kobe2odom8 14 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 You seriously shoved 22 BB with 4 4 over a big stack, errr okay! LOL and you sucked out! That's poker!Good luck at the final table! Luckbox!The double up fairy loves him, so why not go all in? Link to post Share on other sites
FARGOpokerND 22 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 FO means freezeout!Shoving 44 depends what I have the players stats at Link to post Share on other sites
outsider13 0 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Just my two cents - YOU'RE TERRIBLEfyp Link to post Share on other sites
Good Tom Hunting 0 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 FO means freezeout!Shoving 44 depends what I have the players stats at Yeah, the players stats should definitely be a factor in the decision, but not the deciding factor per se.fypA bad play every once in awhile doesn't make a bad player Link to post Share on other sites
FARGOpokerND 22 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Yeah, the players stats should definitely be a factor in the decision, but not the deciding factor per se.A bad play every once in awhile doesn't make a bad playerWho said it was a bad play?! Link to post Share on other sites
TrueAce13 18 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Who said it was a bad play?!<--------------- Link to post Share on other sites
Good Tom Hunting 0 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Who said it was a bad play?!If you meant, "Did anyone say it was a bad play" then the answer is me and dixieIf you meant, "Which IMPORTANT person whose opinion I care about said it was a bad play" then the answer is SCREW YOU I'M IMPORTANT Link to post Share on other sites
Mr. Sparco 2 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 OK, I'm bored, so let's throw a little math in here. The shove with 44 is essentially unexploitable. Of course, the exact math is very hard to do, so let's make some assumptions:1) All three players will have roughly the same calling range,2) Since the effective chip stacks we have against these three are not that different, we can replace each of the effective chip stacks by the average of the three,3) There will always be at most one caller,4) I did not make some stupid mistake.None of these are quite correct, of course - if anyone is even more bored than I am, they are welcome to do the math with more precise assumptions. But we'll see that with these assumptions, the shove is always quite a bit +EV, so I would be surprised if the more precise math would result in a -EV outcome.Here's a little table:The top three lines show the average amounts we win when wea) Shove and get three folds,b) Shove, get a call, and win,c) Shove, get a call, and lose.The columns in the table then show, from left to right,1) The assumed fraction of hands our opponents will call with (this is the thing we want to vary to see what is optimal for them, and hence worst for us),2) The probability a single player will fold, which is simply one minus this fraction,3) The probability that all three players will fold, which is the last number to the third power4) The probability we will get a call, which is one minus the last number5) The probability we win against the range mentioned in (1) (from PokerStove)6) The probability we lose against the range mentioned in (1) (one minus the last number)7) The EV we have in this caseAll the numbers in column (7) are positive, so no matter how our opponents play, we will win money. As the table shows, the best they can do (against this particular hand - of course they don't know we have 44, so this is slightly academic) is to call a little more than 25%, in which case we still win about 170 chips on average.Disclaimer: this of course does not show that shoving is the best play. It shows that it is better than folding. It could of course be that a standard raise is even better than that - that depends a lot on the ranges, the type of players we're up against, how well we play postflop, etc.Cliff notes: with some mild assumptions, the result of doing the math is (1) a headache and (2) the outcome that a shove is +EV against any type of player. Without the mild assumptions, we would get an even more serious headache, but probably the same result. Link to post Share on other sites
DiamondDixie 12 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I would have folded and waited for a better spot. I actually discussed this hand with a PokerVT SNG pro (who is an ICM genius) and he plugged it into wiz and with the stacks involved it was definitely a -EV play. At 10 effective it would be fine but with 22BB it was a very risky play especially with the big stack in the way and BB having a big enough stack to totally cripple you. Was it horrible, probably not especially if those left to act were really tight but it was bad enough that a fold would have been the better play. @Mr.Sparco are you using SNG Wiz or what because Wiz doesn't like this play. Any shove is generally unexploitable but that doesn't make it optimal nor +EV. You can fiddle with stack sizes and ranges in Wiz to make most plays correct but with stacks as they were I just don't see this as a +EV play. @tbrick - you know I wasn't serious with the results comment, right? Link to post Share on other sites
Mr. Sparco 2 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I would have folded and waited for a better spot. I actually discussed this hand with a PokerVT SNG pro and he plugged it into wiz and with the stacks involved it was definitely a -EV play.It's good thing I put some disclaimers in there, then. :)I'm guessing the different outcome he gets is a result of the fact that SNG wizard allows to give the different players different ranges. Or of the fact that I made some dumb mistake. Or of the fact that he used a $EV with some ICM calculation, which is not correct here, since this is not a final table yet.Could someone post the outcomes SNG wizard gives? Assuming it indeed gives a -EV, it would be nice to see how far the naive calculation is off. Link to post Share on other sites
DiamondDixie 12 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 It's good thing I put some disclaimers in there, then. :)I'm guessing the different outcome he gets is a result of the fact that SNG wizard allows to give the different players different ranges. Or of the fact that I made some dumb mistake. Or of the fact that he used a $EV with some ICM calculation, which is not correct here, since this is not a final table yet.Could someone post the outcomes SNG wizard gives? Assuming it indeed gives a -EV, it would be nice to see how far the naive calculation is off.He used cEV they weren't near the bubble or at the FT.I'd Wiz it but I'm not great with Wiz, Link to post Share on other sites
