What calling ranges are these based on? Software tends to assume tighter calling ranges than are likely from human opponents.

That is compared to folding, which is not an option at all. There is probably more $EV in defending or 3!/folding.

See above TT+ AKs and seems fine for live ime/imo

I am glad you agree with my calling range.

OP's stack is worth about $50K. If OP gains on average 1.5xBB to a 50xBB stack by defending, that is worth about $1K. It is clear there is more value in defending or 3!/folding without the huge variance.

This hand is not that big a spew, but it is an example of the fallacy of running software and finding some push is $EV+, and not considering other alternatives are more $EV+ without the risk of not cashing or taking 5th or 6th.

If you make the shoves repeatedly, there is a really good chance you will get called and lose and wind up a short stack.

None of the ICMizer links take me to the actual scenarios, just what I assume is the default one you can configure.

I would also be pretty surprised if button raise/folded AKo in this scenario.

As I mentioned, getting called and losing also destroys your capacity to steal pots. As the chip leader on the bubble you could really open every hand first in and you'll pick up pots without putting yourself at nearly as much risk. It's not just about the $EV of this hand but about how your decision affects your ability to make +$EV plays on future hands.

Yeh, ICM is usually too conservative, like in calling and risking your stack, it does not consider the benefit if you double up and take the chip lead. However, here it may not consider enough the benefit of preserving your stack.

Also, silver assumed a TT+/AK calling range, which seems accurate in practice. However, based on my experience and the results I get running simulations (I am not good with software), software will recommend a much tighter calling range, like QQ+ or KK+. So if you think you are getting called that tight, you can rip whatever. In practice, particularly if real players see you shoving like that, you will get called lighter than you expect.

That is also a question, is this the first time OP ripped like this?

There is a real problem with using software simulations in isolation. They will not call as tight as the software thinks they should. It effects your table image. It doesn't consider other good options as a big stack for this hand and future hands with your stack.

Did you create a free account with icmizer? I hope it works, as it’s very easy for everyone to share icmizer results this way, tweak ranges and run again etc

I agree with AKo, I suspect live rec will sigh call that. That’s 12 extra combos that dominate us 2/1. But icmizer (not me fwiw) included TT+ AKs only.

This is super important. It’s also getting to exactly the direction I’m hoping this thread goes.

While I can’t be sure, I don’t believe FGS comes close to modelling the future value of a dominant stack in a bubble situation. It also fails to account for player edge.

I'd find it hard to believe the top Germans haven't figured out a way to model this better than existing publicly available software. These SHR tournaments have so much at stake on the bubble, that it'd be worth sinking significant resources into the problem.

Modeling edge might be harder

Heh, yes, especially since every mtt player thinks they have one

I’d imagine any calculation of EV in an allin decision should take into account some net present value of our future edge. That may lead us to take an edge pass in spots that are +$ev but not enough to be worth it.

But then if we keep passing on these spots it actually reduces our edge, so it’s an iterative thing too.

This seems a perfect spot to ask whether the net present value of our future edge is greater a $500 +$ev shove with A2s.

One of the key ideas behind ICM is that each individual chip in a tournament is worth less than the previous one, so it ought to be taking into consideration how much worse losing your big stack is than winning the pot is.

If OP has been doing this previously the real calling range for button might be even wider. 99, AQs, 88 maybe?

I did not! I will do that and then try again.

I think for me this is the main takeaway from this spot.

We can debate about the utility of flatting + donks or taking 3b/f lines, but at the end of the day the bread and butter for getting chips as CL in this spot is just raise first in, playing IP, cbet take down, rinse and repeat. So thats some argument for just flatting A2s, play a small pot and get it over with quickly and get back to the more profitable IP positions.

This is a profitable defend because you are getting 4.5-1 immediate pot odds and your hand is only little behind a relatively tight BTN range. Then you have him outchipped on top of that.

I would not see a need to do anything but defend. 3!/fold could wind up as a big pot in which you also risk your chip lead. If BTN flat calls, you are OOP in a big pot with probably a dominated hand. Yes, you could put pressure of busting BTN. You could also gii with a draw against top pair or an overpair or whatever. Of course you should have some 3! bluffs, but this does not seem like the best hand and situation for that.

I would open light in this situation, but not at all ATC at this stakes these days. You have a lead over comparable stacks and short stacks that can shove on you. Opening ATC is overdoing trying to exploit the bubble, as is this huge 3! shove.

