For the record i think sb should be shoving pre in hand above not calling.

here



Please explain to me why button winning the high pot is better than me winning the high pot from sb perspective? You havnt responded to any of the questions in my posts, just repeatedly called me terrible and a $3 reg. The hand above is rare because sb made nuts low and 2 pair with button having a better high by turn which isnt going to happen very often.

This is basically saying, priority is to play chip ev, as has your other responses implied. If priority is to just get chips the whole math behind ICM and bubble play is wrong, is this what you are challenging?

fold or shove?

I see waht you're doing. you're so much concentrated on getting ITM, you even make weird calls (hand before) and not shove this spot. your choice, your game, your 1%+ roi lost right here.

let me clarify my post about busting ozenc for you: 1st priority is to gather chips, apply pressure on other big stack if applicable and the 1st priority is not: making sure ozenc busts as quickly as possible. you're just interpreting my words in the wrong direction.


agree, that's why I said at least on the turn...
he made a weird decision preflop (essentially your tactic to make sure he busts), once he thinks he might scoop he bets into an empty side pot. not loving it, but he protects his equity this way. he would rather give half the pot to the extreme shortie than to you, that should be obvious (even to you).

the rest of your post doesn't make sense, and I can't make sense out of it. Believe whatever you want, but interpreting my posts in a way that fits your argumentation is just lol. I think it's pretty clear what I'm talking about...

Yeah this is easily dissproved with ICM. This is what i was getting at, you are basing your arguments around this premise and its just wrong. Having the second or big stack bust the shorty is always good for you.

Please respond to this post leaving out the thinly veiled insults. They have lessened with each post but "that should be obvious (even to you)." really isnt necessary.

Somehow we have moved from how bad the call is to different ways of playing the hand. It's a different discussion altogether but more interesting for sure.

Bluff isn't necessarily the word I word use. He can and will exploit. $ev wise you have to fold when he shoves such a high%. By shoving you are avoiding being exploited and at the same time exploiting him by forcing him to fold.

The situation you have created by min raising, I actually wouldn't really need to look at my cards. The hand strength isn't the point.

If he has a hand that rates to be 27% 3 ways for example as below. But if he shoves he:

i) Has a lot of fold equity against you
ii) He increases his equity in the hand

What if he is thinking about maximizing his personal $EV in the tournament instead of co-operating with you to cut shorties equity?

Is the equity of increasing your stack size and/ or potentially busting shorty actually worse than trying your method to cut shorty's equity in a 3 way pot and bust him that way?

ProPokerTools Omaha Hi/Lo Simulation

600,000 trials (Randomized)

Hand	Pot equity	Scoops	Wins Hi	Ties Hi	Wins Lo	Ties Lo
100%	53.68%	220,945	321,399	9,974	152,216	12,555
7984	46.32%	177,003	268,627	9,974	161,795	12,555

ProPokerTools Omaha Hi/Lo Simulation

554,494 trials (Randomized)

Hand	Pot equity	Scoops	Wins Hi	Ties Hi	Wins Lo	Ties Lo
30%	41.76%	138,457	205,127	7,755	153,334	14,103
100%	30.79%	100,561	166,380	11,985	78,418	15,067
7984	27.45%	79,274	168,679	9,009	60,551	7,799

I am trying to get me head around this one.

The extra chips you have put in the pot induces BB to call wider because he has a better price and Wadz's range is also wider because he knows he has **** lots of FE versus you.

If you folded they are getting it in anyway, so why do you put those chips in.

The other scenario you mentioned is that BB folds hoping you go to war and you fold.

In both cases you are min raising folding? Why not just fold?

In the brief history of hypers it's the style of the winning players. There are one or two that don't and are winning. It's not to say that it's the only style or always the most optimal style by any means.

Indeed. This is kinda the crux of it

I can see the point you are trying to make overall, in that you are cutting the shortstacks equity in the hand and both trying to increase your $ev by busting him.

But I see at the heart of your strategy is a dependency on the other big stack to co-operate and not exploiting you. For me that's the big if. I don't like ifs.

