent that they’ll call for all their chips on the bubble (unless very short-stacked) even if they think your pushing range is in the vicinity of 100%.

Anyway, I think this is a great article and would recommend any serious SNG player give it a read.

Best Regards,
Collin

[abel]

Wow, hand 63 seriously just gave me some much needed education.

As for hands 61 and 74, his explanations definitely made sense, but I still have problems with them. Hand 61: sure the pot odds were there, but I see more value in keeping the 800 chips for fold equity later on rather than calling an open EP push when it's still 6 handed and we're more likely than not behind. I think we're seeing a decent pocket pair here that has us pretty f'd in the b enough to warrant a fold.

Hand 74 was very sketchy. He understands it's a very marginal situation, so why gamble with such a nice chip lead over the two? We know that any competent BB would be calling super tight IF the SB folds, but we also know that SB needs to be calling here with almost ATC as 40% of his stack is already in the pot. I know because of desire to get ITM, there is the occasional, horrible fold by the SB here which gets us what we want, but gambling here with our chip advantage is silly.

If we fold, however, we retain our 5000 chips, and one of three very favorable things happen: [1] SB rightfully pushes and doubles up and their respective stacks are 1200/1700 (2/3 BBs to our 8) and we keep a huge chip advantage over both of them; [2] SB pushes and BB bubbles him out (most favorable); [3] the least likely, but SB folds and is left with 380 chips and is all in within 3 hands

I feel like those 3 situations are much more desirable than pushing with such a horrible hand and possible giving the SB a chance to triple up.

Besides those two hands, I really loved the rest of the hand history. Loved how he left every hand in and explained so much. Great hand history review, wish I could read more like it [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Crane]

[ QUOTE ]
Hand 68: In this hand I was dealt As Td (2,790) in the small blind. Supadphat (1,800) shoved from UTG+1 and I shoved. He showed 9c 9d and the board came Ks Tc 8c 4d Qd and I was up to 5,090 chips.

Commentary: Easy shove. The villain pushed 3BBs, and we have a very good hand in ATo. He has to be shoving tighter than 55+,A9o+,A7s+,KJo+,KTs+,QJs for this to be a fold, and he is DEFINITELY shoving wider than that range. We were lucky to win this flip, and I was very surprised to see him turn up a real hand, rather than a Q9o type hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

How do you know the hand ranges in these examples?

[EnderIII]

Overall agree that it was informative and well written. However, I am troubled by the analysis of hand 23 in which the author has AKo. Shouldn't the other players have loose calling requirements since they are getting 2-1 on their money? Are people actually so tight with resteals at that level that KQo ought to be a fold?

Editted to add -- love the commentary on hand 55, i say this all time, well whenever its appropriate [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[DevinLake]

[ QUOTE ]
How do you know the hand ranges in these examples?

[/ QUOTE ]

He did an ICM based caluclation to determine what range the villain would need to be shoving for this to be +EV. ICM models the equity you have in a tournament and you compare your equity if you fold, to the equity calling has.

The FAQ in the single table tournament forum has more info on this topic.

[DevinLake]

[ QUOTE ]
Overall agree that it was informative and well written. However, I am troubled by the analysis of hand 23 in which the author has AKo. Shouldn't the other players have loose calling requirements since they are getting 2-1 on their money? Are people actually so tight with resteals at that level that KQo ought to be a fold?

Editted to add -- love the commentary on hand 55, i say this all time, well whenever its appropriate [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have my ICM programs on this computer, but in tournaments pot odds don't tell the entire story. At 2-1 you would need to have 33% equity in the hand, which you usually will unless chip is a super nit.

But, by ICM you will need better than this. I'm not sure how much, but with the number of players it won't be huge. Somewhere between 35-40% I'd guess. So, you do need better equity here than in a cash game or MTT.

[z32fanatic]

[ QUOTE ]

Hand 28: This hand leads to my one question for Chip: even though none of your opponents are regulars, does this mean you aren’t trying to get reads as the SNG progresses (either manually or with software)? I agree that shoving is out here, if for no other reason than ICM-type calculations show it to be -Equity. A smaller raise is also pretty weak. But unless I believe the BB to be an aggressive player, I will usually open-complete with effective stacks of ~13 BB’s holding a suited queen.

A slightly similar phenomenon occurs with Hand 37. Generally I’m folding there too, but then Chip introduces the hypothetical of a UTG limp. Now if UTG limps in this spot, reads are very important. Against a tight-aggressive player, say 9/7/x, I would find a UTG limp very suspicious and probably just fold. Against a loose-passive player, shoving looks good. And against a total unknown, I might raise to 650 or so. That is why even basic reads can be so helpful.

Best Regards,
Collin

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all, thanks for the nice words, I really appreciate it.

As for the Q2s hand, completing is fine I think, it's just kind of an awkward stack size because I have 15bb. If I had more I could definitely play it for implied odds, if I had less I could push it. While I don't think unknown people will shove on my completion that often, completing here into a regular is not a great idea.

The AJ hand is a little trickier if they limp, just because it does look like a trap. Looking back at it I'm pretty undecided whether it's a good push or not, so I would probably default fold. If he limped from anywhere but UTG I'd be way more inclined to shove. FWIW the only hands he would trap here with are AA and sometimes KK (even though I'm sometimes shown AK here as sick as that is).

[NU Star]

Really good stuff. You should write more for the mag.

Hands like hand 61 are definitely something I need to work on as far as my ICM instincts. 84o in game while multitabling I probably fold there, but I'm not surprised that a call is correct. Hand 74 w/ 74o I think I'm folding 75% pushing 25%, seems like a marginal spot either way, so glad to see you feel it is marginal. Hand 28 w/ Q2s, I can understand why a limp would be ok, but I'm just never messing around with this type of hand in SNGs. I agree with you that the stack is a little too big to fold. I really hate 15BB stacks.

In a nitty side note, you seem to mix up 2-1 and 3-1 a lot.

[T3rminator4]

cool, good read

[EnderIII]

Thanks for the explanation, i appreciate it.