Tehtoe Has Said Something About A Ft

[Tehtoe 3]

Never said it was. Probability wise , it makes perfect sense..but only from a mathematical perspective. Though, 65% of the time will result in profit, where as 35% of the time will result in failure, if failure is to occur, you have a 35% chance of successfully escaping it. Simplifying it to 1/3, 1 out of every 3 times will result in a failure, you then have a 1/3 chance to save your money . The profit gained through the villain folding is only 20k whereas the loss is 130k. Which is very similar to someone asking you to put up 130 dollars for the 66% chance of winning 20, if you happen to hit that 33%, you now have a chance to win 130 dollars, but only with 33% certainty. Not too many people would take that offer. And in the long run, it wouldn't pay off. Even if you were to win 5 (which would be unlikely) times in a row, making a profit of 100 dollars, lose once and you lose everything you earned plus another 30 dollars.The reason why I feel as if a large raise seems much more sensible, is because in the same situation, if someone were to offer you the deal to put your 45-50 dollars up for a 66% chance to win 20 dollars. The risk/reward ratio is much better and has a much higher chance of delivering a positive profit. Even if you were to lose, you still would be in good shape to continue. I'm not saying the raise was a bad move, I just don't understand the point of shoving all in. I thought poker was mainly based off of Risk/Reward ratio. To me, the risk in this situation seems much higher than the reward.

lol, what?Your math is pretty much way off here, and are you suggesting we raise/fold vs a 12 bb stack here? That's super bad and exploitable.

[Naslund44 0]

Never said it was. Probability wise , it makes perfect sense..but only from a mathematical perspective. Though, 65% of the time will result in profit, where as 35% of the time will result in failure, if failure is to occur, you have a 35% chance of successfully escaping it. Simplifying it to 1/3, 1 out of every 3 times will result in a failure, you then have a 1/3 chance to save your money . The profit gained through the villain folding is only 20k whereas the loss is 130k. Which is very similar to someone asking you to put up 130 dollars for the 66% chance of winning 20, if you happen to hit that 33%, you now have a chance to win 130 dollars, but only with 33% certainty. Not too many people would take that offer. And in the long run, it wouldn't pay off. Even if you were to win 5 (which would be unlikely) times in a row, making a profit of 100 dollars, lose once and you lose everything you earned plus another 30 dollars.The reason why I feel as if a large raise seems much more sensible, is because in the same situation, if someone were to offer you the deal to put your 45-50 dollars up for a 66% chance to win 20 dollars. The risk/reward ratio is much better and has a much higher chance of delivering a positive profit. Even if you were to lose, you still would be in good shape to continue. I'm not saying the raise was a bad move, I just don't understand the point of shoving all in. I thought poker was mainly based off of Risk/Reward ratio. To me, the risk in this situation seems much higher than the reward.

raise/fold 12bb's, for the lose sir.

[rawkodd 0]

ugh, I hate when people use letters instead of words... like "u" for you and "r" for are.Makes you sound retarded imo.p.s. Congrats skully!

or like ps for post script...i pheel u

[GWCGWC 83]

SpenceYou may get to a place where you could make the argument that this hand is a clear fold if you do some ICM calcs. It could be an interesting exercise. I don't have the info but I'm 99% sure icm would say it's not a bad shove. This shove is absolutely fine based on the range Grinder assigns to villain. I'm pretty sure Grinder didn't have any equity tools pulled up and running to help him make this decision but instead, used his knowledge of chip stacks, blinds and players tendencies to come to the conclusion to shovel. I recommend reading Grinder's two posts again and exploring his thought process a little more.

Well, we're both regs, so immediately he knows that I'm shoving significantly wider than some random fish would, so naturally his calling range gets wider. However, the calling ranges I gave him were already based on our dynamic and how I assume he plays vs. regs who shove on him. My image is pretty much not impacted by my shove much at all. 3 out of my 4 opponents were tourney regulars who know that I'm a regular as well, so me shoving 13 bbs effective into another reg isn't going to affect anything at all really. I mean, the only benefits I can think of is the random who has the btn when I'm SB, opening tighter from the button for me fear of me shoving over his weak hands. Also, since you get into so many confrontations shorthanded, the dynamic is going to be constantly shifting. If I get a few trash hands in a row when it's folded to my SB and I give him a few walks, his calling range is going to tighten up, and in accordance I'll try to get some lighter shoves in. If it gets shown down and I win, again I expect not a ton of change from my opponents, other than them maybe assuming I was shoving light, to knowing that I was.

niiiiiiice post MJThe effects our actions have on the decision making processes for our opponents future actions seems to get overlooked by many players. The difference between top players and average players has nothing to do with the ability to win flips in the late stages of mtt's.

