Final 4 22$ Deep Stack - Correct Shove As Shorty?

[foxxer 0]

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t5000 (4 handed) Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)BB (t137188)UTG (t758260)Button (t111746)Hero (t67806)Preflop: Hero is SB with 2, Q. 2 folds, Hero raises to t67306is this shove ok, or was the SNG-thinking kicking in at a bad time?BB called a 10 BB AQs UTG shove of mine the level before that with a lil more than twice my chips with A9o.

[Aces Rule 0]

Since you still have over 13BB, I'd prefer a 3xBB bet since it'll work as a blind steal almost as often as a full shove and has more implied strengh than a shove since a strong hand seeks action while a weaker one tries using full FE by pushing all-in. Q-7 is the computer hand - that is the mid-point in hand stregh so even suited Q-2 is far from the mid point.The biggest drawback to a standard raise is that the BB may call with less than optimium cards since he has position so having a T-P in the BB is prefered scenero. This may call for a second shot on the flop putting your stack in VERY short territory. BBs that are more prone to calling a standard pf raise may be better pushed off the pot with a shove but being the shorty, they'll call you sooner or later with more moderate holdings. As always - it depends. And depending on the playing style of the BB, a limp, standard raise or shove may all be right and don't forget to calculate your table image into the decison - although once you're the shorty your previous image may be ignored as the sharks start circling for a kill.

[copernicus 0]

fold

[Aces Rule 0]

fold

Why? B/c stealing is bad or something? He's shorty at a 4-player table and he's taking a shot at a mid-stack in the BB - the cards don't matter (they really don't) but he does have a face and a flush draw to fall back on vs a random hand.I don't believe it Cops but your comments tends to discount blind steals or the need to play the player and not just the cards and that's just too conservative for tournaments. BTW, a fold would be a viable option depending on how aggressively the BB defends his blinds.

[foxxer 0]

there werent a lot of blind battles, since it seldomly got folded to me.with a bigger stack, i got a raise in around 3 times, the BB called it twice before the FT.at the FT, i i shoved it...once or twice i think when either BB or i was short. (w/o getting a call)one key factor in my thinking was that since the CL will call a push or shove when i raise from the button/co with a much more wider range, the player i have the most FE against is the BB - since id have to go through the CL to get to the third player. also, almost every pot was raised/limped, so it being folded to me at that point was a rare occurence (understandably).since we are down to 4, i would lose 9500 every 4 hands. i figured with the constellation as it is, the likelyhood of finding a decend hand i can shove over a limper or a raise is slim.so i guess i still should have waited at least another round before pushing basically ATC in that spot?

[Aces Rule 0]

so i guess i still should have waited at least another round before pushing basically ATC in that spot?

I'll steal with ATC given the right table dynamics and player(s) in the blinds but I'm not a big fan of pushing ATC unless I'm so short stacked it's the only play left in my gamebook - meaning I'm 10 or less BB and the blinds are coming to eat me up anyway! At just over 13BB you're getting close to that play and if you have a reasonable feel that the push will fold the BB the card really don't matter but if you're not not so sure then try a 3x steal. But in either case you should have at least a 50/50 read that the BB will fold. If he aggresvely defends you can't have that assurance so limp (or fold) and play the flop - if he'll let you!

[copernicus 0]

Why? B/c stealing is bad or something? He's shorty at a 4-player table and he's taking a shot at a mid-stack in the BB - the cards don't matter (they really don't) but he does have a face and a flush draw to fall back on vs a random hand.I don't believe it Cops but your comments tends to discount blind steals or the need to play the player and not just the cards and that's just too conservative for tournaments. BTW, a fold would be a viable option depending on how aggressively the BB defends his blinds.

A steal should have some hot and cold equity if its called. Q2s is a bottom 30% hand, and if BB is any good at all he has a very wide range for calling. With deeper stacks BB was willing to call with A9o. Youre getting looked up a lot here, its not the bubble of a SnG.

[copernicus 0]

I'll steal with ATC given the right table dynamics and player(s) in the blinds but I'm not a big fan of pushing ATC unless I'm so short stacked it's the only play left in my gamebook - meaning I'm 10 or less BB and the blinds are coming to eat me up anyway! At just over 13BB you're getting close to that play and if you have a reasonable feel that the push will fold the BB the card really don't matter but if you're not not so sure then try a 3x steal. But in either case you should have at least a 50/50 read that the BB will fold. If he aggresvely defends you can't have that assurance so limp (or fold) and play the flop - if he'll let you!

Raise/folding is awful with 13bbs. You need a hand that has about 40% equity so that you can call a push back, and Q2s doesnt have it against any reasonable range.

