First off, if your first instinct is “tl;dr” you might as well close this out now knowing that you are missing out on something that has never been discussed before (at least as far as I know).

It has been long debated amongst sit n go players: should you take a +ev spot just because it’s +ev? Or can you wait for, here comes the cliché, “a better spot?”

Before sharing my feelings on this matter, I’d like to provide a quick disclaimer that these are only my opinions and I am not in anyway telling you how you should play. At no point should you treat these opinions as “the real answer(s).” So without further slowroll, I’d like to explain my feelings on this topic as well as answer a question that has never been addressed before. Is an edge really an edge?

Let’s take a common middle game scenario and look at it in wiz. 8 handed at 75/150 it folds around to us in the sb with average stacks around the table. You have 1500 and the BB has 1500. In this hand, we will assume some factors as being true. We will know in advance that the BB will call with precisely 20% (33+A4+A2s+KQ,Kts+), and you can only push or fold. Hero is dealt 32o. What is your move?



Now let’s take a look at this same situation, but now you are the BB facing the shove. We will assume that you know for a fact that the sb is shoving 100% of his hands. What would you call with? For our example, you are dealt T7s (omg it’s sootid). What is your move?



I clearly chose to delete some numbers because honestly this is the only stuff a lot of people see when they look at wiz. Push. Fold. EZ GAME (Spacegravy’s license plate btw awesome!). But do you really know what you are getting yourself into? Let’s examine if an edge is really an edge. Does x = x?

With 32o you shove and T7s you call. Both edges are here in this spoiler.


Hmm, the same edge. Interesting. Funny enough, a .12 edge has a significant meaning in a 16 buck. Every .12 edge you earn will increase your return on investment by 1%. ($135 prizepool x .12% of the prize pool = 16.2 cents). So if in every game you play, you found .48 more edge, you would increase your ROI by 4%. Easier said than done obviously. You would have to increase your edge by .48 on average in EVERY game you play. Anyway, what I want to ask is if .12 really equals .12? Seems like a silly question to be honest. Is a hot chick really a hot chick? Well, she is until you find out any secrets/weird stuff she may have roflcopter. Here is what people don’t see in wiz.

Chance of survival. Every edge has a different chance of survival. If you shove 32o, how often are you still in the game? 80% of the time the BB folds and of the 20% of the time you get called you will win 27.8% of the time.



This means that you will still be in the game approximately 85.54% of the time. I’ll round down to 85%. If you call with T7s, how often do you defeat a 100% range?



Let’s round up to 51%. A .12 edge is clearly not the same thing if in one instance you survive 85% of the time and the other time only 51%. Some people may say that this is compensated by stack size because when you win with T7s you always have 3000 chips which is obviously better than 1650 (80% of the time) when you shove from the SB and the BB folds. In fact, the average stack of shoving vs. calling is 1487 vs. 1519 respectively. You can work it out if you want. Calling is worth 32 more chips on average, however you are in the game 34% less often.

Some insta-wtf’s that may arise are: “But 3000 chips is way better than 1650, Glitlr”. Ya, it is. But if you are at 0 chips 49% of the time then that sucks pretty hardcore. “But 3000 chips can do stuff that 1650 can’t”. That’s true too. But what happens once you double up? You go back to folding because it’s 7 handed still.

Some sng players get consumed with taking every +ev edge but ignore the consequences (ie - crazy swings from taking any 51/49, etc that they can get their hands on). They aren’t thinking about all the future edges that they won’t be around to earn. The goal of the game is to maximize your OVERALL equity not to maximize your equity in EVERY hand. I will without a doubt receive a lot of scrutiny for making this statement. But I’m down wit dat fo sho son.

Let’s take a look at what sng wiz is missing. Who is shoving into you? I’d assume it would have to be a good player to know that he is shoving wide enough to argue a call. Which makes even more of an argument for calling because you bust your only real competition (unless you don’t game select lolz) at the table and will probably have less bvb spots shoved into you later in the game. Let’s say the SB is Spacegravy. How will knocking him out 51% of the time change the course of the game? But wait, WHO ARE THE OTHER PLAYERS AT THE TABLE? No one asks this stuff! To Sng wiz, they are just UTG and UTG+1 John Does with no future implications. But in real life these are real people with real ranges and real playing styles that warrant attention. How can .12 still be .12 in a game with 8 Spacegravys? That game will play out much differently than a game with you, Spacegravy and 7 fish whose Sharkscope graphs look like Chutes and Ladders without the ladders. Why take a 51/49 if half the table pays you off with second pair on the flop? A .12 edge is not always .12. An edge is not always what it appears to be. Sng wiz is a snap shot of a single hand and is not smart enough to grasp the future. The only element that can do this is YOU. If you are playing 8 Spacegravys, sure go ahead, make the call because I doubt you’re going to get any really good spots later. But with 7 fish, you’d be foolish to pass up on all that future income. In short, there is no reason to take every edge you can possibly get because every edge is not created equally.

Think about what you are doing when you take an edge. If you had to choose to shove/fold/call in these hands you should always elect to shove because it yields less swings. Not variance. Swings. Variance means deviation from the mean, not omfg this guy rivered a 2 outer. I would always elect to shove over call in early game spots because I like to be around to collect my rent money when I’m on the bubble, 3 handed, and heads up with weaker opponents.