[JSpencer 0]

Binarizing the outcomes into success and failure is not helpful. The successes and failures come in different sizes. This analysis only includes two of the three possibilities: he folds, he calls and you lose, he calls and you win. You need to include all three possibilities in your consideration. Even though getting called and winning is happening a small percentage of the time, you make enough that one time to match all the losses you take the other times. That's what poker stove is telling you.

Not at all. I said there was a 66% chance of success (him folding) And 33% chance of failure (him calling). If he were to call by chance, there would be a 33% chance of success (you winning) and a 66% chance of failure ( him winnning). Looking at it based of these probabilities, Technically, he should break even. But since there is an even chance of profiting as there is resulting in loss, it's basically a coin flip. I realize these are unavoidable, but if you flip a coin too many times it's bound to eventually land on the side you don't want it to. Knowing this, I wouldn't mind having some insurance for when it does. To me, it just seems that if grinder were to tighten up the range in which he is willing to push vs raise, the % would increase on both sides in his favor (the first since he is being seen as a tighter player) and the second because if he happens to get called, he has something to work with. If the first 66% chance changes to 70% and the latter 33% chance changes to 45%., shoving becomes much more profitable, and in the worst possible position, you are more than likely on a little less than a coin flip.

[GrinderMJ 0]

Jspencer, you seem to have glossed over the post where I posted his exact calling range, and the fact that my shove is profitable by nearly 1/2 of a bb, not breakeven. Also, basically you're suggesting I fold more out of the sb to gain an edge when I shove into his bb. However, you're completely ignoring the fact that I pass up an edge over and over, while giving him my small blind and the antes over and over again. Sure you're gaining an edge as your shoving range gets stronger but you're giving up a ton of chips when you start to fold hands that you can profitably shove. Also, raise/folding is really bad for obvious reasons. Any hand 12 bbs deep that you intend to play should be shoved or folded pre nearly 100% of the time.edit: You also mentioned 190k, I'm not risking 190k.

[Cappy37 0]

I both really like this and am at the same time kinda scared cuz thats essentially how I approach a lot of late MTT decisions myself.I think the real elephant in the room no one is talking about is Grinder is playing a 5-figure tourney against a final table of people who also play 5-figure tourneys.And it's about 100000x better valuewise to raise/fold ~12bbs in the $4.40s and donkaments that I play, where it s a ton easier to find a better spot.

[JSpencer 0]

Jspencer, you seem to have glossed over the post where I posted his exact calling range, and the fact that my shove is profitable by nearly 1/2 of a bb, not breakeven. Also, basically you're suggesting I fold more out of the sb to gain an edge when I shove into his bb. However, you're completely ignoring the fact that I pass up an edge over and over, while giving him my small blind and the antes over and over again. Sure you're gaining an edge as your shoving range gets stronger but you're giving up a ton of chips when you start to fold hands that you can profitably shove. Also, raise/folding is really bad for obvious reasons. Any hand 12 bbs deep that you intend to play should be shoved or folded pre nearly 100% of the time.edit: You also mentioned 190k, I'm not risking 190k.

Didn't say you were risking 190k, I said you had 190k in chips, which from the looks of the table, was a fairly average sized stack, shoving in your position would make perfect sense to me if you were shortstacked but since you weren't it seems like an unnecessary risk . I understand the concept of stealing blinds and gaining an edge, there is rarely a time in any particular tournament that I don't do this. Raise 60k vs Pushing all in...both, by your logic as well as mine, would be considered to be profitable. The 80k raise reaping a possible 20k profit and a possible 80k profit with less risk, the "all in" reaping a possible 20k profit and a possible 130k profit. So, the 80k raise 66% of the time will result in the same exact profit as pushing all in, the 33% of the time it doesn't, you still stand to earn 80k 33% of the time, and at any particular time, only stand to lose 80k.Assuming that he were to only play the hands you mentioned, an 80 k raise would result in the exact same action from his as an all in, especially at this point in the tournament. You will be earning the exact same reward as an all in 66% of the time with less risk.