[Aces Rule 0]

A steal should have some hot and cold equity if its called. Q2s is a bottom 30% hand, and if BB is any good at all he has a very wide range for calling. With deeper stacks BB was willing to call with A9o. Youre getting looked up a lot here, its not the bubble of a SnG. Raise/folding is awful with 13bbs. You need a hand that has about 40% equity so that you can call a push back, and Q2s doesnt have it against any reasonable range.

A steal is a bluff and while it's nice to have hot/cold equity with a stealing hand it is not necessary!!! Do you actually apply math b4 attempting a bluff? I know the popular concensis is to have some hot/cold equity for a positional steal but the application of that kind of math almost ensures the bluffer is going to HAVE to call a push-back with the worst of it b/c he's priced the bluff in!! - That's would be awful imo especially for a shorty! Personally I like the idea of being able to fold a bluff if challenged. However since you feel that kind of math is called for I did a calculation on Poker Stove for Qs2s vs a random hand and got this:2,097,572,400 games 0.047 secs 44,629,200,000 games/secBoard: Dead: equity win tie pots won pots tied Hand 0: 50.169% 48.10% 02.07% 1008970414 43361423.00 { Qs2s }Hand 1: 49.831% 47.76% 02.07% 1001879140 43361423.00 { random }I think your arguements are better suited to short stack strategies than to a positional steal and may very well apply to the OP but foxxer's play was blind vs blind and looked to me like a blind steal and not a shorty looking to dbl up. Looking at both points I can appreciate that the dividing line between the 2 would be very narrow in this case but I was making my comments from a steal/bluff point of view. Lastly, when I say I'll bluff with ATC the reader should not ignore the qualifiers I build in b4 doing so - like the "table dynamics" and the "players I'm attacking". I have a very agressive steal strategy but it's still a long shot from being a maniac. And while ATC will have a 30% hot/cold equity vs most hands I don't consider it smart (tournamanet) poker to risk a lot of chips and short my stack simply b/c I have the correct odds to call with the worst of it.

[copernicus 0]

A steal is a bluff and while it's nice to have hot/cold equity with a stealing hand it is not necessary!!! Do you actually apply math b4 attempting a bluff? I know the popular concensis is to have some hot/cold equity for a positional steal but the application of that kind of math almost ensures the bluffer is going to HAVE to call a push-back with the worst of it b/c he's priced the bluff in!! - That's would be awful imo especially for a shorty! Personally I like the idea of being able to fold a bluff if challenged. However since you feel that kind of math is called for I did a calculation on Poker Stove for Qs2s vs a random hand and got this:2,097,572,400 games 0.047 secs 44,629,200,000 games/secBoard: Dead: equity win tie pots won pots tied Hand 0: 50.169% 48.10% 02.07% 1008970414 43361423.00 { Qs2s }Hand 1: 49.831% 47.76% 02.07% 1001879140 43361423.00 { random }I think your arguements are better suited to short stack strategies than to a positional steal and may very well apply to the OP but foxxer's play was blind vs blind and looked to me like a blind steal and not a shorty looking to dbl up. Looking at both points I can appreciate that the dividing line between the 2 would be very narrow in this case but I was making my comments from a steal/bluff point of view. Lastly, when I say I'll bluff with ATC the reader should not ignore the qualifiers I build in b4 doing so - like the "table dynamics" and the "players I'm attacking". I have a very agressive steal strategy but it's still a long shot from being a maniac. And while ATC will have a 30% hot/cold equity vs most hands I don't consider it smart (tournamanet) poker to risk a lot of chips and short my stack simply b/c I have the correct odds to call with the worst of it.

No, hot and cold equity isnt necessary, but it is certainly preferred, and is very dependent on what range you put BB on for calling.Your math showing 50/50 against ATC is of course, irrelevant. The math that is necessary is BB's calling range and your equity against that range, plus your equity for a fold. The break even point is at about villain folds 55% and calls 45%. However, even at 65% folds from villain your chip equity is only about 2200, or 3.5% of your bet. Since this is an MTT with a steep payout structure your cash equity is even less (chips you win arent worth as much as chips you lose).Q2s is just too weak, even for a "bluff".

[Poker Addict 0]

I don't always speak "Copernicus". Or even think the math through like that. But I do think in terms of risk reward when I am looking at a steal like this. If we go 3x then we are raising it to 15k. We have 2500 in the pot already so another 12500 or ~20% of our stack to win ~6500 plus antes. We can't call a shove. If we are flatted we are forced to play a horrible hand out of position. All we are hoping to get is the dead money already in the pot.Now that being said, I will make that play on occasion depending on how the table is going. I play by feel as well. But I believe by the math it is a fold. You are just not getting the right reward for your risk. And if you nailed this flop with something you are comfortable with - a made flush, two pair or trips - will you be able to get any more out of him? If you hit top pair/bottom kicker are you going to get stacked? I think it's better to keep that 12.5k in my stack so I can steal with better hands and as the blinds are going to go around fast, have enough chips left for FE when I get to shove/fold time.

