Am I a Fish 2?

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What site has players so bad that it down to final 2 at 75/150 blinds?

Made up HH?

[/ QUOTE ]
lol, good eye!

[/ QUOTE ]
Which sites have 15 player SNGs, and opponents who would politely say they disagreed with your play after a bad beat? This sounds like a home game, and some home games have blinds which increase slowly.

[tacticaltal]

I'm pretty good HU using the strategy you speak of. However, I can't get over that $650 raise PF. Player B called that huge raise, so I gotta give him credit for a big pair or at least two big cards. I'm not sure I'd re-raise all in after that big raise from player A with AK or AQ, but I would have w/ the KK, but not all are like me. On the other hand, if the KK re-raises all in PF, that may allow player A to get awy from the hand, so the slow play may be correct when you consider that any A or K HU is a significant advantage most of the time.

[zycon]

[ QUOTE ]
What site has players so bad that it down to final 2 at 75/150 blinds?

Made up HH?

[/ QUOTE ]

$hit...i was wondering the same thing.

So what site are you playing on OP?

[Albert Moulton]

[ QUOTE ]
You're heads up with a 4:1 chip advantage and position so raising there is not out of the question preflop, you hit the flop so there's no way you getting off that hand. No shame int he way you played it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this entirely.

[Muppet Man]

keep playing like this......

so where do you play what your nic

hah hah

[Rek]

This is a beginner’s forum and I am amazed at the responses in favour of the play here.

You are heads up with a huge chip lead. Yes, be aggressive but the last thing you want to do at this stage is double up the opponent with a hand like 47 (please, please , please don’t tell me “yeah but it was soooooted").

Putting in a raise initially is ok (and just ok – with the blinds so small compared to your stack, you are asking for trouble with hands like that). You have now met resistance and you need to reconsider your strategy. Ending up with all your chips in here is madness.

You were obviously behind after he pushed. The continuation bet you chucked in here I don’t like. At worst he was holding 2 overcards to the board and with his chip stack is likely to push and hope to hit. I wouldn’t even want to give him that chance.

To him your actions just look like the big stack being aggressive with a continuation bet. Him coming over the top with say AK/AQ is possible because he might have you beat with that holding. If you were going to bet at all after the flop then push it all in (I don’t like this either but if you are then going to call his all-in bet then you have already decided all the chips are going in). At least with you going all in it does put his tourney life on the line for a call.

Math plays a huge part in poker but in tourney poker sometimes it is right to fold even if you have the odds for a call. This is 1 example. As I said, you were a huge chip leader at heads up stage and you are trying to justify a very marginal play (to say least) on the math aspect. You do not want to be doubling him up here when there is absolutely no need for this play. PICK A BETTER SPOT. This is just dreadful play at this stage with the chip stacks, blind levels and the change in the likely outcome of the tourney should you double him up.

You got extremely lucky whether or not the math was marginally correct. Bear this in mind or not, I don’t care because I want all my opponents to play like you did if the same situation occurred.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]

Math plays a huge part in poker but in tourney poker sometimes it is right to fold even if you have the odds for a call.


[/ QUOTE ]
Right, although that is still a mathematical issue. See the independent chip model (ICM).

[ QUOTE ]
This is 1 example. As I said, you were a huge chip leader at heads up stage


[/ QUOTE ]
No. It is a common misconception that the big stack should play differently when heads-up, but this is wrong. When there is a prize for second place, and there are several players left, then the value of chips is sublinear, so you might need 52-55% to risk busting out to try to double up. However, when you are heads up, the value of the chips is essentially linear. You should not be risk averse with any stack size.

Again, if you play to accumulate chips, you will win with at least the probability equal to your share of the chips. If you have 1000 out of 10,000 chips, you will win at least 10%. To hold you to that 10%, the player with 90% of the chips needs to play to accumulate chips, and not sacrifice chips to sit on the lead.

[ QUOTE ]
I don’t care because I want all my opponents to play like you did if the same situation occurred.

[/ QUOTE ]
If you disagree with the play, what is your plan to exploit it? Flop top pair and get paid off? That's a nice plan, but you flop top pair or better quite infrequently, so you will lose a lot of chips while waiting. When you do get top pair, you won't always get called, and when you do, you will often lose to a better hand or to a draw which hits.

[Rek]

pzhon, the guy had 47. You want my strategy here? fold or play a little aggresive. If you hit resistance then fold. And this definately takes into account the table dynamics.

I am not saying be risk adverse or that you need top pair. I said be aggresive but be prepared to fold. Seriously, if you are advising beginners to push 47 then be all in after that flop that is just bad advice. You must, must, must take into account the chip stakes and the danger here. To be honest, I don't actually mind the play if he was the short stack.

Big stacks should definately alter their play heads up. You need to be aggresive but you need to know when you are beat and you need to be able to fold. If you are playing 47 like that then you might as well play anything and get all in.

I play mainly SnG's at $30 level. I have played in excess of 12,000 games and constantly am at 10% ROI. I am not the best by a long way and you can always learn at this game. Indeed you may have better results than me but I do know how to play a SnG at all the stages.

I only post here to offer my advice. As I said you can take it or leave it. But getting all in like that with 47 you will damage your ROI.

[GrumpyB]

I have found this to be one of the most fascinating threads on here - and that says a lot as there are a lot of great threads here. So OK, I'm a noobie, with very little HU experience, but this seems like a good spot to check if I've really understood the Sklansky-Chubukov numbers.

There seems to be a common view that after player B called the $650 raise PF you have to give him credit for a big pair or two big cards at least. But, if I have understood the SC numbers properly [and that's a very big IF - they are as confusing as hell] player B, with a stack of 4500 and a pot of 1000 heads-up only needs a hand with a SC value greater than 2.25 to go all-in [(4500/1000) / 2 - *is that right?* ] for it to be worth an all-in.

That takes us down to our favorite hand, 72o which has an SC of 2.24. In fact the only hands with an SC of less than 2.24 are 52o, 62o, 42o and 32o.

But then again, the SC number does not tell you that you HAVE to go all-in when the numbers are right, but [if I remember what is written in NLTAP correctly] - "just don't fold". So if player B has read NLTAP there are a lot of hands he could be calling with here other than a big pair or two big cards.

OR - should you only think this way when the 1000 in the pot comes from the blinds and antes - and not in response to a PF raise?

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]

OR - should you only think this way when the 1000 in the pot comes from the blinds and antes - and not in response to a PF raise?

[/ QUOTE ]
The most important missing assumption in your attempt is that the SC numbers assume that your opponent starts with a random hand. That's valid when your opponent has only posted the blinds, but not when your opponent has chosen to raise as opposed to folding or limping. The raiser's hand is no longer random.

[ QUOTE ]
So if player B has read NLTAP there are a lot of hands he could be calling with here other than a big pair or two big cards.


[/ QUOTE ]
I think you arrived at the right conclusion with an incorrect argument. If your opponent will only call a 4.3 BB raise (less than twice the size of the pot) with two big cards (let's say JT or higher) or a pair 77+, that's 15.7%, less than 1 hand in 6. Such a player is weak, and you should steamroll him by raising a lot, over half of your hands. Proper play is to call or reraise with a lot of hands like Q8 that don't look very good when you play full ring and have to beat 8 other players, but are good enough heads up.