I play with a regular at my local casino who is what I will politely call an 'uninformed/underinformed button masher'. He demonstrates near zero skill ability to play post flop with regard to hand strength, position, and bet sizing.

His one distinct trait that I have observed over the years playing with him is that he will shove all-in PF with only AA, KK, AKo/s, AQo/s regardless of his position, what the action is to him, and how many other opponents are already in the pot. He thinks his shove is intimidating and many 1/3 players who do not understand this phenomena will fold all but the nuts to him.

I called off his $1000 (eff) PF shove with KK from the BB after UTG+1 opened to $15, got two MP callers and Villain RRAI OTB, all others folded.

My hand math says (some rounded approximations for ease):
6 combos of AA = will win 15.5% (19% PF holding possibilities X 0.8 [KK 1:4 vs. AA])
1 combo of KK = tie
8 combos of AK = will win ~8.5% (26% PF holding possibilities X 0.33 [KK 2:1 vs. AKs/o combos])
16 combos of AQ = will win ~17% (52% PF holding possibilities X 0.33 [KK 2:1 vs AQs/o combos])

I can expect to win outright ~55% of time vs. V1's PF shove, with dead money included, makes this is a +EV situation, albeit a very small one overall. I realize the math says to always engage a +EV situation and casinos build hotel towers based on house edges as low as ~1% on all bets small as well as large high roller action.

Unlike the casino, I do not have infinite time or a near unlimited bankroll, so is pushing this small of an edge really to my advantage? His post-flop play with other holdings makes him easily beatable and he has a VPIP ~30% excluding PF all-ins

My BRM style is that one 100BB buy-in represents 1% of my overall bankroll & I would only max out at 5% overall BR in any one session between buy-ins and top-offs. I used to use a 10% BR rule for max win, but now trust that I can effectively continuously (re)assess game for value potential.

Short answer: if your bankroll is really 100 buyins, that’s more than enough to take any possible edge you think you can identify.

I'm too lazy to double check the math, but yeah, if you're positive of his range and the math checks out, then in a vacuum you're supposed to call here if your bankroll can handle it.

However, there are a couple of other things you may want to factor in.

One, how's your mental state going to be when you lose (both shortterm and mediumterm), such as when you run into AA or he binks his AK? I don't think (?) I've ever gotten in $1000 into a 1/3 NL pot (that is just the way our game goes, and in fact his $985 raise is actually $185 larger than our maximum bet rule), so while I pride myself on tilt control / keeping an even keel, I'm pretty sure even I might go a little off the deep end after losing one of these (especially knowing there is a possibility it is the only one I'll encounter in my playing lifetime). I know: get better at tilt control, but that is easier said than done.

Two, you may want to take a pass if the table is packed with ez-to-play fish and you're already deepstacked against all of them in a limited BI game and you're a deepstack expert. The smallish +EV that you have in this particular hand may not be worth it if you have to BI for the limited amount after getting stacked (i.e. the smallish EV of the current hand doesn't outweigh the amount of EV you lose in the next little while thanks to not being able to cover deep fish).

GnothingisplayedinavacuumG

I carried over a 1000 Big Bet BR from my 10/20 fixed limit days. Since mid-stakes fixed limit games are fast disappearing in favor of LLSNL (10/20 was considered the bottom end of the range according to Bob Ciaffone in his book on Middle Limit Hold'Em), I figured I had to make the transition. I've only been playing 1/2 & 1/3 for a few years. I went from being a break even at best player up until this last year. The onset of the covid closures gave me time to study and learn. Since casinos have re-opened with short(er) handed play (7 or 8) instead of full ring games I have managed to become profitable and added/grown my BR above its original starting level.

I know the Kelly criterion would say to definitely engage this type of proposition. But applying (extreme) standard deviations and trying to keep Risk of Ruin (RoR) below 3% so as not have to go back 'down' to 1/2 with same BR buy-in parameters, these types of 'coin-flips' push the risk factor further and further as V1 shove gets larger, i.e. flipping for 300BB+ with a 4-5% edge creeps up to the 3 STDV limit with respect to 3% ROR, if that makes any sense?

I'm not a pro and don't play full-time with the expectation of earning a living. I am recreational player who is trying not to play like a purely recreational player. I try to apply financial outlook aspects to poker as I would other activities where I have money on the line; winning is more fun. Not entirely sure about moving up in stakes either; occasional shots at $5 BB games is within my norm, but it is on infrequent occasions and must be under the right conditions.

It might be a small sample size, but in the 50-60 occassions where I have seen V1 get called, these are the only hands he has rolled over as players here are forced to do so when all-in PF so as to dispel any collusion considerations.

Less than a 1/4 time has V1 had stack >200BB (effective) when challenged. Average stack depth is usually between 80-140BB (effective); I see opponents (some after getting tired of this antic throughout the night), finally call off with less than ideally strong hands due to frustration, e.g. AJo/s, KQo/s, 99-JJ as they are unaware of this 'pattern' that I have noticed. I have my own feelings about calling off PF with QQ, even against this Villain and knowing what I know.