[GrinderMJ 0]

So, you're suggest that i raise to 80k and fold for the 50k that he has behind when he shoves? There's literally not one hand in the deck where it's correct to 8x and then fold for 5 more bbs. You realize that anytime I open to 80k I'm obligated to call the rest off, so it's still risking 130k to win 20k. Also, you're still ignoring the effective stack sizes which is 13 bbs, which is 100% shortstacked. My stack size is completely irrelevant in this hand, the only thing that matters is the the smaller of our two stacks, since that's all that's in play in a HU pot.

[Canary3 1]

JSpencer, your balls are showing sir. You have demonstrated that you have no idea how to calculate the correct math in poker situations. Grinder, great posts in this thread. Its always nice to see what is going on in a great players head.

[JSpencer 0]

So, you're suggest that i raise to 80k and fold for the 50k that he has behind when he shoves? There's literally not one hand in the deck where it's correct to 8x and then fold for 5 more bbs. You realize that anytime I open to 80k I'm obligated to call the rest off, so it's still risking 130k to win 20k. Also, you're still ignoring the effective stack sizes which is 13 bbs, which is 100% shortstacked. My stack size is completely irrelevant in this hand, the only thing that matters is the the smaller of our two stacks, since that's all that's in play in a HU pot.

(bolded area) Very true. I understand your logic and reasoning, there is just something behind the play that really bothers me. Just the idea of committing yourself to going all in with 56o..even if it were a smaller raise than 80k..I just feel as if there had to be a better play somewhere... (italicized area) And wouldn't the fact that he was short stacked scare you away from trying to shove in order to steal his blinds? Knowing that he is going to get desperate and play with marginal hands that will still probably make you the underdog if he happens to call?

[Gallo 1]

So, you're suggest that i raise to 80k and fold for the 50k that he has behind when he shoves? There's literally not one hand in the deck where it's correct to 8x and then fold for 5 more bbs. You realize that anytime I open to 80k I'm obligated to call the rest off, so it's still risking 130k to win 20k. Also, you're still ignoring the effective stack sizes which is 13 bbs, which is 100% shortstacked. My stack size is completely irrelevant in this hand, the only thing that matters is the the smaller of our two stacks, since that's all that's in play in a HU pot.

Grinder, I think we talked about this. But since regs know that you are shoving wide in this spot, would you ever just consider your standard raise, just so your hand looks stronger than it really is? I mean, obv we are not folding to a 12BB stack if he shoves. But, against regs who know the standard play that you made, do you think just raising would be better?

[JSpencer 0]

Grinder, I think we talked about this. But since regs know that you are shoving wide in this spot, would you ever just consider your standard raise, just so your hand looks stronger than it really is? I mean, obv we are not folding to a 12BB stack if he shoves. But, against regs who know the standard play that you made, do you think just raising would be better?

That's what I was saying..

JSpencer, your balls are showing sir. You have demonstrated that you have no idea how to calculate the correct math in poker situations.

Considering that we both are basically agreeing on the exact same %'s and odds...I fail to see how you can say this. I love how people just jump on the bandwagon.I stated the following.66% chance of a fold (20k profit) 33% chance of a callif he calls66% chance of loss (130k loss) , 33% chance of Win (130k profit)So in a perfect world, where probabilities are absolute...Let's say he shoves twice..and each time the other guy folds...he makes a net profit of 40k, statistically, the third time he shoves, he should get called. In this situation he has a 33% chance of winning 130k and a 66% chance of losing 130k. Probability wise, you are not favored to win this hand 2/3 times. So if you lose the first time, your net profit is ( the 130K you lose minus the 40k you gained) -90k. You make another 40k from shoving which puts you back to -50k, he calls again, and you lose again, now you are at -180k net profit. You make another 40k from pushing, and get called again. This time you win and get 130K+, you puts you at a net profit of -10k.So in the long run, wouldn't such actions result in loss? (assuming the %'s and profits stay the same)Replacing the shove with a raise increases profit and decreases loss. Even if you have to fold after putting 40-50k in the pot, in the long run, you should make more money than you lose.

