not just you, i just noticed a whole lotta people calling zhu scared money. he's not. he's just playing tight.

guy plays all the 10k tournaments, pretty sure he played the 50k players champ this year. he aint scurred.

If Zhu's only 3-bet range in this spot is to shove 40BBs with exactly AA and KK, that isn't playing "tight". That is either playing very very scared or just very very badly.

I'm not suggesting that Zhu is playing very scared or very badly. I'm suggesting that this is not his exact 3-bet range.

exactly
it's almost entirely results oriented nonsense

the whole "bubble of the final table" thing is nonsense as well.there is no more novemeber 9.

Hoyt Corkins also bubbled KK<QQ at a high roller event. I forget how much he lost, but it was a large amount, if his hand would have won. I believe it was a WPT event? I felt sick just watching it happen at the time.

Part of this may be due to the personalities and (lack of) marketability of the recent ME winners.

Without getting into the bashing of ICM, if you believe in ICM, and I do, then you need 50% equity to call.

To have greater than 50% equity here, Zhu has to have some Ax and TT in his range AND Manion has to have JJ in his reshipping range.

In a non-ICM analysis, maybe you can call, but I can't see KK having 50% equity against the two ranges here (UTG open plus HJ ship into UTG open and caller).

I'm gonna be giggling about 'sentient potato' for a few days.

I don't entirely agree with the assessment in OP, but I think a lot of people are entirely underestimating how nitty you should be 9/10 handed when you are this deep and there are pay jumps.

I think there is a fair bit of prestige associated with making the final table. It’s not as steep a cliff as the November nine, but I think you should acknowledge that it does exist. It’s also pretty huge to be able to make a simple decision at the end of a long damn day and get some sleep.

My brag here is super humble at 154 this year, but things get tense and magnified even for the solid and stable among us.

The $100k pay jumps aren’t why it’s an ICM mistake to call, it’s because Labat is third in chips where his stack is worth millions of dollars. By calling and losing he doesn’t lose just $100k in the jump from 9th to 10th, he is likely losing millions by putting himself at risk to go from a snug top 3 stack to a shortstack ninth and a likely quick exit

Also this is a sick ICM spot Main Event or not. In most tournaments you would probably have enough people donking around so KK would be a call, but if they are as snug as they are in this scenario (and they appear to be very tight), KK is likely a fold Main Event or not from ICM perspective

Ok but the chips needed to become Chipleader at the FT in the hands of a really good player who knows how to wield a big stack (IE Dyer, not Manion) are MEGA valuable in a way you can't quantify.

I agree with this.

Sick spot obv. But id rather sneak in 3rd at the FT then gamble there
ESP when the nit is only shoving QQ+

Sigh, this analysis is essentially correct and Labat needs AA+ here, this is very obvious to anyone that's played with solvers for a significant amount of time in formats where they have to deal with 3 way all ins.

Let's just break it down line by line, using the most optimistic assumptions for Labat's [guy who flatted KK] case.

UTG: open 14% (44 XTs AT Axs) - this is an optimistic range and it can be 10% or less.

Labat's flat: Optimistically let's just say it's completely dead and he never calls Manion's rejam for a second.

Zhu's jam: Optimistically TT+ AK AQs. Remember he also runs the risk of getting called by anyone between him and manion, plus Manion himself.

Now as Manion with the above assumptions, he needs QQ+. If he has AK he is only 43% which is just way too low, doesn't matter about "the icm is underrating the bigstack!!!1111eleven." What about if you say Zhu never jams AA, well it is still 46% equity and too ****ty to call AK, but closer.

Now look at Labat with KK. He has 35% main pot equity vs (TT+ AK AQs), (QQ+) and is obviously flipping the side pot. In total this is a fold. Even (TT-KK AK AQs) (QQ+) it's a fold.

Basically* for any opening range you give Manion from 8 to 15%, then you can define mathematically what a profitable jamming range for Zhu (and decide whether to include AA or not), you will see that under any of the initial choices and decision to include AA or not, Manion needs QQ+ (based on an ICM assumption, which in a HU pot [as we can optimistically assume labat folds out of turn to create the largest jam range possible] at a general table is a very good assumption); and therefore KK is a very clear fold.

[*Actually, I'm speculating because I don't license HRC anymore, but someone can plug the numbers in and verify this is a fact. However I have a high degree of confidence in it.]

