Doing some reviews, and wiz has thrown this hand up as quite severely negative $EV.

The villain was an unknown, but I've given him a reasonably accurate range as he did call.

It looks like a beyond standard shove to me, but the math seems to suggest that it's really bad, and doesn't become plus EV unless the villain starts calling something like 22%, which is unrealistic.

In game I would never fold this, but it looks like a leak.









I mean, it can't be right, right?

Its an easy shove.

Do you have any special reason to assume utg only limps 12%?

Why is your edge set to 0.11 when you have 10 bbs?

jam and it's not even close.

easy,easy shove.

Yes, I agree, it looks like a beyond easy shove and I would always make it. However the math appears to show that it isn't optimal.

Therefore we're faced with a problem. Why?

Two potential answers:
1) I've made a mechanical error [Pag],
2) It's in fact correct and we need to do some analysis of why that could possibly be.

Just saying what I've already said ("a beyond standard shove") does nothing.



@Pagasses

Well that's the thing. I've played with the opening and calling ranges and wiz still has it as a fold on 0 edge (was just playing with edge too but as you can see it doesn't affect that SS) with him limping 20%, even limping 20% and calling 11%, which is the minimum calling range based on the result. It doesn't make much difference. Only limping 20%+ and only calling JJ+ makes it +EV. He surely isn't ever limp folding AKs, AK, AQs, AQ, TT.

And the tighter we make him (an unknown) the more -EV it becomes.

In game he called with 4s. If we set to opening 11% (44+, KQs, AT+, A8s+) and calling 11% - which is perfectly possible, there are fish that just limp as their open and this one called half his stack with 4s, it becomes REALLY -EV.

Basically, wiz thinks it's bad to actually get all-in here, even against hands we dominate, because of the short stack.

I suppose one potential answer to this is that ICM doesn't account for increased future +EV from using a doubled up stack effectively here?

This is the ft 9 handed, right?

I will simplify:wiz dont know that you are going to be the bb soon, that you are going to lose fe and that your chances to fisnish in the 3 first places will decrease. Wiz also dont know the satck utility in case you double up. ICM here shouldnt be an issue for you cause one mistake in this spot is never a huge mistake in $.

Suppose you have the same 10 10 and that you are 4 handed. CL has 30k, you have 20k and the other guys have 8.5k each. You are the bb and CL is the SB. Everyone folds till sb who shoves. Here is where ICM its important and should have a huge impact in your decision because the diff between a fold and a call represents way more in terms of $.

Hope its clear for you. gl in the tables

These are good points.


It's interesting you provide this example, as the pay jump in a 45 between 4th and 3rd is actually almost the same as between 7th and 8th. So it seems to me that bubble decisions are in fact highly sensitive: I don't feel that's emphasized enough on these forums generally.

That said I do agree with your conclusion, but it's interesting that this is still in fact marginal, somehow. It's baffling to me, but it basically is. 99 is really in very bad shape in this same spot ICM wise (another easy shove as my and most others' instinct).

UTGs limp range is very important, also the player type. Some fish will not limp fold for 10bb at his stack size, if that's the case his limp is now essentially a shove. If you have fold equity then that's a huge plus.

TT here is obv +chips but your never excited to run it to showdown. 40-45% of the time your busting 8th and getting 0. That's why the fold equity is crucial and why Wiz thinks so negatively of the shove. The times you win at showdown you need to make up quite a bit of money with your 8k stack to justify the risk.

-.48% isn't the magical answer either. I think you could argue taking spots like that as a shorter stack with the blinds coming around. But that's not a solved debate. The math isn't lying, don't avoid what it's saying cuz it's quite important to 45 mans.

Thanks for the response. So you could fold this against an unknown, readless?