I think a villain like Wadzon actually gives hero an additional viable option here.

The typical value line would prob. be to shove PF, given the quality of the hand and hero being OOP.

The typical ICM line would prob. be to simply call, call a small PF raise and fold to a PF shove.

However, if hero wants to play this hand due to value, it might be better to call PF and induce Wadzon to shove with his typically wide range (sensing hero's apparent weakness and knowing many "heroes" will complete/fold here due to ICM). It would help to know how the 3 other players have been playing in recent hands (or typically play in this spot). If they are folding purely due to ICM, then that gives us little info. If they have shown any propensity for loose PF play on the bubble, then 3 folds would indicate that Wadzon prob has a decent hand in BB and will not likely fold (and likely will shove).

I think "the maths" would tend towards ICM, and given villain's known tendency to play loose (esp. w/ big stack), would prob. tell hero to complete/(fold if AI PF) here. Both short stacks are due for the blinds next, and it's likely Wadzon will put them to the test from the SB & button. However, such action in this spot also hurts hero's table image and steers him toward folding all but the very best hands as he waits for one/both short stacks (or even #2) to bust before his own stack gets too low.

I think it's a coin flip between inducing villain with a complete (or even a min raise)... and a complete/(fold). If 3 folders have been playing tight and/or hero wants to make some sort of statement, then induce villain... if hero wants to go strictly "by the numbers" and/or 3 folders have not been overly tight on bubble, then complete and be ready to fold to PF shove.

Inducing villain is an ICM disaster.

I'd shove and not really think much of it.

Might do the maths later but i'm pretty pushed for time today.

If anyone else fancies it i'd be interested to see the results

I've played with Wadzon enough to know he is a little wide in his calling range. The point is that occasionally he does call with a horrible hand but that doesn't represent his true calling range especially in this spot.

Ok so I geeked up and did the maths. Just want to double check it so ill post it later

Agreed, but shoving is an ICM disaster too IMO. By shoving, hero is going to get called by a range that prob. isn't that far behind hero's hand, while gaining ~10% chips (negligible really) when villain folds. By simply completing:

- if villain checks his option, hero sees free flop
- if villain raises (say 3x BB), hero can call and assess on flop
- if villain raises AI, hero can call knowing that villain likely shoves a very wide range here

I tend to think Wadzon will shove the vast majority of the time in this spot, since he is big stack by far, it's the bubble, and he senses hero's weakness by completing. He will use hero's knowledge of ICM against him, so why not use this knowledge against him (assuming hero plans to play/shove this hand anyway)?

the only advantage I see in pushing here vs. folding is fold equity we might or might not have against wadzon. Inducing him and then calling off is giving that advantage away. I would see hero inducing with AAwx but otherwise not really.

It's a rather nitty fold, although justified by ICM.

I think this hand plays well post-flop, so to complete for 150 to make pot 725 is small price for chance to see flop, but hero must know whether he will call villain's likely shove. I think all 3 (folding, completing, shoving) are viable vs. this villain, but I'd probably end up calling at least half the time in villain's spot vs. hero's shove, which means Wadzon is going to call 80+% of the time, so now hero's whole stack is at risk on the bubble, against a range that is unlikely to be that far behind (given 3 folders, it's prob ~55/45 at most... 52/48 against any ace e.g.).

Very interesting perspective. I am genuine in saying that has actual created more food for thought. Thank you.

Before hand

12726 17.878
3731 10.4
2334 7.417
2640 8.18
5569 13.004


Folding

12976 18.019
3556 10.171
2309 7.43
5544 13.048
2615 8.206

0.30 of time

12401 17.696
4131 10.98
2309 7.27
5544 12.897
2615 8.037

0.70 of time following scenarios

Scoop 0.387
8995 15.549
7537 14.449
2309 6.834
5544 12.46
2615 7.588

Scooped 0.272

16532 19.859
0 0
2309 10.72
5544 14.996
2615 11.305

Spllit 0.341

12688 17.858
3844 10.589
2309 7.348
5544 12.969
2615 8.117

This is how far I had got assuming a calling range of 70%. I am not 100% sure how to break it down further to 1/4 and 3/4 scenarios so it's still a bit crude for my liking. I think it is apparent though that this actually questions my immediate auto-pilot snap shove, with the corresponding stack sizes, and suggests an ICM fold. If we assume Duncan's belief that he is calling tighter than this, I believe it even more so.