[Gallo 1]

That's what I was saying..Considering that we both are basically agreeing on the exact same %'s and odds...I fail to see how you can say this. I love how people just jump on the bandwagon.I stated the following.66% chance of a fold (20k profit) 33% chance of a callif he calls66% chance of loss (130k loss) , 33% chance of Win (130k profit)So in a perfect world, where probabilities are absolute...Let's say he shoves twice..and each time the other guy folds...he makes a net profit of 40k, statistically, the third time he shoves, he should get called. In this situation he has a 33% chance of winning 130k and a 66% chance of losing 130k. Probability wise, you are not favored to win this hand 2/3 times. So if you lose the first time, your net profit is ( the 130K you lose minus the 40k you gained) -90k. You make another 40k from shoving which puts you back to -50k, he calls again, and you lose again, now you are at -180k net profit. You make another 40k from pushing, and get called again. This time you win and get 130K+, you puts you at a net profit of -10k.So in the long run, wouldn't such actions result in loss?Replacing the shove with a raise increases profit and decreases loss. Even if you have to fold after putting 40-50k in the pot, in the long run, you should make more money than you lose.

But we would NOT fold 56o to a shove. You are saying that we should raise-fold if the SB or BB shoves. Raise/folding would be bad to do for reasons stated by GMJ.Bolded part=BAD

[GrinderMJ 0]

Grinder, I think we talked about this. But since regs know that you are shoving wide in this spot, would you ever just consider your standard raise, just so your hand looks stronger than it really is? I mean, obv we are not folding to a 12BB stack if he shoves. But, against regs who know the standard play that you made, do you think just raising would be better?

I mean you could I guess, but it's fairly irrelevant as any regular with a brain realizes that a good opponent won't raise/fold into such a short stack. So effectively, when I'm playing vs. a reg any action in which he puts chips into the pot with these stack sizes, indicates to me that he is continuing with his hand 100% of the time. So I guess you could do it, just to **** with people and pray they make a mistake, but most regulars are smart enough to realize that you've effectively shoved into them.

[FARGOpokerND 22]

JSpencer, I did the math earlier showing that it IS mathematically correct to shove.

So from a math standpoint, if he folds, his EV is -6kIf he shoves, he has 14k profit 65% of the time (when villain folds) and he wins 134k (.38*.35) and loses 130k (.62*.35)so 14k(.65)+134k(.38*.35)-130k(.62*.35) = -1.28k

So from the ranges he is given, he loses 6k if he folds, vs losing 1.28k if he shoves. Its virtually a breakeven play from a math standpoint to shove, but when you take into account image and payouts and everything else (granted if its a reg mtt'er he won't be worried about payouts, he'd be worried about passing up +ev spots) this play pretty clearly turns into a +ev spot.

[GrinderMJ 0]

That's what I was saying..Considering that we both are basically agreeing on the exact same %'s and odds...I fail to see how you can say this. I love how people just jump on the bandwagon.I stated the following.66% chance of a fold (20k profit) 33% chance of a callif he calls66% chance of loss (130k loss) , 33% chance of Win (130k profit)So in a perfect world, where probabilities are absolute...Let's say he shoves twice..and each time the other guy folds...he makes a net profit of 40k, statistically, the third time he shoves, he should get called. In this situation he has a 33% chance of winning 130k and a 66% chance of losing 130k. Probability wise, you are not favored to win this hand 2/3 times. So if you lose the first time, your net profit is ( the 130K you lose minus the 40k you gained) -90k. You make another 40k from shoving which puts you back to -50k, he calls again, and you lose again, now you are at -180k net profit. You make another 40k from pushing, and get called again. This time you win and get 130K+, you puts you at a net profit of -10k.So in the long run, wouldn't such actions result in loss? (assuming the %'s and profits stay the same)Replacing the shove with a raise increases profit and decreases loss. Even if you have to fold after putting 40-50k in the pot, in the long run, you should make more money than you lose.

I've already posted the EXACT expectation my shove shows with what I believe his calling range to be. If you go to www.pokerxfactor.com there's a spreadsheet created by sheets that allows you to input stack sizes, your hand, % opponent folds, your equity vs. his calling range etc. and it churns out the exact expectation of an open shove. Your math is flawed for sure.