Reading this and looking at stuff I've seen in the past, I tend to believe A2 is a pure call here, especially with ICM implications. I could be convinced low frequency 3-bet/folding some suited wheel Ax is ok. Most of our 3-bets are gonna be our premium pairs, big suited Ax and some suited connectors.

I think if we're going to have some jams here, they'll probably be a smattering of middle pairs and offsuit Ax that wants to take down the pot right now and don't play as well post-flop in low SPR scenarios.

I mostly agree with this. You do want to balance 3!/calls with some 3!/folds. Maybe suited gappers or other hands with some playability, but not that much value defending. Axs does have the blocker. You might want to push big aces and mid pps, which you might not want to 3!/call with due to ICM. It might be better to just defend with those hands also.

I know we have BTN outchipped, but it might be better strategy not to have many 3!s or jams. Not sure you really want to be playing big pots against another big stack.

One thought on OPs post:

You have stated that you believe there was a lot of value abusing this bubble. While I agree that 6/7 getting paid is a good spot to abuse as a chipleader, the structure of the tournament (not being in the money yet when average stack is only 28bb) and the chip distribution with the short stacks only being 1/3 of the big stack work against a player truly abusing the bubble with only a 50bb stack.

If, for example, you had 75-100bbs and there were two sub 10bb stacks, the mid stacks would be more likely to wait for a bust out before wanting to mess with the big stack in the bb and you could survive a big hand and still retain a chip lead. Realistically here, any double up of small stack basically swaps position with the medium stacks and your battle with the third place stack knocked you down to a short stack.

Yeah, you have a slight lead over 2 other big stacks and there are 3 short stacks with reshove stacks. You can obviously easily lose the chip lead. This is also live with top heavy payouts. You are not in a situation to extremely abuse the bubble. The situation you describe in your second paragraph would be a good situation to abuse the bubble.

In this situation, you can open wider and play somewhat more aggressively postflop with the chip lead, but not at all open every hand as someone suggested.

Making huge overshoves is generally not the best way to abuse the bubble. You can make a bet that threatens another bet for someone's stack for example.

I think hand 1 is a spew. I understand what OP is going for but it's too big of a shove. I think it's either a flat or a 3b/f. If the villain had a shorter stack then we can work some math where shoving makes sense.

I think also it's worth thinking about what hands that the villain would have that would fold to a shove and not a 3 bet. Or 3 bet and 1/3 bet on the flop.

Hand 2 is standard. You can just shove 16BB from the button with TT or you can miniraise and try and get someone to make a mistake.

A2s is a better hand to shove with than to 3!/fold with. It has a blocker and good equity allin against a tight range, both of which are important if you are committing your stack. From the BB, I would probably 3!/fold something playable less than jack-high. Then you do not have so much value defending and it is easy to barrel with air. With A2s, you do not know where you are postflop with ace-high or either pair.

3!/fold seems like better to pressure the 35xBB stack with the 50xBB stack. You threaten to take him all by the river without committing your whole stack. As discussed, it is hard for the shove to be good with the massive ICM issues for you.

Hand 2, I would minraise with 14xBB, as TT is so high in your range from the button, but shove this hand from early position.

I agree. I think trying to bully the bubble with only 25% of the chips at a seven handed table is a strategic mistake with these stack sizes. Solid play rather than huge overshoves seems to be a better approach.

I also wonder if the other players' perceptions of OP is the same as he described. I have seen guys make late runs and becoming the chipleader playing hands in a wild fashion. It's hard to fold to such guys when you get a real hand like QQ. OP clearly has a lot of theory behind his move and certainly seems to have an advanced understanding of the game- I just wonder if the other players saw this during game play.

Yeah, thinking back, this as well. I think this is one of the big differences between live and online, online is just a game of ppl 'playing their ranges', but live even if a CL is making standard bullying plays, it feels a bit more personal and theres a little bit more animosity and its much more tempting (especially for a rec player) to just decide to make a stand and call you down.

There is 95k up top and some juicy $ just under it. If BTN gets this wrong he goes home with zip. I agree QQ is a call here but JJ flips against AK AQ KQ and is dominated by QQ+ so even JJ is a brutal call. AKs is flipping against ANY pp.

If V makes a call wider than TT+ AKs they are simply wrong - mathematically wrong - provided the opening range for BTN is around 24%

Unlucky to run into the top of his range and then brick the Axs v QQ

This is the bottom line here. AWs is well known to hold its equity vs all but AA. Add in the blocker, and this make it so appealing. Even QQ is not a fist pump here.

Sorry what is edge?

PIOSolver Edge