Thanks Streity - I did this yesterday so i'll post it. TBH I just left out the 1/2, 1/4 and 3/4 possibilities. Not sure that its worth the effort to do those...

Using an ICM calculator we have an equity of $10.17 before the hand in question.

This changes to $10.98 if we successfully steal and $14.45 if we get called and double up.

Of course if we are called and lose then this goes to $0.

Thus a steal is worth $0.81 and a double up is worth $4.28 whilst losing costs us $10.17.

EV = P(wadzon folds) * $0.81 + P(Wadzon calls) * (P(scoop) * $4.28 - P(lose) * $10.17)

Using pro poker tools:

ProPokerTools Omaha Hi/Lo Simulation

600,000 trials (Randomized)

Hand	Pot equity	Scoops	Wins Hi	Ties Hi	Wins Lo	Ties Lo
ac 4c ks 9s	55.56%	231,569	321,380	13,840	156,933	18,975
70%	44.44%	163,662	264,780	13,840	136,417	18,975

So we have roughly 39% chance of scooping and 27% chance of losing the pot.

Thus EV = 0.3*0.81 + 0.7*(0.39*4.28 - 0.27*10.17)

EV = $ - 0.51


So if Wadzon does indeed call 70% then this looks to be a fold

Does someone want to double check the numbers / working am fairly sure this is right but you never know...

I must say I am suprised by the result - I didn't expect this shove to be -ev but I obviously the small increase in chips is not worth the risk of busting.

A more interesting question now would be - what range does Wadzon have to tighten up to before we can profitably shove here. From a quick look at the numbers i'm guessing about 30%.

Streity or others - do you have time to rework the figures for that scenario? I'll do it later if no one else does but right now it's grind time. GL all!

It's useless without 1/4,1/2,3/4

not useless but yeah including splits will bump our EV up a little

still a good approximation imo

People are way off on thinking wadzon is calling 60 to 70% here.

Yeah but even if he calls 40% then it's unlikely that the shove is +EV.

I think that's the point here - we could argue all day about his range - I mean lets face it prob not even the man himself could tell you what it is but it's sure gona be wide

Including splits but ignoring 1/4 and 3/4 (since they are likely gona cancel each other out anyway)

So we have roughly 39% chance of scooping and 27% chance of losing the pot and 34% chance of splitting.

Thus EV = 0.3*0.81 + 0.7*(0.39*4.28 - 0.27*10.17 + 0.34*0.418)

EV = $ - 0.51 + 0.099

EV = $ - 0.41

Doing same thing for 40% range:

ProPokerTools Omaha Hi/Lo Simulation

600,000 trials (Randomized)

Hand	Pot equity	Scoops	Wins Hi	Ties Hi	Wins Lo	Ties Lo
as ks 4c 9c	53.20%	214,279	308,374	23,165	134,649	30,552
40%	46.80%	173,200	268,461	23,165	148,353	30,552

So we have roughly 36% chance of scooping and 29% chance of losing the pot and 35% chance of splitting.

Thus EV = 0.6*0.81 + 0.4*(0.36*4.28 - 0.29*10.17 + 0.35*0.418)

EV = $ - 0.019

So looks like 40% is roughly the cut off here. If big W calls any wider it's - EV if any tighter it's +EV

I'll let everyone else argue over exactly how wide he calls here

I'm just gona stick with an all in jam - cause it's the most fun

If Wadzon decides to call 70% it is also -ev for him:

44.44*$2.03 - 55.56*$2.28 = $ -0.37

The other 30% of the time he loses $ 0.14.

