|
|
#21
07-18-2007, 12:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Rainkhan and the 33 versus Alex Kravchenko
[ QUOTE ]
- Inflection points (nothing to do with Gigabet's theory which is mostly nonsense): if Hero loses, back down to M=10 and into the Orange Zone, loses flexibility For STT types, all of this means I would want a quite high minimum edge, even after ICM corrections, and I don't think 33 is there. [/ QUOTE ] How is Gigabets theory nonsense? He evolved tournament strategy beyond HoH I/II and most great tournament players seem to believe in it. ICM is far from a perfect model for MTTs. I'm not saying that block theory applies in this particular spot though. Anyways we agree it's a fold at least [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] 
|
|
#22
07-18-2007, 12:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Rainkhan and the 33 versus Alex Kravchenko
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] - Inflection points (nothing to do with Gigabet's theory which is mostly nonsense): if Hero loses, back down to M=10 and into the Orange Zone, loses flexibility For STT types, all of this means I would want a quite high minimum edge, even after ICM corrections, and I don't think 33 is there. [/ QUOTE ] How is Gigabets theory nonsense? He evolved tournament strategy beyond HoH I/II and most great tournament players seem to believe in it. ICM is far from a perfect model for MTTs. I'm not saying that block theory applies in this particular spot though. Anyways we agree it's a fold at least [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] Go read his post. It's a bunch of hand-waving that has a small kernel of truth at the core that he didn't even come close to expressing well, and has several ridiculous statements (e.g. moving up to the next "block" is equivalent to doubling up). He did nothing to "evolve" tournament strategy, good players understood the effects of inflection points and relative stack sizes before Gigabet, and his post did nothing but impress the masses because it sounded profound.
|
|
#23
07-18-2007, 12:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Rainkhan and the 33 versus Alex Kravchenko
[ QUOTE ]
ICM is far from a perfect model for MTTs. [/ QUOTE ] See the corrections I described above.
|
|
#24
07-18-2007, 01:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Rainkhan and the 33 versus Alex Kravchenko
I think Khan knew Alex's range is very big , he knew Rheme is tight and will only call him with a group A hand ( we also know he has a good read on him from the booth ) .
Pot odds Alex's range Practiclly last to act knocking out a player all these factors mae this more then a marignal play IMHO
|
|
#25
07-18-2007, 01:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Rainkhan and the 33 versus Alex Kravchenko
[ QUOTE ]
If Rahme really had AQ, how did he stop the blood from spurting out of his eyes? [/ QUOTE ] He was ridiculously tight for most of the FT. He probably would have folded AK here too.
|
|
#26
07-18-2007, 01:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Rainkhan and the 33 versus Alex Kravchenko
[ QUOTE ]
As pineapple says, I expected the early open from Kravchenko to be tight enough that I didn't think that 33's equity was going to be that great. [/ QUOTE ] I would think a good shortstack player should have a relatively wide range there. any pair, most hands with 2 face cards, some high suited connectors.
|
|
#27
07-18-2007, 01:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Rainkhan and the 33 versus Alex Kravchenko
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] If Rahme really had AQ, how did he stop the blood from spurting out of his eyes? [/ QUOTE ] He was ridiculously tight for most of the FT. He probably would have folded AK here too. [/ QUOTE ] Is it correct to fold AQ or AK there? Not berating his play, just curious to what you guys think.
|
|
#28
07-18-2007, 01:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Rainkhan and the 33 versus Alex Kravchenko
[ QUOTE ]
He did nothing to "evolve" tournament strategy, good players understood the effects of inflection points and relative stack sizes before Gigabet, and his post did nothing but impress the masses because it sounded profound. [/ QUOTE ] Those effects are of a "static" nature though, they don't take into account future hands. I think Gigabet was the first to point out a variety of dynamic effects that maybe should influence your decision making.
|
|
#29
07-18-2007, 01:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Rainkhan and the 33 versus Alex Kravchenko
Yeah and let's not forget the $10mil+ overlay for first. Massively top-heavy structure that rewards gambling to double up.
Btw - I am at work, but some SNG donk who knows what they're doing can make a custom structure file in SNGPT to get the ICM #s. Then run the whole analysis through Pokerstove with a) two way pot with an opening range for Kravchenko and b) three-way with a calling range for Rehme. I think we can safely put Rehme on something like TT+,AK there. JJ+/99+ for Rehme isn't going to make a giant difference in the final numbers I don't think. Then vary Kerchenko's range to see where breakeven lies. Finally add $10 mil to first and see what that does to the numbers.
|
|
#30
07-18-2007, 01:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Rainkhan and the 33 versus Alex Kravchenko
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] He did nothing to "evolve" tournament strategy, good players understood the effects of inflection points and relative stack sizes before Gigabet, and his post did nothing but impress the masses because it sounded profound. [/ QUOTE ] Those effects are of a "static" nature though, they don't take into account future hands. I think Gigabet was the first to point out a variety of dynamic effects that maybe should influence your decision making. [/ QUOTE ] Huh? You mean "I'm maniacal enough to get my money in with crap, so don't F with me, especially because I have 5 more chips than you?" Well, if that's your game, that's your game, I guess. Worked for Dario for quite a while in the ME.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