AA is a no-brainer and I think +EV is enough with KK. But you're right regarding mental tilt as well as the capped buy-in disadvantages.

1. Your back of the hand math underestimates the advantage. KK vs. {KK+, AQ+} has 59.47% equity.

2. You've miscalculated your edge. Technically we should account for the possibility of the opener calling but don't feel like doing the work and it's rare. I'll also round the numbers slightly. If we go with the 55% equity estimate, we're paying $1000 of a $2045 pot with 55% equity, for 2045*.55-1000 = $125. $125/$1000 = 12.5% edge, not 5%. With the corrected equity it's a 21.6% edge. That's massive and it's just arrogant to think you're so much better than your opponents that you can pass on that much EV and still beat them for a worthwhile amount.

3. 5% isn't even a small edge anyway. If we were talking casino games advantage players would pay thousands of dollars and fly across the country for such an opportunity.

4. The fact that losing a big pot could tilt you isn't a reason to fold, it's a reason to rack up before you even get into this spot. If losing 300BB sends you on tilt you have no business sitting with 300BB in the first place. Mental fortitude is just as important to being a winning player as any strategic game knowledge, maybe more, so I really hate advice to take into account the possibility of going on tilt. People who are mentally weak shouldn't play this game, or even gamble in general.

5. The point about buyin caps is sometimes legitimate, but not for such a huge +EV spot.

If someone is reliably shoving KK+, AQ+ every time, you should feel very good getting it in with KK. You’re going to win in this configuration almost 60%. To get 60/40 for 300 bb is amazing for your bottom line.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If above is true...

None of the below really matters.

Kind of a silly question.

So and so is losing $300/hr at the table.

Never mind that.

Just tell me if I should shove all-in pre as a slight favorite.

It is my perception that his All-In shove is intended to 'intimidate' all but the nuts...a lot of 1/3 players where I am are not really properly bankrolled for 1/3, might be playing 'scared' money, and/or are playing from a recreational standpoint with X amount of discretionary funds from their work paychecks. That's why they will eventually frustratedly call off with the likes of AJ & KQ.

I don't know if I'd consider myself a 'sharpie', but the few smart players I've seen call him off with AA or KK and even AK, so when he sees those hands and ends up on the wrong side of the run out, he packs his tail between his legs for the night, goes home to regroup and comes back another day. I very rarely see him rebuy - it's a split between the times I see him cash out for 300-500BB+ as opponents just hand over chips to him with inferior holdings and the times I see him go broke.

As stated, I think he has now become aware that other opponents know that he knows he has very little post-flop playing skills. Other than flopping super strong hands, he really lacks awareness of all other essential elements (bet sizing, position play, hand reading, pot odds & IO, etc.). He is just about incapable of bluffing and might as well turn his hand face up and/or insta-muck his hand when he misses his draw as comprehending showdown value with second (or maybe even 3rd pair) even when draw missed still has some value in some situations is really beyond his grasp.

Days of Our Lives at the poker table - who woulda thunk it?

That's a lot of drama conjured up for not folding pre with KK. Is this some kind of level?

Given a $1.05 overlay for each $1 wagered on a coin flip, you'd certainly be smart to take the bet even if you had as little as $100 on you at the time, as it would just be a function of the varying number of flips you would need to complete before you won all the money.

But ask the same number people if they'd be willing to risk their entire bankroll, life savings, etc. for an even money payout in a situation where they are a 7:3 favorite would get you a lot of 'no thanks' as the fear of losing everything 30% overwhelms their decision making. Kelly Criterion would also discourage taking this proposition.

I didn't realize my advantage was so high, especially if I was confident of V1's range (which doesn't mean my assessment is 100% correct - V1 can have made adjustment to KK+, AK only which would change advantage edge). Again limited sample size is maybe not most reliable indicator, but it's what I had going into decision.

Yes, shoving with KK pre is only difficult in a handful of situations, majority of time it's just short of a no-brainer.

But given earlier coin flip scenario, where you might now only get $0.98 on third successive win and/or you have to pay $1.05 on third successive loss changes dynamics as to whether this is really +EV over the long run.

If V1's PF shove range has shrunk, then lesser (if any edge) on 3% of total bankroll can have reasonably statistically viable negative outcomes, i.e. Risk of Ruin (RoR) or significant losses (25-30% of total BR) that are still within 2-3 STDVs even within a near, short(er) term as opposed to having infinite time and infinite opportunities to balance out variance fluctuations.

If V1's PF shove range vacillates between KK+, AQ+ and KK+, AK with unknown frequency, then risk models are even more uncertain.

Never mind - I apologize for getting involved in the discussion.

Apologies, if my pedantic inquiries don't meet your standards of sophistication and erudition.

Would it please thee if I should return back under the rock from which I once earlier ventured forth?