KQs on button. Short stacked late in tourny.

[ArtMonkRules]

[ QUOTE ]
I feel like raising half you're stack might look stronger than a push and possibly less suspicious

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd say the opposite is true. Whether or not they are suspicious of your all-in, The fact that you went all-in is the final word. It is the truth. They have no opportunity to play back at you, and whether or not they may think you're stealing blinds, you've taken the ultimate initiative, and now all they can do is fold or call. Going all-in here gives you the most possible power and the highest chance to win this hand.

[BigZag]

Ok, so it seems pretty unanimous shoving is best here.

I'm not sure I understand why though. I feel like if I bet half my stack it looks equally scary to a2-a9o in the SB or BB or even perhaps more so (I'm assuming anything a10 or better will call). Given the specifics, a brand new table with new players who don't know me and I don't know them, wouldn't raising half my stack look much more like a very high quality hand that wants action instead of a desperate short stack that wants to steal the blinds?

The main range here that seems important against KQs is ace rag which is a possible calling hand against a shortstacked shove. I'm tempted to think that Ax would more likely call against a shove than a half stack bet in this precise spot.

I've seen a couple comments about +EV etc. If someone could please explain why shoving in this specific situation (taking the lack of reads etc. into account)has a higher +EV than raising only half stack, also assuming that I will go all in on the flop no matter what. Any help is obviously much appreciated...

[Rottersod]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, so it seems pretty unanimous shoving is best here.

I'm not sure I understand why though. I feel like if I bet half my stack it looks equally scary to a2-a9o in the SB or BB or even perhaps more so (I'm assuming anything a10 or better will call). Given the specifics, a brand new table with new players who don't know me and I don't know them, wouldn't raising half my stack look much more like a very high quality hand that wants action instead of a desperate short stack that wants to steal the blinds?

The main range here that seems important against KQs is ace rag which is a possible calling hand against a shortstacked shove. I'm tempted to think that Ax would more likely call against a shove than a half stack bet in this precise spot.

I've seen a couple comments about +EV etc. If someone could please explain why shoving in this specific situation (taking the lack of reads etc. into account)has a higher +EV than raising only half stack, also assuming that I will go all in on the flop no matter what. Any help is obviously much appreciated...

[/ QUOTE ]

The point you're missing is that you are trying to double up, not just steal blinds or get half a stack. You are hoping to get called by exactly the type of hand that did. Under 10BB is an insta-push and hope to double through.

edited to add: If you only bet half or less of your stack you may find yourself called by both blinds and your KQs doesn't stand up well in a multi-way pot.

[pped5700]

insta-shove. You should be shoving with less than 7x the PrF pot from LP, with your entire range of raising hands.

[Pokerfarian]

OP makes some fairly credible points & I certainly don't hate what is basically a go and go with KQs. Some players with call with Ax & fold flop, or some low PP and fold an Axx flop, or a few other good things can happen. But shoving is still higher FE imo, and your in such a horrid spot if they decide to SNG you & you have KQ high. Also metagame pretty much says you should be shoving your whole range (that your not folding) here.

[Jetpilot86]

Shove, then curse your bad luck, and shove next time too...

[PantsOnFire]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, so it seems pretty unanimous shoving is best here.

I'm not sure I understand why though. I feel like if I bet half my stack it looks equally scary to a2-a9o in the SB or BB or even perhaps more so (I'm assuming anything a10 or better will call). Given the specifics, a brand new table with new players who don't know me and I don't know them, wouldn't raising half my stack look much more like a very high quality hand that wants action instead of a desperate short stack that wants to steal the blinds?

The main range here that seems important against KQs is ace rag which is a possible calling hand against a shortstacked shove. I'm tempted to think that Ax would more likely call against a shove than a half stack bet in this precise spot.

I've seen a couple comments about +EV etc. If someone could please explain why shoving in this specific situation (taking the lack of reads etc. into account)has a higher +EV than raising only half stack, also assuming that I will go all in on the flop no matter what. Any help is obviously much appreciated...

[/ QUOTE ]
Most players will know that you betting half your stack is a commitment. Not many players bet 3.5BB and then fold leaving themselves with 3.5BB. Since players know this, they realize that you are not folding any flop.

So why would they call? Pot odds. You have 7.1K in chips and the pot is 400/800+800=2000. Say you bet 3K. For the BB, there is now 5000 in the pot and he needs to put in 2200 to call giving him 2.3:1 odds to call.

Now the pot is 7200 and you have 4100 left. For him to call a flop all-in (which you or any other normal player will be doing automatically), he will have 11.3:4.1 odds or 2.8:1 odds. He can assess the flop and either call with these great odds or fold if he feels he doesn't have the almost 25% equity he needs to make his call correct.

Basically, you are giving the BB an opportunity to make a correct call to your pf raise and either a correct fold or call to your inevitable flop all-in.

I can't do the math but I think you'll find if you took all the ranges of BB's hands and went through the scenarios, you would see that simply shoving pf would make more in the long run.

[BigZag]

[ QUOTE ]
Most players will know that you betting half your stack is a commitment. Not many players bet 3.5BB and then fold leaving themselves with 3.5BB. Since players know this, they realize that you are not folding any flop.

So why would they call? Pot odds. You have 7.1K in chips and the pot is 400/800+800=2000. Say you bet 3K. For the BB, there is now 5000 in the pot and he needs to put in 2200 to call giving him 2.3:1 odds to call.

Now the pot is 7200 and you have 4100 left. For him to call a flop all-in (which you or any other normal player will be doing automatically), he will have 11.3:4.1 odds or 2.8:1 odds. He can assess the flop and either call with these great odds or fold if he feels he doesn't have the almost 25% equity he needs to make his call correct.

Basically, you are giving the BB an opportunity to make a correct call to your pf raise and either a correct fold or call to your inevitable flop all-in.

I can't do the math but I think you'll find if you took all the ranges of BB's hands and went through the scenarios, you would see that simply shoving pf would make more in the long run.

[/ QUOTE ]

This argument is pretty convincing. In fact I'm now fully convinced my shove was correct. Thanks to everybody who posted.

[ArtMonkRules]

The reason that going all-in is more +ev than any other kind of raise is that it increases your fold equity. The blinds are big enough in relation to your stack that you'd much rather take the blinds down without seeing a flop than get called and leave it up to the board. If you bet less than everything and get called, you're pot committed whether you like the flop or not. Considering you're going to miss the flop 2 out of 3 times, Why take your chances with seeing it when you'll have no firepower once you get there?