i think it's a combination of both tbh, though with the fact that the difference is so huge in shoving 54s vs 54o, i think the 4 combo's vs 12 combo's has more to do with it than the 3-4% equity gain

3-4% equity gain but shoving 10x the amount of blinds doesnt seem to add up well

could be wrong though on how much impact each of the things has, though most reasonable it seems that it's combo of the 2

why is K5o a shove at 14bbs against a Nash calling range of 14bbs but T9o is not, when T9o has more equity than K5o against that range?

it's not just about equity, people.

T9o is in the nash shoving range for 20+bb ?

The only true value seems to be in misleading your opponent into opening up his range more than necessary assuming you play 45o the exact same way...

maybe i didn't explain it well earlier, but the two things are connected. the reason why 54s plays well (has greater equity) vs the calling range is that there aren't many dominating hands in his calling range. but if you were shoving more combos of 54, then the BB solution would include more dominating 5x hands in the calling range so no 54 hands would have good equity.

that said, whatever the reason 54s has more equity than, say, K5o, the fact is that it does, and that's the only reason it's in the shoving range.

my mistake. 97o is a good example. same equity as K5o against 14bb call range yet can only shove it at 10.8bbs.

theyre not the same equity. the one has more than the other. it's not much, but we are dealing with small edges here. thus it is more profitable to shove it. that is all.

Yup, but if you start shoving 97o, opponent will be able to open up his range, which would hurt 97o more than it would hurt K5o.

3-4% equity is a LOT more than it sounds like.

Wtf?

T9o is a 20+bb shove...

Seriously, are you just high?

So here's an interesting one.

14.2bb nash calling range: 22+,A2s+,K6s+,Q9s+,JTs,A2o+,K9o+,QTo+

K5o equity against that range: 35.274%
97o equity against that range: 35.432%

My guess at the answer here would be that if you added 97o, the appropriate calling range would widen enough that you'd be worse off shoving 97o than folding it. (which is exactly what NRFanshawe said)

But hey, I stand corrected. It's not always about equity.

that's the point. hence the 12 versus 4 combos notion from before. it's probably both combos and equity i guess (because the more you shove, the wider the opponent's calling range). definitely not equity only though - i mean some hands there is an ev difference of only in the hundredths of a bb, yet the stack sizes for shoving are vastly different. maybe i'll find my MoP book and re-read that section. that book scares me though so i'd rather leave it buried in the closet.

12 versus 4 combos has a lot less of an impact than 3-4% equity, I'm guessing.

3-4% is a lot. (for some reason, I was thinking the difference between suited and not suited was closer to 2%, but the difference between 45s and 45o against a 14bb calling range, which is what I had in stove at the moment, is a whopping 3.5%)

Technically, though, it is actually still all about equity.

Because you can't just add or subtract shoving hands without also modifying the equilibrium calling range.

So even though 97o (rated for 10bbs) has a higher equity against a 14bb calling range than K5o does, once you modified the optimal calling range for adding 97o, it's almost certain that K5o would do better than 97o against the new calling range, because you'd be adding more hands that are less than K-high than you would be adding K-high hands, and the A-high hands are already all in a 14bb calling range.

And of course, the whole thing would be -EV compared to just folding.

One more thing why is J2o 4.6 on the pusher chart and 4.2 on the caller???
according to the gap concept u need a stronger hand to call than u need to push since when u push u have fold equity and when u call u don't. So why is it reverse here?

It's not reversed.

4.6 > 4.2.

There are some hands that are, though. The reason being that the caller already has such a big % of their stack in the pot, where the pusher only has half as much.

That discrepancy will only happen for *very* short stacks though. Like 82o being a 1.8bb shove, but a 2.8bb call. At < 3bbs, you're pretty much getting odds to call any 2 cards, since more than a third of your stack is already in.

You guys have TNixon editing a lot of posts.

HAI FAIVE!

To calculate EV for pushing T7o with 9bbs from SB, we must consider all hands in our range that we push for 9bbs and more.
According to the Nash chart this range will include:

22+,A2s+,K2s+,Q2s+,J3s+,T4s+,95s+,84s+,74s+,64s+,5 4s,A2o+,K2o+,Q6o+,J8o+,T7o+,97o+,87o,76o

Against the calling range proposed by Spamz0r (22+,A2s+,K2s+,Q6s+,J8s+,T8s+,A2o+,K4o+,Q8o+,J9o+) which makes 40.6% of all holdem hands, we have 45.7%.


So suppose we are at 25/50 with 450 chips before posting the small blind (as required by proper push/fold strategy - see Spamz0r's 1st post) and our opponent is going to call call us 40.6 % of the time.

Thus we will win 75 chips 59.4 % of the time when opp folds to our shove

And we will lose 425 chips in 54.3 % when opp calls us 40.6 % of the time

Or we will win 475 chips in 45.7% whem opp calls us 40.6 % of the time

0.594*75 - 0.406*425*0.543 + 0.406*475*0.457 = 44 - 93 + 88 = + 39


I guess this push would be -EV vs such calling range if we were pushing only T7o, but playing the top of our (Nash) range differently.

In order to obtain equilibrium and make +EV shoves we must stick to the proper Nash ranges.

This is false. Every hand in the pushing range must be +EV, otherwise deviating from it would provide an advantage even if the opponent maintains the same calling range, which is impossible for any Nash equilibrium.

Nope, this is false and Jack is right.

you should probably read this thread

Why?

Btw: I read the post. It's a good post imo.

Go look up what a Nash equilibrium is and then come back.

because your claim in the post i originally quoted is wrong and the reasons why are thoroughly debated/explained in this thread.