AQ facing two all-ins in Stuper

[djk123]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
really easy shove

[/ QUOTE ]


waht? no it isn't!

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't use pokerstove here, but I'm pretty sure this is a shove. If I were in Jurollo's spot during the actual tourney, I would have shoved right away. UTG+1's range is pretty wide, and i don't think the caller necessarily has to have a monster. For UTG+1 let's say 44+,AT+,KJs,KQo. I highly doubt he's pushing tighter than that, but he could easily be pushing 22-33,KJo, and QJs. For the caller I'd say TT+,AK is a decent range. Don't we have at least whatever equity% we need to breakeven?

[registrar]

[ QUOTE ]
and i don't think the caller necessarily has to have a monster.

[/ QUOTE ]

I always think CC-er has a monster here, and I'm usually wrong. Misclicks, boredom and idiocy are all in his range.

Anyway, I don't think is the easy but it has to be some form of close so I'd personally err on the side of accumulation.

[curtains]

Hmm my initial instinct is to fold against random opponent.

We are still under 50% against this pretty loose range:

55+,ATo+,A8s+,KQs


Of course there are two opponents and some dead money in the blinds, but I'm really not so excited about this spot.

[bigbabyjesus]

Yeah.. MP's coldcall scared me a little bit, I think occasionally this can mean a big hand but not the majority of the time. I guess just ususally, some people have an instinct to flat call their monsters.

In these spots I am sometimes paranoid about bigger stacks left to act behind me and committing so much w/ AQ, although their calling range is super tight and the odds they have a calling hand is pretty rare.

I ended up mucking.. KTs for EP guy and A8o for MP (son of a ...)

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah.. MP's coldcall scared me a little bit, I think occasionally this can mean a big hand but not the majority of the time. I guess just ususally, some people have an instinct to flat call their monsters.

In these spots I am sometimes paranoid about bigger stacks left to act behind me and committing so much w/ AQ, although their calling range is super tight and the odds they have a calling hand is pretty rare.

I ended up mucking.. KTs for EP guy and A8o for MP (son of a ...)

[/ QUOTE ]


lololol owned

[djk123]

Well, after doing some math, it looks like I was waaaaay off. This is a clear fold.

135 in antes, 450 in blinds. Main pot is 5305 chips, and we have to call 2360. Side pot is 975,
and we have to call 975. So to breakeven in the main pot, we would need 30.7893% equity. We will always be losing money in the side pot since we never have 50% equity vs the callers range, which means we actually need more than 30.7893% equity in the main pot.

So i plugged some reeealy loose/optimistic ranges into pokerstove, and it wasn't even close.

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

108,810,452,520 games 150.878 secs 721,181,699 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 27.672% 26.75% 00.93% 29102121708 1007486922.00 { AQo }
Hand 1: 20.619% 19.61% 01.01% 21340794036 1094705670.00 { 22+, A7s+, K8s+, Q9s+, J9s+, T8s+, 98s, A8o+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo }
Hand 2: 51.710% 51.38% 00.33% 55902370440 362973744.00 { 99+ }

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, after doing some math, it looks like I was waaaaay off. This is a clear fold.

135 in antes, 450 in blinds. Main pot is 5305 chips, and we have to call 2360. Side pot is 975,
and we have to call 975. So to breakeven in the main pot, we would need 30.7893% equity. We will always be losing money in the side pot since we never have 50% equity vs the callers range, which means we actually need more than 30.7893% equity in the main pot.

So i plugged some reeealy loose/optimistic ranges into pokerstove, and it wasn't even close.

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

108,810,452,520 games 150.878 secs 721,181,699 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 27.672% 26.75% 00.93% 29102121708 1007486922.00 { AQo }
Hand 1: 20.619% 19.61% 01.01% 21340794036 1094705670.00 { 22+, A7s+, K8s+, Q9s+, J9s+, T8s+, 98s, A8o+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo }
Hand 2: 51.710% 51.38% 00.33% 55902370440 362973744.00 { 99+ }

[/ QUOTE ]

Never say never, looks like we do have 50+% against the callers range, but ok I think it's a bit results oriented and that folding is still fine without any info on the villain.

[djk123]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well, after doing some math, it looks like I was waaaaay off. This is a clear fold.

135 in antes, 450 in blinds. Main pot is 5305 chips, and we have to call 2360. Side pot is 975,
and we have to call 975. So to breakeven in the main pot, we would need 30.7893% equity. We will always be losing money in the side pot since we never have 50% equity vs the callers range, which means we actually need more than 30.7893% equity in the main pot.

So i plugged some reeealy loose/optimistic ranges into pokerstove, and it wasn't even close.

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

108,810,452,520 games 150.878 secs 721,181,699 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 27.672% 26.75% 00.93% 29102121708 1007486922.00 { AQo }
Hand 1: 20.619% 19.61% 01.01% 21340794036 1094705670.00 { 22+, A7s+, K8s+, Q9s+, J9s+, T8s+, 98s, A8o+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo }
Hand 2: 51.710% 51.38% 00.33% 55902370440 362973744.00 { 99+ }

[/ QUOTE ]

Never say never, looks like we do have 50+% against the callers range, but ok I think it's a bit results oriented and that folding is still fine without any info on the villain.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, i didn't even see the results post. I guess i should just go with my instincts because if i had been in OP's spot I would have shoved. Everyone's posts got me thinking i was way off lol.