Thank you all for the support and input.

I don't take anything personally though.
Hoping you won't take mine too.
On the contrary, I just like to hear someone would explain us how pushing 44 here would be good. You can carry on if you want, I would enjoy it. But there is nothing wrong when you don't want.

Though JanF13, if you like, please can you tell us, what would be your pushing range?
Something like 44+, A8o+, A3s+, KJo+, KTs+, QTs+?


And one general advice, if we're talking about turbo 45-mans and I guess other turbos too, it is just that we can't go much beyond wiz ranges (assuming we're modeling the opponents right in every single hand) in FT in these games. There is not room.

i can`t fold this here.
too much chips in the middle already and i dont mind to gamble here.

please show me the math
please show me the probability

please what ranges do you think people will call with if this is shoved?

+1 to not pushing= leak.

Fwiw its still possible to have 20%+ roi in 3$ 45'er.

So u play strictly ICM at all FT?

this is shove a dont flame about nothing cause it makes thread more important than it is

fyp

Please teach me the ways of achieving +20% roi in turbo mtsngs.

Don't care if it's 18's, 45's, or 180's as long as it's turbo.

What do u think sets you apart from the marginal winners?

Especially over a large sample. I can beat the games, but not stomp them.

you got to ask Glitlr to answer that question, not him.
His mouth is shut when it comes to give advice.

->> http://sngprotege.com/apply.php

I don't think you can have 20+ ROI in $7 45-man when multi-tabling and over a large sample. I guess it would remain 15-20 maximum if you play excellent and not too many tables.

You can have 20+ ROI for like 500 games usually. Maybe 1000 games if you are like 1-4-tabling.

For example I ran 14% for 2000 games, then 20% for 400 games and after that break even for 600 games.
During that time I didn't change my strategy even a bit to see how the variance goes. I never tilt also.

I guess you can get 20-30%+ ROI in 180-man+.



(And I'm tired of that 44. It is a fold. :P )

ICM is the basis in FT. It won't tell you exactly what to do. It just tells you what the stacks are worth at every given time. Then you can do calculations on that info taking into account every player's looseness and your image and so on.
Of course I play ICM every FT.
It is like the laws of physics. You can pretend it isn't there but it is always there whether you play accordingly or not.
If you know your opponent uses ICM and you know how it goes and you take advantage of it then it means you are using ICM also.

+1
don't think i can ever fold here with 4bbs

I would shove though I am not thrilled about it.

This is the classic argument had with 45 mans, someone shouts "ICM though" and quotes sngwiz ranges. Then someone goes "fk ICM, I ignore it". The funny thing is I am of the belief that neither of these views is correct and the truth lies in between these views.

In this case folding our way to the money is going to be v hard 9 handed and maintaining some form of fold equity is important, once the blinds go through us, we are forced to showdown at some point and that is not far away.

So yeah basically is a spot where we understand that in a vacuum this is --EV, yet it is going to be easily our best spot to get our chips in, before our stack is decimated.

It is a fold because -

On average BB calls you about 60% (wiz gives it 63%, lets take wiz estimates as average coz I would call 80-100%) of the time(22+,A2s+,K2s+,Q2s+,J2s+,T4s+,96s+,86s+,A2o+,K 2o+,Q2o+,J4o+,T6o+,98o ), you lose against that range 47%. It means you lose 47%*0.63=29.61% of your pushes against him.

SB calls you about 29% (22+,A2s+,K5s+,Q9s+,JTs,A2o+,K9o+,QJo ) , you lose vs. that range 50.4%, losing 50.4%*0.29=14.6% of your pushes to him.

BTN calls 15% (33+,A4s+,KTs+,A8o+ ), you lose 57.1% vs. range and 57.1%*0.15=8.565% of the times you push.

CO calls 14% (44+,A4s+,KJs+,A8o+ ), you lose 58.5% vs. range and 58.5%*0.14=8.19% of the pushes.

UTG+4 calls you 19% (33+,A2s+,KTs+,A5o+,KQo ), you lose 54.1% vs. range and 54.1%*0.19=10.279 of your pushes.


If we add up all those pushes you lose to everyone we get that you lose 29.61%+14.6%+8.565%+8.19%+10.279%=71.244% of your pushes.
(This is not an exact number because there might be three-way all ins in rare cases and someone with better hand might get isolated, but this gives a rough idea.)

On the other hand if you'd go all in while being next time on BB with 27 vs. only one opponent with AK you lose less - 67% of the times (you don't have to go all in on BB) and you can get better cards until you're on BB next time.

So it is stupid to risk with 71%+ of chances to get killed where sometimes there will bust 3 players in very next hands/you can get better hands and vs. just one opponent who is less likely to have a pair compared to 5 opponents you would push against.
All this gives us much more chances than in pushing 44.

You don't need a big stack to get a good place in 45-man. You can double up once with some rag (27 vs. AK) and once more and you're in top3. It is just that you don't need that many BBs to get a good place. Everyones stack is actually very short compared to M all through FT anyway.

Is it actually a view? We can view the universe using the laws of physics known to man but if we didn't the laws would still apply as I already said earlier.
I think that ICM is always there. You don't need to view it for it to be there. It is just whether you use it and how and in what extent. Everyone uses it in some extent intuitively and may get a better result with intuition, leaving out mistakes one can make in ICM calculations.