But he is not, being we are only going to open a top percentage of hands (rubbish to all this we should play any 4 vs bb brunolf is saying). BB cant fold as he knows we then have to fold behind often. When bb has commited his chips we can then call alot wider as the pot is all in 3 ways. The sb cannot exploit this without premium hands (which isnt really exploiting, we save equity we would lose by shoving), with anything but premium hands his $ equity is always going to better calling than shoving.

Personal $ev and busting the shorty go hand in hand, its collusion that comes from the big stacks sharing a common cause. With all the scenarios you are pointing out, no one is gaining fk all but the shorty. So the $ev you are "exploiting" from the other big stack is lost plus some to the shorty.

He has to call anyway, extra chips or not. Once bb has called no longer **** tonne of fold equity and a poor ICM decison



Your right, should ask wadzon what he has before you make a decison.

I am very happy to lose those chips if bb is stupid enough to fold, though this is going to happen very rarely.

I'll respond in detail tmrw. It's not like I'm saying the big stack should search for these opportunities to give the short stack some chips of the 2nd big stack to keep the bubble alive.
the rest of the post you just ignore?!

This is pure conjecture until proper maths breakdowns are done.

I know I can prove that my shoving increases my $ev but I haven't run any sims on your collaborative strategy being better for $ev.

If you play this strategy I assume you have modeled the relevant ICM outcomes. If you could share this may further the discussion and get us shove fold monkeys to listen!!

Say people (i.e most regs) don't follow your strat and shove. What intrigues me most is how you handle people shoving on your min raises. What's your call/fold % then in these spots? If you don't wanna share this then share one hand when you folded and one hand where you called.

This is not obvious to me, it may be the case if there's no chance of shortie busting. But in this case, busting shorty benefits us even if it means mid stack gaining some EV also.

On topic of minraising/shoving, I think sergei_s1 has been able to pull it off nicely, mostly on early stages of the game.

BB is so short I didn't understand at all how anybody is making BB call wider. I was actually trying to come up with reasoning to fill in your thought process here: "c)When we min raise, sb shove, bb is going to be calling alot wider"

You have me confused now. I am still talking about the original hand with Wadzon.

We are the BTN. If we min raise the sb in this situation is the big stack and 1st to act after us- he can exert maximum FE right there. BB and the short stack in is this hand is the last to act.

In general I shove here a pretty high % and there are other regs who would shove wider than me. Wadz would therefore be telling me to shove. So why ask if I get a similar answer?

The only outlier is would Wadzon shove Juicy's hand here on Wadzon!

Wadz is a pretty extreme player though. I personally would just fold Juicy's hand.

Are you happy to lose chips when all regs 3b shove on you here as well?

No problem.

I know. I think I made that clear in my post above. It helps me get my bearings if I know whether the odds would be favorable or not in a cash game. Sorry it that's distracting to you. I meant it to be helpful.

I don't know exactly what you mean by "$EV." You're using this symbolization in other posts too, and unless you tell me what you mean, I'm just guessing. (I'd like to learn what you mean).

I don't understand what you're hinting at.

We're on different sides of the argument here. I think Hero is more or less forced to call. You evidently think the call is gambling too much. I agree it's gambling, but note that if Hero takes Juicy_J_93 out of the tournament here, then Hero has virtually won the tournament. (Seems worth the gamble to me, since Hero has a very nice, though not premium, starting hand).

Buzz

I am talking about that hand also, When J shoves and Wadzon calls bb has an easy fold. When we min raise (is what discussion is based on, though i prefer limping my range on button in this spot) and Wadzon shoves bb has to call. This is a pretty huge part of what i am saying. Once bb has called we can call a very high percentage of our opening range, so high Wadzon can not exploit it by shoving light. Wadzon shoving and then bb folding is so rare neither Wadzon can exploit it with aggression or we care as we have pretty much guarenteed to get to heads up.

Yes if they insist on repeatdedly getting it in with poor $ev. Even more so when im the bb in this scenario.

Chip ev is basically direct ev, as in a cash game. $ev is the value of your chips compared to the tournament pay out structure. In this example you can see the bb has about 4% of the chips, when he folds he is what 40ish% to take 35% of the prize pool or about 15% $ev of the prize pool. You can see that in extreme ICM situations chip ev and dollar $ev can be vastly different.