[Aces Rule 0]

No, hot and cold equity isnt necessary, but it is certainly preferred, and is very dependent on what range you put BB on for calling.Your math showing 50/50 against ATC is of course, irrelevant. The math that is necessary is BB's calling range and your equity against that range, plus your equity for a fold. The break even point is at about villain folds 55% and calls 45%. However, even at 65% folds from villain your chip equity is only about 2200, or 3.5% of your bet. Since this is an MTT with a steep payout structure your cash equity is even less (chips you win arent worth as much as chips you lose).Q2s is just too weak, even for a "bluff".

Ahhh, but it isn't MY math - I just ran the senero on Poker Stove just to see how well it would stand up to a random hand. Shame on me but when I'm looking to attempt a bluff, I don't do any math on equity or hand selection, I just look at the chances of a steal taking the blinds preflop without a fight - table dynamics and people calculation! My bad I guess - When you say Q2s is just too weak, even for a "bluf" you've shifted the enphasis of the bluff to the playing the cards rather than playing the player. So long as the target folds my 7-2o was as good as AA but if he plays back, he'll never know for sure what I had b/c I'm getting outta Dodge. That's the nice thing about bluffing rags vs a 'playable hand', - you're less likely to gamble (b/c the odds are 'right') and lose your stack if the steal doesn't go as planned. You simply muck the hand!In the OP, foxxer shoved his whole stack and had no exit strategy. If it was his intention to play the Q2s as a short stack looking to 1.)steal the and/or 2.) dbl up or bust then I would agree this was a pretty weak hand to make that play BUT if it was a play just to steal the blinds I think he risked too much with the all-in when a 3x will work often enough and his cards didn't matter one iodda.

[foxxer 0]

i play by feel a lot myself, especially in deep stack tournaments. the math doesnt always suggest the best approach to a certain situation. that said, i do agree, in retrospec, that the shove in that spot was bad.the problem was, that i knew the BB wasnt quite solid, making a lot of questionable plays, meaning he will call rather softly in that spot. i wasnt absolute sure of it, but i was leaning towards that assumption.but it was also only either a fold or a shove as he showed a propensity towards calling raises without a good postflop plan. (open limping K6 UTG 5 handed, calling a raise OOP, playing for the whole stack on K-high flop for example)however, i thought he was the type of player who calls a lot of raises that would essentially put him or the opponent all in without him realising it, but has a huge discrepancy when it came down to calling ranges of actual all ins. but: since he will still call more often than not, it was a bad play.even though i only had my stack all in (effectivly) 2-3 times during the last 8 hours, he prolly didnt even take notice of it so i couldnt count on me having more FE than usual either.

[copernicus 0]

Ahhh, but it isn't MY math - I just ran the senero on Poker Stove just to see how well it would stand up to a random hand. Shame on me but when I'm looking to attempt a bluff, I don't do any math on equity or hand selection, I just look at the chances of a steal taking the blinds preflop without a fight - table dynamics and people calculation! My bad I guess - When you say Q2s is just too weak, even for a "bluf" you've shifted the enphasis of the bluff to the playing the cards rather than playing the player. So long as the target folds my 7-2o was as good as AA but if he plays back, he'll never know for sure what I had b/c I'm getting outta Dodge. That's the nice thing about bluffing rags vs a 'playable hand', - you're less likely to gamble (b/c the odds are 'right') and lose your stack if the steal doesn't go as planned. You simply muck the hand!In the OP, foxxer shoved his whole stack and had no exit strategy. If it was his intention to play the Q2s as a short stack looking to 1.)steal the and/or 2.) dbl up or bust then I would agree this was a pretty weak hand to make that play BUT if it was a play just to steal the blinds I think he risked too much with the all-in when a 3x will work often enough and his cards didn't matter one iodda.

No, I didnt shift it to playing the cards vs the player, by putting the player on ranges of calling/folding hands you ARE playing the player. The math (ie the cards) is the tie breaker for whether a play is +EV GIVEN YOUR READ on the player.My math was for the all in as in the OP. At 13bb raise/folding isnt an option, so we are then concerned with villains range for calling vs pushing back, and our equity if he calls...we already know we're behind if he pushes back.assuma a 2.5x raise and put him at 50% folding, 15% pushing back and 35% calling. Our equity from the fold is 4750, our equity from the push back is -1675. the hot and cold equity for the 15-50% range is about 45:55, and the money going in is maybe 30% all in and 70% just the 2.5x or 30k on average. So your equity for that scenario is about -3k...ie break even. Again given the declining value of chips, break even isnt good enough.Poker Addict, obv you cant do this kind of math at the table. The point really is that with 13bbs, if youre going to play the hand, you need around 40% equity against his calling/pushing range, unless you know hes an extremely tight caller. Thats something like Any pair, any Ace, and two Broadway, suited connectors down to 98s, and suited one gappers down to J9s,Kxs down to K6, Qxs down to Q9.Another way of looking at Q2s here is to extend the SAGE tables out. Q2s has a Power Index of 28, which would be a push at 9 bbs or less (and pushing is better than raising from the above math). At 13 bbs the PI would be around 32 or so, which fits pretty well with my "40% equity range" above.