Correcting my own post:


We can't actually add up those percentages because they usually call one at a time. (We can still look at those numbers though.)
Then they are beating us 54% on average if someone calls and more if there would be more than two players all in including us, beating us about 60% of the time we are called down (everybody would roughly push their 5% over others also).
And we are called pretty much every time because the probabilities add up as 140% chances of being called.

Taking that into account and considering we can wait for better hands and wait for players to bust, it is careless to risk busting ourselves with 60% chances.

lolpopotroll.gif (I can see ur contribution itt is great)

Musaire, u obv done a nice work trying to sort this out. Just a few notes:

Ur giving villians very very very wide callingranges imo.

A) Why would SB gamble 55% of his stack and call with stuff like K5s, A2o, 22? Thats really never gonna happen he calls that wide. And especially with no reads given u can figure this out and especially dont assume he calls this wide.

B) In general u give them to wide callingranges imo. And we without reads on BB we cant really tell if he is gonna call like 60%.

C) Remember its still 9handed. 2 more has to bust.

D) Also if u fold this hand, u would need a very good hand next time because shorty is already all in. Next hand again ur shoving into the bigstack. And two hands after (blinds possible up till 1600/800) ur have forced urself down to 2150 chips with blinds at 1600t.

E) Now get 44 in before u bust 8 or 9 urself, and even if u survive u set urself up for a nice 7th place! Thats just laughable with this topheavy payoutstructure.

callingranges are really really bad/loose

These calling ranges are according to Wiz I suppose. Even if we adjust them and adjust the edge, it's still a fold if we configure Wiz to $ option. I think the whole thread comes down to using ICM or not to analyze the hand. We should consider the big money jumps of getting 1-3 places, but we should also consider the % of times we fold and hit ITM, or at least get into the bubble with the BB already all in. After following this thread for a while now, it's still not a trivial spot to me because of these stacksizes. If we run into bad cards and take the BB for example, we would probably be already ITM and defending the BB with ATC to double up. So it's not like our equity in the tournament drops too much when we fold the hand, although I'm not too happy with folding either.

U dont know wether or not BB will be all-in before the bubble. He can double up and have a 6k stack!

They are indeed not adjusted! Wiz maybe folds, but it is the INDEPENDENT model.

Ur pretending both BB and UTG dosnt double up, but busting, what if they double or even just BB doubles??!?! U cannot know! We cannot take for granted we going itm bye folding here.

Also its pretty obv we need more info from op about villians. But that was not given.

How about our future equity?

Our future equity is precisely what I'm debating here.

U still assume the % is so large that is more profitable to fold. Else u would have shoved. Indirectly u also assume u can find a better spot. Which will be very hard unless u pick up a monster. Which then go back to that we a high % of the time will be at 2100t at blind level 1600t. Yes maybe we are the money, maybe we are not. But its a fact we now have set us self up for a nice 6th, 7th or 8th place.



Nothing is black and white in poker. We have different thoughts and different reasons for making either a shove or fold. I guess we should leave it there. Its obv. we will never agree which is totally fine imo.

soulread
2 general opinions, no final result - it is just allways the same with these kind of threads/spots

mckrogh, you said I am giving too wide calling ranges in these calculations.
Yes, they are very wide indeed.
I took them to get the approximate results and give you an idea how many hands you would lose in a loose table with not so many regs and a weak BB (ranges maybe apply to $1 45-man and $3 45-man with lots of fishes in some extent). Tightening the ranges doesn't change really nothing. Only this much:


Let's assume it is me calling you at all those positions being BB and SB etc and knowing you are a tight pushing only 13% (44+,A9o+,A7s+,A5s, KJs+).
I would be really tight calling (I would call approximately as wizard would because I actually would) except when on BB:

On BB I'm calling you 74.7% (22+,A2s+,K2s+,Q2s+,J2s+,T2s+,92s+,82s+,72s+,62s+, 52s+,42s+,32s,A2o+,K2o+,Q4o+,J6o+,T6o+,96o+,85o+,7 5o+,65o,54o), you lose 46.6% to that range.

SB calling only 5.9% (88+,AQo+,AJs+), but you will lose 65.4%

BTN 4.2% (99+,AKo,AQs+) 68.9%

CO 2.6% (TT+,AKs) 77.2%

UTG+4 1.8% (JJ+) 81.0%

You would get called 89.2% of the time but you are beaten 67.8% on average when called, more if two players call you and push. So it would be the same, you are beaten ~60%+. BB at reg infested table would call you wider while others tighter.

Those were really tight ranges now. If they were a bit wider as in real life but BB would fold even KJo then you can push 44.
Folding KJ there is pretty bad, so you'd have to know BB would do that.

Don't know what you meant by Independent Chip Model.
Isn't it independent because it doesn't depend on players skill, it only depends on stack sizes and those stack sizes do set the limits to every player no matter what their skill levels are? :/
It is all dependent on how you can read your opponents looseness, their future actions and know their ranges and since we used all that info about ranges in our calculations there is nothing more our actions depend on. Is there?