$1050+50 Sng Hand History + Theoretical Question

[AMT]

[ QUOTE ]
umm, if IIII am raising, im not folding to a shove, so im definitely not shoving 55-88 or AT/AJ/KQ really on myself. though.. in the 1ks, everyone else is retarded, and will shove like J7o on the button here.. so its really hard to say what the 'tight/solid' regulars do. holla

[/ QUOTE ]



thats why i kind of take issue with this question...you have pineapple coming from a sound but all theoretical approach and i just dont think anyone would play like that in game at a 1k sng...on the other i cant justify calling retardedly loose and the "solid, tight" description could be a lot different than someone who describes me that way at a lower buy in sng...figured my range was a good enough medium to put an answer out there, but i guess the best answer is "give us more info n00b" [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[pineapple888]

[ QUOTE ]
sound but all theoretical approach and i just dont think anyone would play like that in game at a 1k sng

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not? And if people were deviating from theory regularly it would be pretty easy to observe that fact and pwn them, it's not like you are going to see 4-bets with J3o or whatever, it's still an STT.

[AMT]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
sound but all theoretical approach and i just dont think anyone would play like that in game at a 1k sng

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not? And if people were deviating from theory regularly it would be pretty easy to observe that fact and pwn them, it's not like you are going to see 4-bets with J3o or whatever, it's still an STT.

[/ QUOTE ]


i wasnt aiming to offend pete [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] i just meant that i dont know what a "tight/solid" regular is enough to appropriately asses his play with your take on it or raptors, and my range was the only thing i could come up with that a) came close to generating conversation based on the tangible, realistic ranges b) tried to answer the question even though it was quite difficult to answer because the answer of "we need more" is a much better one [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[speedyg]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would expect the two ranges you are asking for to be quite similar. Given the position of the raiser, the pusher might have legit hands like 66,AKo,AQs and some mix of medium suited connectors (but not too many). Given the odds, the original raiser might call with whatever legit hands he has in the pusher's range.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, no. See "gap" and "ICM". Throw in Harrington's zones for good measure. That is all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Getting better than 3 to 2 on the call, calling with approx. his range is not a bad rule of thumb. Are you accounting for the odds the original raiser is getting at all? Your posts seem to be ignoring them.

[pineapple888]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would expect the two ranges you are asking for to be quite similar. Given the position of the raiser, the pusher might have legit hands like 66,AKo,AQs and some mix of medium suited connectors (but not too many). Given the odds, the original raiser might call with whatever legit hands he has in the pusher's range.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, no. See "gap" and "ICM". Throw in Harrington's zones for good measure. That is all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Getting better than 3 to 2 on the call, calling with approx. his range is not a bad rule of thumb. Are you accounting for the odds the original raiser is getting at all? Your posts seem to be ignoring them.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I don't really understand odds and stuff, that's probably why I run bad.

[JSH06]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would expect the two ranges you are asking for to be quite similar. Given the position of the raiser, the pusher might have legit hands like 66,AKo,AQs and some mix of medium suited connectors (but not too many). Given the odds, the original raiser might call with whatever legit hands he has in the pusher's range.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, no. See "gap" and "ICM". Throw in Harrington's zones for good measure. That is all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Getting better than 3 to 2 on the call, calling with approx. his range is not a bad rule of thumb. Are you accounting for the odds the original raiser is getting at all? Your posts seem to be ignoring them.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I don't really understand odds and stuff, that's probably why I run bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

[pineapple888]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
sound but all theoretical approach and i just dont think anyone would play like that in game at a 1k sng

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not? And if people were deviating from theory regularly it would be pretty easy to observe that fact and pwn them, it's not like you are going to see 4-bets with J3o or whatever, it's still an STT.

[/ QUOTE ]


i wasnt aiming to offend pete [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] i just meant that i dont know what a "tight/solid" regular is enough to appropriately asses his play with your take on it or raptors, and my range was the only thing i could come up with that a) came close to generating conversation based on the tangible, realistic ranges b) tried to answer the question even though it was quite difficult to answer because the answer of "we need more" is a much better one [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

No offense taken (or intended, if my post seemed harsh, I didn't intend that), I just wasn't sure I agreed with your premise. Raptor seems to be saying pretty much the same thing as me, that both players should be pretty tight here, esp. given that OP gave that as a read.

[DCJ311]

[ QUOTE ]
umm, if IIII am raising, im not folding to a shove, so im definitely not shoving 55-88 or AT/AJ/KQ really on myself. though.. in the 1ks, everyone else is retarded, and will shove like J7o on the button here.. so its really hard to say what the 'tight/solid' regulars do. holla

[/ QUOTE ]

This is pretty much my opinion of the hand as well. I feel like in bigger buyin sngs that the raise to 300 with a total of 1500 (raising about 20% of one's stack) tends to be a sign that they are not folding to a RR. We can't assume the reraiser has 0 fold equity here, but clearly he has to be a bit tigher than normal.

As a sng player it's tough to find the 'breaking point' of a range in which to reshove. I personally think Raptor's range is about right. I can see reraising 88 or maybe even AJ in this spot but anything worse just seems bad. Another issue with the shove is that while the reraiser only stands to lose 1500, the problem with that is that it seriously devalues his remaining 300 chips after the hand, something that I don't feel people address often enough when judging when to make tough calls/allins.

Anyways the player in this hand had AJo and ran into the original raiser's AA. I had a disucssion with curtains about this hand and I felt like it was too loose a shove and curtains felt like it wasn't that bad partly due to metagame considerations. I'd prefer to let him expound on this if he wishes to.

However, I do feel like if you switch stack sizes and give the original raiser 1800 and the reraiser 1500 then I feel like reraising the AJo seems like a viable play, if that makes sense.

[curtains]

my point to DCJ311 was that if the button folds AJo here, and if the SB+BB play similarly, then its correct for the cutoff to raise to 300 with any 2 cards.

This is purely theoretical as in practice this isn't how things work out. However whenever you have a play, where if you don't make it, it allows your opponent to raise with any 2, I don't think you can say it's clearly a bad play, without any specific read on the players involved.

[AMT]

so what youre saying is, if you wanted to be completely results oriented, i guessed the right call of the reshove range based on reshovers AJ [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]


DCJ,

can you elaborate a bit on the stack size switch and your adjustment of ranges and play?