[GrinderMJ 0]

JSpencer, I did the math earlier showing that it IS mathematically correct to shove.So from the ranges he is given, he loses 6k if he folds, vs losing 1.28k if he shoves. Its virtually a breakeven play from a math standpoint to shove, but when you take into account image and payouts and everything else (granted if its a reg mtt'er he won't be worried about payouts, he'd be worried about passing up +ev spots) this play pretty clearly turns into a +ev spot.

Also, you are using the widest range I can imagine him calling with, and it's pretty likely that his calling range is even tighter than the range you're using, which obv makes it better and better the tighter he calls.

[Gallo 1]

I mean you could I guess, but it's fairly irrelevant as any regular with a brain realizes that a good opponent won't raise/fold into such a short stack. So effectively, when I'm playing vs. a reg any action in which he puts chips into the pot with these stack sizes, indicates to me that he is continuing with his hand 100% of the time. So I guess you could do it, just to **** with people and pray they make a mistake, but most regulars are smart enough to realize that you've effectively shoved into them.

Exactly. Most regulars know that if you shove, then you're probably shoving wide, by raising it might make your hand look stronger to them than it really is. I'm just throwing that out there because who knows if the SB/BB would put it in with a hand like A4 or even more marginal, IDK. just a thought.

[FARGOpokerND 22]

That's what I was saying..

And what Gallo was saying was not what you were saying. He was saying raise 2.8x or whatever GMJ would raise here, so it looks like a stronger hand, but STILL calling the shove if shoved on.The only question I am curious about with doing that is wouldn't it result in the villain spazzing out and actually shoving a wider range? Something that would maybe include T7o+ 97o+ J7o+ and such which makes your 65 actually worse-off?I was thinking about that last night.If that is the case, then raising 3x is even a WORSE idea than shoving.And JSpencer, never ever ever ever raise/fold to a 13bb stack in this spot.

[FARGOpokerND 22]

Also, you are using the widest range I can imagine him calling with, and it's pretty likely that his calling range is even tighter than the range you're using, which obv makes it better and better the tighter he calls.

Yeah I was using worst case scenario just for the point.

[GrinderMJ 0]

Exactly. Most regulars know that if you shove, then you're probably shoving wide, by raising it might make your hand look stronger to them than it really is. I'm just throwing that out there because who knows if the SB/BB would put it in with a hand like A4 or even more marginal, IDK. just a thought.

You're probably right, in thinking about, there's a chance that if I like 2.2x or something that looks like I'm inducing he'll fold some of the weakest hands in his range, maybe like A4o-, K7/K8, J10/Q10 type stuff, since he might level himself into thinking that I'm inducing.

[Gallo 1]

And what Gallo was saying was not what you were saying. He was saying raise 2.8x or whatever GMJ would raise here, so it looks like a stronger hand, but STILL calling the shove if shoved on.The only question I am curious about with doing that is wouldn't it result in the villain spazzing out and actually shoving a wider range? Something that would maybe include T7o+ 97o+ J7o+ and such which makes your 65 actually worse-off?I was thinking about that last night.If that is the case, then raising 3x is even a WORSE idea than shoving.And JSpencer, never ever ever ever raise/fold to a 13bb stack in this spot.

I was saying against a reg. My thought is based on that most regs would know that we would NEVER fold to a shove no matter what. Against non-regs I would shove. Like in a Micro MTT I would always shove instead of raise because of the fact that most people don't realize that if we have 14BBs or less that we should never be folding. And if we are raising into a 12-14BB stack we wouldn't be folding either.

[FARGOpokerND 22]

You're probably right, in thinking about, there's a chance that if I like 2.2x or something that looks like I'm inducing he'll fold some of the weakest hands in his range, maybe like A4o-, K7/K8, J10/Q10 type stuff, since he might level himself into thinking that I'm inducing.

So does that mean this line of thinking

The only question I am curious about with doing that is wouldn't it result in the villain spazzing out and actually shoving a wider range? Something that would maybe include T7o+ 97o+ J7o+ and such which makes your 65 actually worse-off?

is probably off-base then?It's not something I have ever really thought of before, but I wonder, just the same.

[GrinderMJ 0]

So does that mean this line of thinking is probably off-base then?It's not something I have ever really thought of before, but I wonder, just the same.

Maybe, you could easily be right, my natural instinct is that it would cause him to freeze up more than it would cause him to spaz out but I'm not really sure. You could def be right.