[Poker Addict 0]

Ahhh, but it isn't MY math - I just ran the senero on Poker Stove just to see how well it would stand up to a random hand. Shame on me but when I'm looking to attempt a bluff, I don't do any math on equity or hand selection, I just look at the chances of a steal taking the blinds preflop without a fight - table dynamics and people calculation! My bad I guess - When you say Q2s is just too weak, even for a "bluf" you've shifted the enphasis of the bluff to the playing the cards rather than playing the player. So long as the target folds my 7-2o was as good as AA but if he plays back, he'll never know for sure what I had b/c I'm getting outta Dodge. That's the nice thing about bluffing rags vs a 'playable hand', - you're less likely to gamble (b/c the odds are 'right') and lose your stack if the steal doesn't go as planned. You simply muck the hand!In the OP, foxxer shoved his whole stack and had no exit strategy. If it was his intention to play the Q2s as a short stack looking to 1.)steal the and/or 2.) dbl up or bust then I would agree this was a pretty weak hand to make that play BUT if it was a play just to steal the blinds I think he risked too much with the all-in when a 3x will work often enough and his cards didn't matter one iodda.

I just think you are too deep to do this right now. I don't think you are in the ATC short stack ninja mode or the ATC abusing short stacks or a money bubble to give you the added protection.

[Aces Rule 0]

I just think you are too deep to do this right now. I don't think you are in the ATC short stack ninja mode or the ATC abusing short stacks or a money bubble to give you the added protection.

Fair enough and given foxxer's last post where he wrote:however, i thought he was the type of player who calls a lot of raises that would essentially put him or the opponent all in without him realising it, but has a huge discrepancy when it came down to calling ranges of actual all ins. but: since he will still call more often than not, it was a bad play.even though i only had my stack all in (effectivly) 2-3 times during the last 8 hours, he prolly didnt even take notice of it so i couldnt count on me having more FE than usual either. I would never attempt a steal from this player with the short stack. Vs this type of player I'm playing short stack strategy and not positional steals which would be seldom given that stack size since blind steals are better suited to competitive and larger stacks than short ones. The fact that I would attempt a steal with a short stack at all would be heavily dependant on the table dynamics and a suitable target that would give me better than 60% chance to take it down without a fight and the cards be damned. There is most definately risk in any bluff (mathamatically suitable or not) and more so b/c of being a shorty but if the situation looked right, I'm not about to give up an opportunity to improve my chips. I seldom consider "added protection" other than mucking if played back at or maybe taking another short on the flop (not too likely with that short a stack). However, I would have completed with the Q2s unless the BB had shown himself to defend aggressively more times than not vs a limp. I just don't see me ever shoving all-in with that hand even as a short stack strategy when there are other less costly options including limping or folding which I believe was the question first put in the OP

[Mercury69 3]

Initial thought: Horrible shove. Will read responses for logic determinators...Edit: I have not changed my initial read...Fold pre. Completing is just begging to get raised and shoving over top of a raise is tantamount to suicide in this scenario.All the math in the world isn't going to make me shove Q2s when I have 13BB's and I don't think it's nitty to say so. When 70% of starting hands (random) beat you and are actually only working with one card (the Q, as the deuce is fckn useless unless a flush comes, which is less than likely), then I think you are just asking for trouble. I'd much rather shove with 67off than Q2s, for example. Or even 96s...Anyway...

[GeneralGeeWhiz 0]

Since you still have over 13BB, I'd prefer a 3xBB bet since it'll work as a blind steal almost as often as a full shove and has more implied strengh than a shove since a strong hand seeks action while a weaker one tries using full FE by pushing all-in. Q-7 is the computer hand - that is the mid-point in hand stregh so even suited Q-2 is far from the mid point.The biggest drawback to a standard raise is that the BB may call with less than optimium cards since he has position so having a T-P in the BB is prefered scenero. This may call for a second shot on the flop putting your stack in VERY short territory. BBs that are more prone to calling a standard pf raise may be better pushed off the pot with a shove but being the shorty, they'll call you sooner or later with more moderate holdings. As always - it depends. And depending on the playing style of the BB, a limp, standard raise or shove may all be right and don't forget to calculate your table image into the decison - although once you're the shorty your previous image may be ignored as the sharks start circling for a kill.

Fold > Shove > Call

fold

thanks