He played the hand perfectly, especially post river, where he got the most value

I see. Thanks.

Yes. Thanks.

Buzz

wooot? just to clarify: hero limps, wadzon shoves, BB calls, hero calls? why would hero ever call in this situation? I wanna see someone do the math (ICM) and see if there is a hand that justifies calling there. I might be wrong, but I don't think there is one (streity, waht do you think on this? this seems like ICM-suicide to me)

That post you bolded had me super confused too but it was late. Even after sleep I don't get it either.

Guess the nationality

This is hand from 27$ Omania final table. I know it is not hyper turbo tournament but discussion above seems to apply to this situation.
UTG was shoving quite a bit to end tournament faster because he was sleepy an tired ( he was complaining in the chat about that.)
Before reading all this I thought my call here was pretty standard. But now I am not so sure. What are your thoughts?
Mods feel free to move this post somewhere if you think it does not belong here or delete if no one wants to discuss this hand.

27$ Poker Stars No-Limit Omaha Hi/Lo Tournament, 4,000/8,000 Blinds, Ante 1000

Hero (BB) (t110,234)
UTG (t421,700)
Button (t23,582)
SB (t155,484)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 4, 6, A, Q
UTG raises t420,700, Button calls t22,582, 1 fold, Hero calls t101,234

What's the payout structure?

1. 1190$
2. 873$
3. 657$
4. 495$

Thanks.

This is the first calc I have done for a while and side pot scenarios make this a little bit more complicated so it's taking some time.

As i have said in many posts, yes SB can fk our ev in the hand, however he can not do so with out screwing his own ev also. As i have also said only person who gains in your scenario is the BB. Besides this convo is silly, you are working of the belief that players should be shoving like 90% in this spot. Neither do they or should they, so you are making an argument based on a scenario that doesnt even exist outside this disscussion.

not answering to the point above? imagine this actually happens (what you're not convinced of). are you calling the shove there?
and let me conclude this whole argument from my side by saying: people (who have played more than 5k games in their life and know juicy as a very good and winning regular) will shove there a lot. I can't help you if you're not believing this. If my math is not mistaken, wadzon only needs 26.7% equity vs. ozenc disregarding all ICM stuff and assuming ozenc calls a shove from wadzon after juicy limp/folded there. If juicy decides to minraise/fold, it's actually lower (~22%)

Disregarding all ICM stuff i can call with the whole of my limping range. Unfortunatly the ICM stuff is really important and fortuantly Wadzon knows that.

What question, that wadzon actually shoves 90%+? Then yes i call wide, wide being like top 10% of hands, which is going to be 33%+ of hands i have limped, higher if i, ya know ADJUST to my opponents tendancys. I would call for the same reasons Wadzon called the shove in the example.

Would be nice if you ever answered any of the questions i have posed to you over my posts if you really wanted to .

229j like you said earlier? or tighter? how much tighter? Also please feel free to include the ev of when wadzon doesnt shove, unless thats inconvienent to you. Its a good job im just a $3 fish and not J so i dont get shoved on really wide by good players here.

this question is as clears it gets, your answer is not. you will never reach a state where you know wadzon's range, maybe you know sth about his tendencies. You say you'll call x% of your range without being able to assess if a call can be justified. Otherwise you're making the same spite calls as wadzon (and I don't like his call or juicy's shove).

it's funny how you rant in your posts without showing a clear thought process. I did not tell you to ignore ICM, but you wanna read it into my post. What I wanted to show to you there is that the actual hand wadzon has does not matter vs. BB once he is certain that juicy has to fold.

Either you try to base this argument on facts or we're done here. It doesn't make sense to keep justifying my posts just because you want to misinterpret them.

and btw:

ProPokerTools Omaha Hi/Lo Simulation

600,000 trials (Randomized)

Hand	Pot equity	Scoops	Wins Hi	Ties Hi	Wins Lo	Ties Lo
229J	36.79%	169,616	267,234	5,041	0	0
100%	63.21%	327,725	327,725	5,041	215,113	0