If I have zero FE preflop and my IO speculative hands have not nearly as much IO postflop as they once did (especially OOP in EP) then, yeah, that's my thinking.

Gbutwe'rereallyderailingthisthread,imoG

How can you have a nitty image, not get paid off post flop with big hands AND have no FE preflop?

Simple: 97s can crack AA, so why would they ever fold preflop? Especially when they know that they'll likely be going multiway to the flop (pot odds!).

But I think we've derailed this thread enough.

G/derail,imoG

I"m with GG on this one. If you're thought to be a nit, then opening baby PP like 44 from EP doesn't make sense. He's getting half the table to call, and he'll prob only barrel when he flops a set. But since they're thinking he has AA anyway, he's only going to get action (while being oop) vs hands that can beat or are drawing to beat AA, most all of which can also crack his bottom set.

With a different image ofc you can open much wider than he does and make it work. But I'm sure we all see nits who play 5 hands a night, and somehow they often get paid anyway. GG's prob not playing to get paid from 2+2 posters, so the fact that we know to fold to him doesn't mean he won't catch a fish.

This is utterly ridiculous.

But you've been playing breakeven for 2-3 years.

I think it's 2.2% not 2.56% when we factor in our blockers.

My previous response is in reply to this poast

Ok, we are 9.5 bb effective

This is utterly ridiculous.

Situation A:
A short stack shoves all in for $30.

Situation B:
$6 straddle UTG $15 blind raise UTG+1 even drunker guy blind bet $30

You think the calling ranges are the same? Not even close. People playing 1/3 are not calling a $286 all in preflop with the same hands as they are calling a $30 (actual 10BBs) all in no matter what blind bets there were.

Where do you people come up with this stuff? Do you actually believe it?

This is close. Those saying it's a slam dunk either way need to rethink their lives.

Was the highest math you ever took high-school geometry or something....? You seriously should stop posting math-related arguments on 2+2 because clearly you have zero expertise in it.

My reading comprehension or memory is so bad because I remember no slam dunk talk.

My guess is +EV shove if one plows through the math, but hard to say if that will be better than a limp to induce.

Actually I was the second person ever to take Algebra II and Trig at the same time at my high school. The first person was my older brother. Algebra II is a prerequisite before taking Trig.

This isn't a math related argument anyway. People dont call a $30 bet with the same range as a $286 bet in a 1/3 game no matter what straddling or blind betting action there was. It has nothing to do with math. The guy to heros left isnt sitting there with AT thinking "Hmmmm...its $286 to me, but its only 10BBs. I think I'll call."

Having said that, I never said shoving wasnt a good play here.

Those situations are not the same thing scaled differently, which (I think?) Is your claim?

If you're not gonna adjust your play for $55 in blinds instead of $4 in blinds when you're sitting on $286, that's your prerogative.

I didnt say you shouldn't adjust your play and I didnt say shoving was bad. I only said its not the same thing as 10 BBs effective.

Standard shove is standard

We are not at all concerned with the calling range of players behind us. Either they call too wide and we get value or they don't and we just earn a huge chunk of that 18bb in EV

Obviously, I did not mean high school geometry literally.

Algebra 2 & Trig isn't even that advanced. I took that as a freshman in high school.

Well yeah, ldo people aren't calling a $30 with the same range as a $286 bet. No one denied that.

Think of it this way. Whoever wants to limp in has to call the $30 blind bet. What's $300, formerly 100 big blinds, divided by $30? Or how many times can that limper call the blind bet with a $300 stack?

My strong suspicion is that my brother is better at the maths than your brother.

Very possible but I bet my dad can beat up your dad.

This might be one of the easiest shoves you could ever make. Anyone who even has the word fold pop in their head should quit poker.

Duh! I understand the math. Still not the same thing as 10BB effective.

You have to factor in the psychology of the game, peoples risk tolerance for certain amounts of money ect.

The word "effective" doesnt have the same meaning as people ITT are implying.

I agree with mikestar here, 286 might be (roughly) 10bb effective in this instance but your usual llsnl reg isn't thinking that way....they are thinking f me it's 286 to call... Most llsnl villans are rec players, not playing with an explicit poker bankroll or whwtever, they get there wages and came to gamble....286 isn't 10bb to them, it's $286...

Now what we choose to do with that info is something different.... There are gamblers who will call it off no problem at all, and there are bits who need exclusively aa or kk to put that money in the middle... You make your judgements bases on the info you have available....

With that said it might be technically correct to think of this as a 10bb stack, your average villan isn't thinking that way....and it would be a mistake to think that they do see it that way:

As an example... Same action as ops hand and utg who is pretty nitty but clearly understands the game open shoves.... You have 88.... It's 286 to call what do you do?

Clearly if it was 1-3 and he shoves 30, it's an easy call, you can him a bunch of ax,kx lower pp's etc....because he is so short....
For 286, just because we have a blind 30, you think he shoves a-7...??? Of course not....and it's a clear fold with 88..... As he just doesn't shove a full stack with less than 88....
Just because we understand we are 10bb effective, and have a proper bankroll doesn't mean our villans do, and we should factor that into our play...

100% all in there every hand (even ATs )

???

How is this ridiculous? If we're at a 10 handed table, we have all 9 people behind us who haven't looked at their hand yet. My guess is that most of us here trivially fold AJo from first position for this very reason, so what changes here? The fact that there's a bunch of dead money in the middle doesn't offset the chances of us easily being dominated by someone at the table.

ETA: I did some quick PokerStove tests, and I think we run into TT+/AQ+ 35% of the time (but don't quote me on that because it's possible I'm not stoving correctly by perhaps not factoring in our card removal). Anyhoo, at the very least someone should maths this.

Galso,youhavefairlylolhighstandardsforwhat"breakev en"meansG

Yeah, I'd be in this camp until someone shows some good maths.

GcluelessmathsnoobG