Winning Poker Network (Yatahay) - 6,000/12,000 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4: http://www.pokertracker.com

22$bi, ~1k up top, 220$ next cash. We came to FT w chip lead, and got into 2 hands where we now sit. Prob only a few orbits through. I know this is an easy software/icm calc spot..and can tell you I ran the spot in HRC, and 3 options revealed very close $EV results. Curious what the 2p2'ers do here, and rationale behind decision. Thanks..

Winning Poker Network (Yatahay) - 6,000/12,000 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

BB: 564,298 (VPIP: 24.86, PFR: 14.80, 3Bet Preflop: 4.55, Hands: 370)
UTG: 476,002 (VPIP: 29.79, PFR: 19.15, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 99)
MP: 416,294 (VPIP: 37.57, PFR: 28.24, 3Bet Preflop: 12.31, Hands: 177)
CO: 340,704 (VPIP: 19.55, PFR: 9.95, 3Bet Preflop: 4.08, Hands: 228)
BTN: 270,218 (VPIP: 16.07, PFR: 17.31, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 56)
Hero (SB): 252,484

6 players post ante of 1,200, Hero posts SB 6,000, BB posts BB 12,000

Pre Flop: (pot: 25,200) Hero has 9 9

UTG raises to 28,191, fold, fold, fold, Hero ?

I don't understand how people find folds in these spots, and maybe that's why I'll never be that good. We have a premium pair, we're the short stack, 20bbs, 50k in the pot, and a single raise from a player who isn't a NIT. I'm all in.

Maybe if the table is super soft we can find a fold.

sick spot

I'd jam, dont think its even that close against someone loose and 6 max.

Don't think he's considering folding guys

I mean, flatting is absurd, 3b/f is ridiculous, and 3b to induce seems pretty ambitious.

do you have any way to quantify these opinions?

No, but I know if we 3-bet or we flat we are much more likely to make mistakes that are somewhat more difficult to quantify.

Tis fair and my normal approach to these situations.

This, to me, shows that we have an open ended question, however. Ampefund and I have reviewed this hand amongst eachother and with the ranges he expected, flatting shows a higher EV (dont have it all in front of me rn and can't be bothered). Yes this is proposterous to me, but lets take a second to try and undersand this instead of automatically dismiss or make an unitelligible argument.

If we're particularly skilled at the pokers, we should aim for the decisions that net us the most chips and/or currency. Our profit (cap of, that is) in these situations is generally unquantifiable vs unGTO ranges, and with a usually small sample of hands, we won't often be able to gauge an expected response from the average villain. But if we play these spots more close to perfect than the majority of our villains, we're gonna profit immensely.

One (betgo) can argue with our simulaton results, but in all reality, these simulations are including a ****ton more of factors and situations that we can even fathom, and should take a step back from our pompous/arrognant egos to consider some alternative options (facts ).

If villain isn't the kind of player that will bully me postflop with insane numbers of barrels, I could see myself goig the smallball route and just call pre.
Folding is a waste in my opinion (both in terms of direct value and in terms of general image - if we never play back, we will get tagged as the nits that we are and get stomped on) and if we consider ourselves not very good postflop, I would bet a pretty high amount of $ that the shove is $EV+. Our icm pressure is lower than most FT situations.

But our stack is still pretty good for a short stack on a final table! So playing it small and calling seems like a very viable option to me. If we had something like 17BB instead of 21BB, I would shove this all day. But with this stack, I think I would elect for a call preflop against most villains and in most dynamics.

PS: how do you evaluate the EV of flatting? Is this based on Pokersnowie data?

Nice post Tbone..
I was messing around w HRC with ICM/cEV/and FGS sims (giving villn a ~26% open range, arbitrarily) to just try to see the differences in $/cev. Granted the $EV of flatting is sim'd using hot/cold equity, and doesn't take into account PoF playability, villain level of play etc..so I thought it was a bit interesting. Granted shoving does show +$EV, as does 3b to 5.7ish as well (and obv have to fold to a 4b). Don't think snowie or other gto/type calc ranges would be that useful here when $/chips is so skewed at a FT, and there are antes that make up a larger % of potsize, and affect entire ev calcs.

Thank you for the clarification AmpeFund!

I have to say that in today's game, I'm gearing more and more towards smallball in general.

26% open? Seems high for someone with a 19% PFR. Why go arbitrary when we have numbers? Do your calculations include the fact that BB can call or shove behind? Going 3 ways with 99 is just set mining. Would you call 55 here?

fair point on the first part, deeper into the limited stats are partially influenced full ring; so effectively he is opening the lj. But we could rerun, w 19% rfi.
ofc on the second part, all players stacks and positions affect the equity of given ranges.
meh, prob fold 55 from the sb, calling the bb...but just to note as villains level of play moves higher, and concepts of icm impacts are greater, shoving smaller pairs becomes more appealing than shoving midpairs to some degree.

Shove is good, or at least 3bet because u are oop with an efective m of 6 and how u play the hand if the flop came A -10-2 for example oop. Keep IT simple.

Trimis de pe al meu Lenovo K53a48 folosind Tapatalk

did u even read any of the (extremely good) posts tbone and ampe made?

You mean compared to flatting in the bb?

In a comparison, from our sb position, in terms of $EV, shoving 44-22 > calling 44-22, Shoving 44-22 = shoving 77-55, and shoving 77-55 < calling 77-55.

If we assume sb folds, and we are in BB in this spot, flatting > shoving JJ-22. If BB was to 3b to something like 5.5bb with some part of that range (which shows higher $EV for JJ-77), and then faces a 4bai from the OR, BB's calling range shrinks to AA.

That reads pretty wtf confusing, so if you want, could post the HRC calc.

Your sims most likely vastly overestimate your postflop equity realisation, especially since UTG has a huge postflop edge due to the ICM setup (also, not sure what FGS sims you ran, but low depth FGS is useless at best in this spot).

Thanks for pointing that out

My bad, should have elaborated a bit more. The point was not that HRC models that include flatting are really difficult to build and interpret in general (for the reasons you mentioned) since it doesn't actually model postflop play (iirc, pls correct me if I'm wrong), but that it gets even more tricky when you have to account for all the effects of a payout structure and chip distribution (which all make flatting worse and shoving better).

Fwiw I'm not saying flatting is definitely bad, although I strongly suspect it's bad in equilibrium, but fine to good against the majority of the population. Anyway, posting some of the calculations that support flatting would be interesting.

Yes, agree with this..pretty much why I posted the hand, because of where 99 fit into different $EV models. And where the 77-22 become folds here imo, but if we were to consider widening a shoving range (because 77-22 are +$EV shoves vs even a 19% rfi), depending on villains (because of how wide or not, some might fold)..at this depth, the smaller pairs of that range may comparatively make more sense.

Will link up the HRC calc I ran a bit later

DB lifetime numbers are inspiring but sample is small and yeah you would realise like 30-50% of equity vs different opponents w/ different dynamics.

I assinged him 22% opening range and numbers CeV for flatting would look like (its not BBs, but thousands of chips, so +1.51 is ~+0.12bb) having set r=50%



its also bc he made almost 2.5x pre

and shoving make +2-2.5bb, so its a no brainer.

But ofc these numbers for flatting are just guideline vs randoms and exceptional players. Basically its reflection of your flop pot share based on your hand equity multiplied by equity_realisation, vs some players its possible to make flatting better than shoving.

I think my general sentiment remains valid but...

user12345 just backed it up n dumped it on my moment of clarity.

Call me uncreative but I'd just shove from SB without giving it much thought unless the opener was a huge nit in which case I may consider flatting. Would be more interesting if we were BB or BTN imo