Deep In The Red Zone With Ducks

[SlackerInc 0]

This was from my bar league last night, after six and a half beers, so I can't guarantee the exactitude of all numbers given. 28-man tourney, final table with 7 players left. I've already guaranteed myself 21 points out of a maximum of 28 for the night, but the top two players get cash prizes. BB is t800, no antes. Starting stacks were t1500, so average stack is t6000. I recently went from one of the chip leaders to a short stack (flopped a pair and the nut flush draw, and got good pot odds to call bets but didn't improve); but since then have made a couple pushes that took down the blinds (showed AQ and 99), and currently have t3000. The players in this league have relatively good deepstack poker skills, but have a poor understanding of the adjustments needed when the blinds get big. As a result, they have nicknamed me "all-in Alan" as they can't see pushing preflop even with what we would call Red Zone stacks, as long as what we'd call their Q is average (they will push if both their Q and M are low, but often too late to get any fold equity).UTG (with an above-average stack) raises to t1750. The next two players fold, and I look down at 22 in the cutoff. It seems unlikely that villain will fold to a push, but assuming there's a good chance he only has overs, should I go ahead and hope for a race in this desperate situation? Or fold and wait for FIV?

[Yahkin 0]

I think you need FIV here. Based on what you said, UTG is not going to raise without a decent hand, and unless he's an idiot he's not folding to your push. Best case scenario he has 2 unsuited overs and then you are only 52% to win the hand. You are dead to any pairs and you are a dog to any suited connectors.You are a huge favorite if he's playing 72 or 32 though.

[ChrisRichey 1]

I think you need to wait for fiv here.

[mjd 0]

I fold this. Two reasons.No antes, so you have a couple more hands, maybe even one more round of blinds to work with.And, it sounds like they are overly scared of your all-in play pre-flop. Take advantage of that and get some FIV.Eventually, you're going to have to get lucky to win this thing, but put the ducks down and move in with (almost) any two next time you're first to act.

[timwakefield 68]

Your M here is 2.5, I shove any pair here all day. You're not gonna do anything by moving up, so you need first or 2nd. Hopefully you isolate the raiser and get a coinflip. You're not likely to see a better hand soon, and even with very tight players (considering the blinds), I think you need to shove a pair. Would you fold 55?

[SlackerInc 0]

It's kinda cool to see there is at least one dissenting opinion here. Let the debate begin!

[TwoFourOffsuit 0]

Ducks aren't all that better than trash like 10-4 off. The only way we have someone beat is if we spike another two, make a miracle straight or flush, or the board flat out misses our opposition. FIV is the only circumstance under which we should consider shoving preflop with ducks. Lay this down.

[Yahkin 0]

Your M here is 2.5, I shove any pair here all day. You're not gonna do anything by moving up, so you need first or 2nd. Hopefully you isolate the raiser and get a coinflip. You're not likely to see a better hand soon, and even with very tight players (considering the blinds), I think you need to shove a pair. Would you fold 55?

5's no, deuces yes. 89s even gives better equity than 22. Any paint card with a suited kicker 6+, and unsuited kicker of 8+ has better odds of winning.Deuces vs Random equity win tie pots won pots tied Hand 0: 50.334% 49.39% 00.95% 6215338932 119416020.00 { 22 }Hand 1: 49.666% 48.72% 00.95% 6131263428 119416020.00 { random }Fives vs Random equity win tie pots won pots tied Hand 0: 60.325% 59.64% 00.68% 7505957532 86195766.00 { 55 }Hand 1: 39.675% 38.99% 00.68% 4907085336 86195766.00 { random }89s vs Random equity win tie pots won pots tied Hand 0: 50.801% 48.86% 01.94% 4099182876 163147620.00 { 98s }Hand 1: 49.199% 47.25% 01.94% 3964811484 163147620.00 { random }

[timwakefield 68]

Ducks aren't all that better than trash like 10-4 off. The only way we have someone beat is if we spike another two, make a miracle straight or flush, or the board flat out misses our opposition. FIV is the only circumstance under which we should consider shoving preflop with ducks. Lay this down.

Vs a standard raising hand like AJ I would rather have 22 than T4. T4 isn't a whole lot better than 22 if our opponent has 88 either.

[copernicus 0]

I fold antying less than 6s here, and think long and hard with 66-88. 22-55 have too many ways to lose against weak calling hands.

[TwoFourOffsuit 0]

Vs a standard raising hand like AJ I would rather have 22 than T4. T4 isn't a whole lot better than 22 if our opponent has 88 either.

Either hand is relative trash, which is the point.

[copernicus 0]

Vs a standard raising hand like AJ I would rather have 22 than T4. T4 isn't a whole lot better than 22 if our opponent has 88 either.

the advantage that T4 has is that if you hit you are far less likely to be counterfeited by a higher two pair.