Cool. tl;dr, [x]FIRST. Can you do that on your own post? haha. Just remember that this is only my opinion, that's it. I'd like to say thanks to a few people. To abarone for showing me that 10x'ing 4s HU is -ev, to sippin for inspiring me back before I knew anything, simplicity8 for talking strat online after I was that fish who PMd you questions about "what do I shove utg?", loonatwok for being sexy, to tbini87 for being a really cool irl friend and proving I'm only half luckbox, mayuri-sama for studying a lot with me, bagclip for being probably one of the most entertaining people I've ever talked to ever - so much so that I've adopted his catch phrases and my gf hates it. To spacegravy even though he doesn't know it - I studied his videos religiously back in the day. His 25 tabling video was hands down the single greatest video in the existence of sngs. I literally watched it like 10 times over the course of several months and everytime saw new stuff that just confirmed that what I studied was real. Anyone else I didn't mention that I've spoke with, thank you. And again, to abarone, thanks for introducing me to this game you f***'ing a**hole. Good Luck In The Long Run, guys.

First. Now I am gonna read it.

very horny post

nooooooooooooo i was first

Very good post. I remember when I first started learning about the WIZ, I thought the edge % you should look for was directly correlated to what ROI % you were beating the game for. Learning that it was just the eq% differential between your two options really through me for a loop. I've often thought a lot about what part of the game good players edges come from. Some may be very good on bubble situations and HU, and therefore would require a pretty big WIZ edge to get it allin early. Others get their edge from being able to put people on ranges early and amassing a big stack and streamrolling. I don't know if a completely mathematical program like WIZ would be able incorporate these different types of player edges when assigning proper shoving and calling ranges.

Oh and

[ ] 3.5k posts

^^^^^ ALMOST 3.5k I just couldn't wait to get this on "paper."

Mod needs to add almost to thread title IMO

ban

theres no edges in SNGs... you lie!

lolololo i almost did that. hmmm...

...you have a point. crap.

So OP I dont want to hijack/derail your thread so maybe we can discuss this somewhere else, but I play the super turbos and have been told by some people that ICM/WIZ is basically useless once everyone is 5bbs or shorter. I realize that things such as losing FE, who's being blinded out first etc, are shortcomings of WIZ, but shouldnt it still be a viable tool for setting a ground base in situations such as these and then using common sense and experience to make adjustments?

This post is full of awesome.

Not to steal Glitlr's thunder, but for the record, I did a much worse job of explaining the same ideas quite some time ago (here). I treated the problem just in terms of its maths (or at least I attempted to), and I don't think anyone took any notice of what I was blabbing on about at the time.

Glitlr post does a much better job of explaining why this stuff is important to consider. And that these sort of ideas are always overlooked when people start discussing %edge. A simple rule of thumb for what edge you should take in a sng just doesn't cut it.

I take it that the essence of the post is this:

Because we are +EV players, we can assume that we have a skill edge that increases as the number of hands we play increases. Therefore, a +.12 edge with a large probability of eliminating us is worth less than a +.12 edge with a low probability of eliminating us.

Here's my (slight) addendum to this line of reasoning: what I play for is not to have the highest ROI, but to have the highest hourly rate. This fact might disrupt your analysis in a minor, but interesting way:

Let's say I have a natural 5% edge on the game I'm playing. At the start of every game, I am offered a play that will give me an additional 4% edge but at the cost of eliminating me 1/2 of the time. If I accept this play, half the time I have a 9% edge and half the time I have nothing for an EV of 4.5%. If I refuse, my EV is a constant 5%, so I should refuse.

Here's the problem: the times I accept this play, I get the extra 2% (on average) edge instantaneously whereas for me to receive my skill edge requires time. Plus, if I accept this deal and bust I can just register for another game. Therefore, it seems like it might be better for my hourly, but worse for my ROI to accept such a deal.

So, skill EV can sometimes be trumped by time considerations and this might give us a reason to take the +.12 call -- if we win we gain an instant edge; if we lose we can just register for another tournament.

Overall great post; enjoyed some of the other considerations like players at the table as well.

Wow thanks alot Glitlr, Great post.

Thanks bro. Means a lot coming from a genius like yourself.

Even in that case, each decision you make must, on average, lead to you making back the buy-in fee for the sng. So even playing continuously, the risk of elimination should effect your play - just to a lesser extent.

This is a really good point, man.

You are welcome, sir.

Great post. Mostly over my dumb head but w/e.

CLIFFS: Shove light, call tight. TY

A properly bankrolled profitable player should never pass up an edge. Your overall goal should be to maximize your equity in every hand you play. Yes, you will no longer have a future edge in that specific game 49% of the time if you decide to call with T7s in your example. You will however have future edges that will occur in future games. The make up of the current table also should not deter you from taking an edge. In the long run you will experience a similar player pool if you continue to play the same games.

It is also wholly thinking to assume that calling a 51/49 like in your example will result in crazy swings. Players that take advantage of more edges will obtain higher ROI's. A higher ROI results in less variance in the long run.

Meta-game and future game problems can play a part in these situations but that is outside the realm of your post.

Be cautious when using the term "edge". An improper use of this term can lead to problems when players begin to learn the intricacies of sit & go's and tournaments. I know you are fully aware that there are a lot of times where taking a "negative edge" in a hand is correct because it is LESS negative than a future hand.

There are several issues that have not been addressed. I do thank you for offering your opinion and opening up this discussion. You are a valuable resource to this community.

I was planning to post something about "skill edge" at some point, but I just want to say at this point that the central assumption of ICM is equal skill, so in fact both "edges" are equal and you should shove 32 and call T7s and be equally content in both cases. I won't attempt to prove it but it's true nonetheless. I think that's what jnfpoker is saying, but I'm afraid I only skimmed the responses, so I apologise if I've repeated him entirely.

rly good post sir (:

too long but i read it

does someone know where can i find it ?