You're right about the 2.3:1, but I don't see how it relates the needing of 4:1 on the flop, that was not my point.

Point is that if you're calling a pf shove, you should push if he limps imo.

I mean if you would fold to a pf shove, then it's fine to check behind and c/f a non-good flop, but if you would call a shove, you're now getting exploited by checking behind and folding on flop, since he is doing a stop'n go.

I would call the shove but it's more advantageous to check and see what happens. Calling the shove is + ev but that doesn't mean that there isn't a better way to play this.

You can get information for free which is never a bad thing. We can then use this information to save ourselves chips when the flop is terrible.

My point about 4:1 is that we haven't got the odds to call a flop like the one you described and it's an advantage to fold. This information we got for free helps us.

From SB's perspective, if BB folds post, he has 27.510% equity. Obv if he busts he has .2 equity and if he doubles he has .2829 equity. If he gets it in on the flop vs 72o on a board where neither player has a pair he is approx a .785:.215 favorite.

If BB folds after not making a pair, then SB is looking at the following.

So it does appear that if we assume SB has no FE preflop, he does in fact gain by limp'n'go-ing with any non-paired hand, and if the BB hits a pair it is a cooler. I don't have the time to do the math from the BB's perspective, but approximately 50% of the equity is leaked to the BTN if he wins, included with the fact that hero has a pwning stack.

It may in fact be a 'win win' depending on who the BTN is for both players. Not sure if it is more profitable for the SB to do this with 100% of his range or a smaller range, but I think it is fair to assume a wider than equilibrium range is definitely profitable, depending on the BB. All of this assumes ICM is a fair way to value SB's stack, which is a bit dubious statement on its own. The assumption that it is 'win win' is also a bit unsettling to just assume is true, since the SB will be able to play a wider range.

Thanks for showing some maffs. Doesn't really negate the point you quoted at all, but definitely shows that it's a reasonable spot to try to implement this even against a thinking regular. I appreciate villains line more now than I did at first.

It wasn't really meant to. Maffs say what they say not ness what I want them too.

In this case you're actually getting "perceived" information, since villain is go'n'going, so really what information does that give you? Other than that you already know in advance you hate almost all flops.

You should shove over his limp and prevent him from exploiting you. If anything, you will show him a metagame lesson here when you open 72o when he calls with his rubbish.

While it seems pretty clear to me that by checking behind we are allowing him to play a wider range more profitably, we aren't necessarily being exploited, and in fact it maybe good for hero if villain is limp'n'go-ing his whole range. If we go by the assumption that villain is only limping the worst hands in an attempt to exploit, I still think the best play is to see a flop and fold on the worst ones.

Villain's actual hand here was A4o.

Does that change your view on his go n go, or should it be one of those hands he shoves pre for value?

Seems solid. As far as I can tell at this point, it is higher expectation to limp n go AK (even if you will shove atc, because he is giving you opportunity to see the flop, allowing him to test if he can play more hands). Whether or not it is correzt cram 27o is still debatable imo... because he can play more hands then equilibrium pushfold if we see flops.

I'd show him by minraising pre. If villain is mass tabling it'll get a lot more misclicks than shoving.

If villain would show up here with the top of his range, he would be pretty bad, since the last he would want with that is hero folding on the flop.

I've already shown that this is not true.

^^ Read this.

So basically, if we are AIPF, you run the cards and best 5 card hand wins. If we see the flop, the BB is folding a hand that would have made the best hand some % of the time vs SB's unpaired AKo. If the BB calls because his hand pairs or he flops OESD is irrelevant, because he was calling preflop anyway. The only thing that the SB loses is the value when the BB flops a pair/OESD/FD and the BB's hand holds or improves to the best hand.

Cliffs: assuming ICM/etc is correct, the SB doesn't want the BB to call when the SB is a 71% favorite on the flop.

And in fact, it is +cEv for the SB if the BB folds the flop when BB folds the flop when the SB is a 71% favorite.

You're misinterpreting what I said imo. I'm saying that limping SB with top of his range would be a mistake compared to shoving and thus getting more calls by BB.

ICM tax tho. He wants you to fold, but since you are never folding preflop but will (or may) fold post flop, it is a higher expectation play (with everything but medium PPs+).

What? We're already ITM, so if villain has JJ+ he wants to get all the chippies in the middle. Best way to do so is by shoving pf. easy game.

So he should shove to insure he gets maximum value out of 3% of his equilibrium shoving range???

If he limps AA here that's just pretty terrible.

In a one hand vacuum, sure. If they were to play the hand 100 times, probably not.

Ehm..nevermind. You're not just arguing for the sake of arguing. Enjoy!

Taking some shortcuts to do math of shoving pf vs checking pf & call/fold flop 35/65, both vs atc.

Shove is 39.07 with wiz.

Propokertools says this about 72o equity vs atc on different flops: http://www.propokertools.com/simulat...=72o&h2=100%25. Let's say we get it in with about 30%+ equity for around 35% of times (afaik this would be mostly pairs and any sort of draws), let's assume that gives us an avg equity of 60%. That would give this scenario an icm-ev of 39.47.

65% of time after checking stacks are 6878, 4846, 1776, which is the same frequency as we'd get 6102, 4846, 2552 when we shove. With checking we'd also have about 14% of 6102, 4846, 2552 (and 21% HU). Which scenario is more profitable for us if we only consider the frequencies of sb staying alive from pwn pov?

I follow what you mean now. Sry for confusion, we are on same page and I apolgize if otta line..

IDK about pwn stuff here. Fwiw I think bubble & itm hands are easier to discuss with reads on players folded out pre cause it does matter imo.