[timwakefield 68]

Hmm, general consensus is that I'm a donk. I guess i undervalue the short stack, or overvalue the ducks

[SlackerInc 0]

Hmm, general consensus is that I'm a donk. I guess i undervalue the short stack, or overvalue the ducks

Well, I guess that makes me a donk too--because I liked your reasoning. I mean, with an adjusted M of less than 2, and a Q of only .5, five spots away from the money, it seems to me I've got to gamble--and hope to get a double up plus the blinds instead of just the blinds. (I would tend to agree that with most any unpaired hand I'd want to be first in, unless it's >ATos or >A8s.)Your and my take on this is less conservative than others' here, but still more conservative than Arnold Snyder's in Poker Tournament Formula. He says with less than 10BBs (<7M, essentially) to push "from any position against any number of opponents with any hand containing an ace or a king, any two cards valued ten or higher, any pair, or suited connectors down to 87s." He goes on to add other hands you should push with if you are first in: Q9, Q8, Q7, J9, J8, T9. And to push with ATC UTG if none of these hands come to you before then.I know people on this board aren't as radical as Snyder, but I did actually think there would be a little more support for a push here. I mean, Snyder's advice would be to push here with K2os even with an M of 6 (which would be an above average stack, a Q>1); whereas in this case I have a pair and a desperate M and Q.Still, I can't say the results worked out for me: it was folded around to villain, who instacalled with AA, which held up.

[Zach6668 513]

But this thread has nothing to do with pushing with any hand.It has to do with calling a raise, or reraising an initial raise, anyways, where we have no fold equity.This has nothing to do with "which hands should we shove with?"

[SlackerInc 0]

But this thread has nothing to do with pushing with any hand.It has to do with calling a raise, or reraising an initial raise, anyways, where we have no fold equity.This has nothing to do with "which hands should we shove with?"

Do you not take the Snyder PTC stuff the same way I do? Seems to me he's saying "get all your chips in the middle, whether you're first in or last to call a family pot pushfest, with all these hands...oh, and if you're first in, here are a few more to push with".

[CobaltBlue 662]

Do you not take the Snyder PTC stuff the same way I do? Seems to me he's saying "get all your chips in the middle, whether you're first in or last to call a family pot pushfest, with all these hands...oh, and if you're first in, here are a few more to push with".

I definitely break away from Snyder on some of his 7-10M pushes. Also, I took that particular quote to mean limped pots...not raised ones.A similar situation actually came up in a $100 STT today. I'd gotten crippled down to an M of 2 w/ 7 players left. A short MP pushed and I decided to call all-in with 33. Happened to be against TT and managed to suck out with a 4-card rivered flush. Felt like a donk...but I also get into that "gotta gamble w/ any pair w/o FIV when super short" mode.

[copernicus 0]

I definitely break away from Snyder on some of his 7-10M pushes. Also, I took that particular quote to mean limped pots...not raised ones.A similar situation actually came up in a $100 STT today. I'd gotten crippled down to an M of 2 w/ 7 players left. A short MP pushed and I decided to call all-in with 33. Happened to be against TT and managed to suck out with a 4-card rivered flush. Felt like a donk...but I also get into that "gotta gamble w/ any pair w/o FIV when super short" mode.

I was skimming through Cloutier's "final table" book and even with an M of 1.5 he talks about folding 22-44. Who was it that asked about 55?

[SlackerInc 0]

Also, I took that particular quote to mean limped pots...not raised ones.

Well, that's a pretty crucial distinction if so. I have started posting on Snyder's board--I should ask for clarification.

[Zach6668 513]

Do you not take the Snyder PTC stuff the same way I do? Seems to me he's saying "get all your chips in the middle, whether you're first in or last to call a family pot pushfest, with all these hands...oh, and if you're first in, here are a few more to push with".

I don't really read books.But I feel there is a SIGNIFICANT advantage to being the pusher, rather than a caller, with a hand like 22, 33, 44.With those hands, you are literally never better than a coinflip.On the other hand, when you push with 22, you fold a LOT of the coinflip hands, 38o, 79o, even some 33, 44, hands where they have you crushed.Again, I never read the book, and only skimmed your long *** discussion here, but I really don't think it's close when it comes to calling off with what will be AT BEST a 50% shot to double up, and it's NEVER better, unless he has 2x, which is obviously VERY rare with only 2 more ducks out there.

[timwakefield 68]

I was skimming through Cloutier's "final table" book and even with an M of 1.5 he talks about folding 22-44. Who was it that asked about 55?

I did, trying to imply that if you play 55 there you should play any pair. I still don't see that 55 is so much stronger than 22 there that you would play one but not the other.

[SlackerInc 0]

I did, trying to imply that if you play 55 there you should play any pair. I still don't see that 55 is so much stronger than 22 there that you would play one but not the other.

It's hard to imagine playing against overcards with deuces but not with fives, so I see your point there. OTOH, it is true that deuces could more likely get counterfeited, leaving you with the nut low; and also, you add three more potential hands for villain that crush you (33, 44, 55). Of course against my particular villain, this was all irrelevant (which made it hard to really determine if I had done the right thing or not). I tend to get knocked out of tournaments disproportionately against aces (more than you'd think), which I take as sort of a good sign about my play in a way, but OTOH maybe I need to try harder to be able to pick up when people have them...

[NEtwowilldo 0]

Didn't you hear? Two's Never Lose.