Another interesting question would be what range does Wadzon have to tighten up to before the loss is less than $ 0.14.

god i should take a week (or a month?) off the tables for working on poker theory :O

another advantage on pushing would be that you don´t have to care about that hand anymore. helps a lot when multitabling ;P

i stumbled over this little post: http://www.pokerroad.com/forums/red-...thematics.html

point no. 10 would be pretty similar to what AllInNTheDark said earlier in one of his posts, letting villian push and call him as a sneaky option to widen villians range. i really liked that thought!

then again reading the ICM posts about the wider villians range the more -ev it is to get the chips in... :S

just shove it, 5 more tables are waiting for your decisions!

Your first guestimate was spot on Angri around 31-32% is calling range is the cutoff point.

Here is the Nash pushing range vs BB calling range.

call : push
100%: 2%
99%: 2%
98%: 2%
97%: 2%
96%: 2%
95%: 2%
94%: 2%
93%: 2%
92%: 2%
91%: 2%
90%: 2%
89%: 2%
88%: 2%
87%: 2%
86%: 2%
85%: 2%
84%: 2%
83%: 2%
82%: 2%
81%: 2%
80%: 2%
79%: 2%
78%: 2%
77%: 2%
76%: 2%
75%: 2%
74%: 2%
73%: 2%
72%: 2%
71%: 2%
70%: 2%
69%: 2%
68%: 2%
67%: 2%
66%: 2%
65%: 2%
64%: 2%
63%: 2%
62%: 2%
61%: 2%
60%: 2%
59%: 2%
58%: 2%
57%: 2%
56%: 2%
55%: 2%
54%: 2%
53%: 3%
52%: 3%
51%: 3%
50%: 3%
49%: 3%
48%: 3%
47%: 3%
46%: 3%
45%: 3%
44%: 4%
43%: 4%
42%: 4%
41%: 4%
40%: 4%
39%: 5%
38%: 5%
37%: 6%
36%: 6%
35%: 8%
34%: 8%
33%: 10%
32%: 11%
31%: 12%
30%: 13%
29%: 15%
28%: 19%
27%: 19%
26%: 21%
25%: 22%
24%: 27%
23%: 30%
22%: 35%
21%: 45%
20%: 66%
19%: 77%
18%: 82%
17%: 92%
16%: 96%
15%: 100%
14%: 100%
13%: 100%
12%: 100%
11%: 100%
10%: 100%
9%: 100%
8%: 100%
7%: 100%
6%: 100%
5%: 100%
4%: 100%
3%: 100%
2%: 100%
1%: 100%

So if I want everyone to fold SB when I am BB I should call almost always their pushes?

Yea but you prolly lose a gazillion EV untill you establish that metagame vs
all regs and vs fish you can never establish it. Wadzon is the best example
for this, he established his wide calling meta so all regs correctly push tighter vs him. And he pays/paid for it with some -EV calls.

Good thread so far. Debate seems to surround his calling range. I put it out there @60-70%. Consensus seems to be that this is too wide. I have put some more thought into what hands I would expect him to call with. Feel free to add/substract on this. If there is interest I shall post the hand he did call with spoilered obviously.

ProPokerTools Omaha Hi/Lo Simulation

600,000 trials (Randomized)

Hand	Pot equity	Scoops	Wins Hi	Ties Hi	Wins Lo	Ties Lo
AC4CKS9S	52.72%	210,239	302,704	35,410	121,632	42,540
LLLL, HHLL, A***	47.28%	173,560	261,886	35,410	144,095	42,540

I've edited this hand to show BBs hand pre flop not Hero.

I thought it was interesting looking at it from the BBs perspective. I'm pretty sure this is a tough ICM fold for BB ?

Poker Stars $13.89+$1.11 No Limit Omaha Hi/Lo Tournament - t400/t800 Blinds + t50 - 3 players
DeucesCracked Poker Videos Hand History Converter

BTN: t4481 M = 3.32
Hero (SB): t14033 M = 10.39
BB: t8486 M = 6.29

Pre Flop: (t1350) BB has A Q Q 3
BTN raises to t4431 all in, Hero raises to t13983 all in, BB calls t7636 all in

Looks like an easy call

Thats a fold in my opinion. obv depends on hero's image but BB only gives up 10% of his stack here.