a question about the stop and go
04-05-2008
, 07:34 AM
Hi!
Sorry for posting a general sorta' question instead of a hand, but I have been really wondering about this one.
I have been browsing through the anthology of mtt wisdom, and bumped into Greg Raymer's explanation of the stop&go (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/show...=&sb=5&o=&vc=1). Of course it is not like the first time I have seen it explained, and i have seen a coupla of people trying to take advantage of it in MTTs, but I just somehow have a hard time understanding how and when it can be +cEV as compared to a preflop push.
As I understand in a typical scenario you are sitting OOP against 1 villain who bet into you (or rereaised you) preflop and you dont have enough chips to make him lay down his hand preflop, but enough chips to scare him postflop if the flop misses him.
Based on this I think we can assume that you have around a pot sized stack left if you just call. (maybe that is the wrong assumption I make, however I cant see people folding at any point if you have much less than that, and I can see them folding right there if you have much more)
Now the plan is that we push on every single flop. If he calls then the stop&go play made no difference (compared to preflop push), since he was calling preflop anyways, so we end up with the same result. Therefore we should profit out of the cases he folds. If we have a pot sized stack left he is getting 1:2. This means, that we are getting superior cEV to the preflop push in the cases we can make him laydown a hand on the flop that was better than a 1:2 dog, and getting inferior cEV when he folds a hand that was worse than a 1:2 dog. (Of course I am assuming that he would have always called preflop.)
I admit I havent done much math (although I am capable if needed, I am a mathematician, just lazy atm
), but I feel that the sooner happens much less frequently than the latter.
Greg for example suggest to use the play with a hand like 88.
I usually assume that if i can make no more than a pot sized AI then Villain is calling me at least with any top pair or second pair, pockets that have no more than 1 overcard to them or any decent draw (is that a wrong assumption?).
So the hands he folds are weaker than these. But hands that are weaker than these usually will be worse than 1:2 dogs on the flop vs 88. (Or so I think, maybe I should do some kind of approximation instead of guessing)
Sure Greg's example when we flop AKQ and make Villain lay down the TT is a fun one. But that is pretty rare too.
If it was a 2bet-call situation preflop, I think we are making him fold just way too many Ace-rag, small pp kind of hands (i find that people open with these unreasonably often), when they get a bad flop.
I can imagine it getting better results if we called a 3bet from the villain. If he is the kind who will lay down QQ-JJ on the flop to our bet if there is a single Ace out there, sure it sounds like more of a good play, however if we think that the vast majority of PPs in villain's 3-bet range are higher than 88 then maybe a preflop fold would be the best for our health to begin with.
I am not a very experienced tournament player (I play $20-$50, and have around 100-150 tourneys total behind me) so I might make completely stupid assumptions. Also I might draw bad conclusions. So please enlighten me and show me a couple of situations maybe where the stop and go is a good play.
Sorry for posting a general sorta' question instead of a hand, but I have been really wondering about this one.
I have been browsing through the anthology of mtt wisdom, and bumped into Greg Raymer's explanation of the stop&go (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/show...=&sb=5&o=&vc=1). Of course it is not like the first time I have seen it explained, and i have seen a coupla of people trying to take advantage of it in MTTs, but I just somehow have a hard time understanding how and when it can be +cEV as compared to a preflop push.
As I understand in a typical scenario you are sitting OOP against 1 villain who bet into you (or rereaised you) preflop and you dont have enough chips to make him lay down his hand preflop, but enough chips to scare him postflop if the flop misses him.
Based on this I think we can assume that you have around a pot sized stack left if you just call. (maybe that is the wrong assumption I make, however I cant see people folding at any point if you have much less than that, and I can see them folding right there if you have much more)
Now the plan is that we push on every single flop. If he calls then the stop&go play made no difference (compared to preflop push), since he was calling preflop anyways, so we end up with the same result. Therefore we should profit out of the cases he folds. If we have a pot sized stack left he is getting 1:2. This means, that we are getting superior cEV to the preflop push in the cases we can make him laydown a hand on the flop that was better than a 1:2 dog, and getting inferior cEV when he folds a hand that was worse than a 1:2 dog. (Of course I am assuming that he would have always called preflop.)
I admit I havent done much math (although I am capable if needed, I am a mathematician, just lazy atm
), but I feel that the sooner happens much less frequently than the latter. Greg for example suggest to use the play with a hand like 88.
I usually assume that if i can make no more than a pot sized AI then Villain is calling me at least with any top pair or second pair, pockets that have no more than 1 overcard to them or any decent draw (is that a wrong assumption?).
So the hands he folds are weaker than these. But hands that are weaker than these usually will be worse than 1:2 dogs on the flop vs 88. (Or so I think, maybe I should do some kind of approximation instead of guessing)
Sure Greg's example when we flop AKQ and make Villain lay down the TT is a fun one. But that is pretty rare too.
If it was a 2bet-call situation preflop, I think we are making him fold just way too many Ace-rag, small pp kind of hands (i find that people open with these unreasonably often), when they get a bad flop.
I can imagine it getting better results if we called a 3bet from the villain. If he is the kind who will lay down QQ-JJ on the flop to our bet if there is a single Ace out there, sure it sounds like more of a good play, however if we think that the vast majority of PPs in villain's 3-bet range are higher than 88 then maybe a preflop fold would be the best for our health to begin with.
I am not a very experienced tournament player (I play $20-$50, and have around 100-150 tourneys total behind me) so I might make completely stupid assumptions. Also I might draw bad conclusions. So please enlighten me and show me a couple of situations maybe where the stop and go is a good play.