GWCGWC 83 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Why would an ICM genius ever use SNG Wizard?I think an ICM genius would assign perfect ranges to all players involved and be able to calculate the EV of specific plays in any and all spots...................IN HIS HEAD! Link to post Share on other sites
TrueAce13 18 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I would have folded and waited for a better spot. I actually discussed this hand with a PokerVT SNG pro (who is an ICM genius) and he plugged it into wiz and with the stacks involved it was definitely a -EV play. At 10 effective it would be fine but with 22BB it was a very risky play especially with the big stack in the way and BB having a big enough stack to totally cripple you. Was it horrible, probably not especially if those left to act were really tight but it was bad enough that a fold would have been the better play.this logic is pretty flawed...well this whole thing is kinda flawed as well Link to post Share on other sites
DiamondDixie 12 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Fine I give, I guess I'm wrong and everyone else right! I was a brilliant play! Keep up the good work and keep shoving those tiny pairs with 22BB! And I guess I should be folding with 10 effective TrueAce, I mean you weren't really clear here.... Link to post Share on other sites
TrueAce13 18 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 i actually don't know the hand, but i'm assuming he rejammed over an open....please tell me why rejamming 10bbs is better than rejamming 20? Link to post Share on other sites
DiamondDixie 12 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 i actually don't know the hand, but i'm assuming he rejammed over an open....please tell me why rejamming 10bbs is better than rejamming 20?The hand is posted in this thread and no, he OPEN shoved 22BB with 4 4. If folded to you with 10 eff, depending on your opponents left to act, shoving 10 eff with 4 4 here is fine but with 22BB it's not.Oh and btw, I'm now sorry I said anything about this hand. I guess I'll keep my opinions to myself in the future.I'm far from great and I just knew this wasn't a play I would normally make so I discussed with someone who I greatly value their opinion on situations like this to make sure I wasn't missing something. I tend to be a bit nitty so I thought maybe I was wrong about my opinion of this hand. Link to post Share on other sites
TrueAce13 18 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 adam just got owned by pokervt Link to post Share on other sites
Mr. Sparco 2 Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Oh and btw, I'm now sorry I said anything about this hand. I guess I'll keep my opinions to myself in the future.Don't be, and don't - discussing hands is always good. (Though it sometimes takes some thick skin and the ability to filter out the useful parts of the discussion from the "what I do is right and what you do is stupid" comments. )To me, before doing the math, it was absolutely not clear whether this shove was +EV or not. In fact, assuming that SNG Wizard indeed gives a different result, even after doing the math it is apparently not so clear. So once again, if someone has SNG wizard and could post the output, I would like to see it, to see which of the assumptions I made makes the difference between +EV and -EV.The useful thing about these discussions is that of course, nobody can do this kind of math in their head while at the table, so to me it is very useful to work through some of those hands in detail and figure out what the correct play is. That way, you gain some intuition for these situations that can be very useful at the tables. As a bonus, if nothing else, we learn from it that these situations are often surprisingly counter-intuitive. Hopefully, that makes us a bit more humble, and we learn to politely present our opinions in threads, so that we don't look like ignorant dicks when it turns out we were wrong... Link to post Share on other sites
rcgs59 15 Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 adam just got owned by pokervtNo he got owned by Dixie Link to post Share on other sites
kobe2odom8 14 Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 rose your avatar makes me hottt Link to post Share on other sites
rcgs59 15 Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 rose your avatar makes me hotttlol, hope Mary is there to you know what Link to post Share on other sites
kobe2odom8 14 Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 makes her hott too Link to post Share on other sites
FARGOpokerND 22 Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 First off, it isn't a 22bb shove. It is a 22bb shove vs the Button only, but IIRC he was pretty nitty and it would take a small range for him to call my shove. So my shove was effectively 17 blinds and not 22 blinds.Satbam (the sb) was playing 10/7. Tom was playing 12/8.With those nitty players in the blinds, I took their calling range for shoves are going to be a lottt tighter than normal. Raising is just iffy because that is inviting Saintfan on the button to put some pressure on me, or flat and put me in an awkward position on ANY flop that doesn't flop me a set (or 235 356 567).Folding is pretty bad since a pair has enough value plus.Shoving is, as Sparco said, unexploitable by anyone after me, so using all that information above, I shoved. Link to post Share on other sites
babylondonks 5 Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 yes it does (make her hott too, ****ing adam posting)and I don't understand...Sparco posted some excellents maths, DD replies with some random PokerVT pro who is an ICM genius who happened to use cEV and didn't show any evidence at all. Then Adam got owned. Poor guy. Link to post Share on other sites
FARGOpokerND 22 Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 No he got owned by Dixie No, as a matter of fact, I did not get owned by Dixie. If I got "owned" by anyone, it would be math provided from a "PokerVT SNG Pro ICM genius" which was then relayed by Dixie to this forum. She just gets the credit for questioning the play, which is perfectly FINE to do btw.I am pretty confident that shoving 44 here is never a bad play given the full information. If the sng guy thinks it was bad in a vacuum, there's not much I can say about that (other than how about he come here and post why it is so we can all learn!) but each hand is more than general assumptions and vacuums. Each situation is different. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now