Now finally let's just talk about "icm is underrating big stack equity". That's true but the effect is not as big as people think in general spots such as 10 handed play. (In contrast, it is bigger than people think in 3 handed play etc.) That means when icm says something is a serious mistake, it actually is - the correction factor isn't enough to outweigh that. For example, spots that are zero +cEV are probably still folds for obvious reasons (you bust a high % of the time).

But actually you don't even need to debate "icm is underrating" in this hand, because everything can be mathematically argued starting from Manion's opening range to his rejam - the icm assumption is very good in 2 way pots at a general table here. Now for the 3 way pot, once you have Manion QQ+ the analysis is over no matter what reasonable prior setting of assumptions you give.

Labat is AA only. Case closed.

OK, I am reasonably convinced that Labat should fold KK here regardless of the exact range you give Zhu. I would actually underweight QQ in Manion's range given the tempo of his shove.

However, it still think Zhu's decision to shove KK rather than make a normal 3-bet is even more questionable than Labat's decision to call, and I'm not sure why that gets so little attention.

Manion is a rec so his opening range is a lot tighter than we expect. I'd range him something between 6 - 8% range which is 77+, ATs+, KQs, ATo+.

Labet's flatting range here is quite interesting. I'd expect him to flat and 3bet AA with some frequency but KK would definitely be a 3b imo so i'd never put that in his flatting range. I would of ranged him with something like 5 - 7% range where he flats 99 - QQ with, AQo and ATs.

Zhu's jamming range here looks super suspicious in terms of ranging him. You don't often see guys jamming 40bbs expecially at the main event bubble. I'd question him jamming Js or Ts. Those hands would happily flat effectively this deep since there are 2 other equal stacks to Zhu. QQ and AK would be his jamming range here since those are the only 2 hands where you don't want to 3b fold or 3b happily get it in with ICM in place against a rec.

Manion's calling range is probably AKs and QQ+, I can't imagine myself calling AKo vs a chinese nit.

In labet's shoe against those 2 combined ranges KK is definitely a fold. Against looser opponents I can justify a call, but against 2 rec nits who have really tight range here this is a super standard fold.

How many BBs did Lynskey have when he snap folded TT?

This is why poker might be getting harder with people saying don't play 'double King high' in this spot because of X, Y and Z.

Shushhhh dude, everyones entitled to play how they want even if you think it's right or wrong.

Nobody opens only 14% UTG with 17% antes COMMON. UTG is the new button.

10 handed and Manion was the tightest player at the table.

why doesnt anybpdy ever talk about live tells and body language? That dude was sitting there so calm and cool, casually calls an allin and is just sitting there while other dude is tankingm not nerouvs at all. Super comfortable, most obvious AA in the world

it's amazing how you picked up on that while looking at the hole cards

I agree with this. When I wrote my first response defending Labat's call, I mentioned that hadn't watched the hand, only read about it.

Having now actually seen a replay of Manion's shove, it is pretty obvious he has only AA/KK.

I hate folding kings here, but you can also add a live read to this decision, rec player snap rejamming vs 40bb shove has got to be aces huge percent of the time

I'd say your range for zhu is a bit inconsistent if you're crediting him with 100% weighting for TT but 0% AQo. AQo actually does better against a QQ+ call range than TT and JJ (and in practice there's a tiny difference between JJ and 99 vs likely call ranges so i wouldnt rule them out completely). On the other hand he also might never be ripping it with AQs. Gotta give each some fractional weighting... just hard to say how much. My best guess is that his range is primarily AK and QQ (100% weighting), with KK/JJ/AQs being slightly less likely (75%) and TT/AA even less likely (50%). Then on the fringe (10%) you have AQo, 88/99 along with some random spazz outs.

AKs is pretty close to 50% against that range which shows a 5bb chip gain if you aren't overcalled (if he over calls AA and half of KK combos that's about 5-10% of his range and reduces the chip EV gain to around 2-3bb). Plus manion covers by 20bb iirc so icm not as big a deal as it otherwise would be.

It's too close to call it a terrible call - queens would be a terrible call.



Against the latter range, KK has 38.5% equity, and it would have 41% equity if manion could have AKs. The chip EV gain for those scenarios is +9 and +12 blinds.

What's the break even requirement in terms of Chip EV gain pretending all were all in? (for the sake of simplicity)

My ICM numbers* came in at almost exactly 50% equity required to call

Fold $3.5 million
Lose $1.7 million
Win $5.3 million

*rounded