January 27, 2013
This a the WPN 25K on Sunday. Field was over 2000. There are 100 left.
Hero has just been moved to this table. Only have 5 hands at this table.
Hero in small blind with pocket 4’s. hero has 22BB
Folded around to the button who min raises. Villain has 27BB.
Big blind has 21BB.
My action: fold, call, raise ?
I cant find a fold here.
Not deep enough for a set mine call.
Raise: Click back or shove? there is 30K in the pot. That’s a 20%ish increase to my stack. This was an easy shove for me.
Big Blind picks up a calling hand maybe 7% of the time and think the button is folding out most of his raising hands in this spot.
What other factors should I consider?
Thanks for your input.
TPE Pro
December 6, 2012
Default should definitely be to shove here. I'd need a read that Villain was a really nitty opener (but also willing to call a shove with a reasonable range) to justify folding – you're right that calling from the SB is out of the question.
The thing about small pairs is that, assuming your opponent is opening a reasonable button range, there's nothing he can do to make shoving unprofitable. If he mostly calls with bigger pairs, then he's going to fold prettyy often, and you win so much from those folds that it doesn't matter that you're in bad shape when called. If he calls you more aggressively, then his calling range will consist of mostly unpaired cards, chich means that you'll be in pretty decent shape when called and won't need a lot of fold equity to show a profit.
February 16, 2015
Flatting is not the best idea, though with 27 BB's it's acceptable and done often enough. A better move would be to 3bet on the higher side. If he comes back over the top of you then you know you're either dominated or at best flipping and can easily fold. Considering that it's a button min raise it's very unlikely he has a hand that he'll be just calling your 3bet with; he'll either fold his steal hand or come over the top with 99+/AJs+. Shipping 27 BB's just tells your opponent that you do NOT have either AA, KK, QQ or even AK.
January 27, 2013
Thanks for the feedback. The problem with a small 3-bet is that if the button is competent, he will flat my 3-bet often because he is getting a very good price to do so. I dont like playing such a large pot, OOP with a hand that does not flop well. I see a shove as the least exploitive option. At this time in my poker knowledge base I do not see myself having a tremedous edge over any field in a mid stack Tournament. Making plays that are the least exploitive have become a primary goal for me. I understand that least exploitive does not mean game theory optimal.
Is itwrong for me to give up marginal equity to pursue least exploitive?
December 11, 2013
I would tend to just stick all the money in in this spot. 3bet/calling off is also an option and may look stronger, but at this stack size it looks like a good spot for a jam to maximize fold equity. As you have correctly identified, BB is not going to have a hand to go with very often and if we know nothing about BTN it's safe to assume they will have a raise/fold button in this spot. Furthermore, there are a lot of villains vs. which we have really good equity with 44 against a raise/call range. The combination of our fold equity and our equity vs. a standard raise/calling range makes this a really profitable JAM in my opinion
EDIT:
Yes, it is wrong for you to give up “marginal” equity in most cases. In fact, in this spot I wouldn't call your equity marginal at all. I think a Jam here is going to print money and as Foucault said there is no counterstrategy that exists for BTN which can make your shove here bad.
TPE Pro
December 6, 2012
BanTheRiver said:
Flatting is not the best idea, though with 27 BB's it's acceptable and done often enough. A better move would be to 3bet on the higher side. If he comes back over the top of you then you know you're either dominated or at best flipping and can easily fold. Considering that it's a button min raise it's very unlikely he has a hand that he'll be just calling your 3bet with; he'll either fold his steal hand or come over the top with 99+/AJs+. Shipping 27 BB's just tells your opponent that you do NOT have either AA, KK, QQ or even AK.
Hero has 22BB. Though even with 27BB, I would say 3-bet-folding is no good because you are going to have the right odds to call the shove. You aren't going to be “at best” flipping, you're going to be “usually” flipping, and with so much money in the pot you can't afford to fold away so much equity.
Even a conservative 4-bet jamming range for the button would be something like {88+,AJ+,ATs,KQs}. Note that that's about 8% of the deck, or 25% of a relatively tight button opening range. Your 4s have 38% equity.
If you make it 7BB (a large 3bet) and V shoves, there will be ~38BB in the pot, and you'd need to call 20 more. You'd need 34% to call. Given how close you are to having enough equity to call against a tight range, you'd definitely need to call against a slightly wider range. Better not to put yourself in that spot by just shoving yourself.
I did a HH review with Marc Alioto and he showed me I was miss playing hands like this in these spots. Before, I would 3bet call it off in this spot. Marc showed me that was wrong. For one, what do you do when he just calls? Do a stop and go? And second, when you just shove, you get him to possibly fold hands that you are crushed by – 55, and maybe 66. He will also fold 2 overs a lot and then you don’t risk your tournament life.
NH, thanks for posting.
Most Users Ever Online: 2780
Currently Online:
76 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
bennymacca: 2616
Foucault: 2067
folding_aces_pre_yo: 1133
praetor: 1033
theginger45: 924
P-aire 146: 832
Turbulence: 768
The Riceman: 731
duggs: 591
florianm1: 588
Newest Members:
Tillery999
sdmathis89
ne0x00
adrianvaida2525
Anteeater
Laggro
Forum Stats:
Groups: 4
Forums: 24
Topics: 12705
Posts: 75003
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 1063
Members: 12008
Moderators: 2
Admins: 5
Administrators: RonFezBuddy, Killingbird, Tournament Poker Edge Staff, ttwist, Carlos
Moderators: sitelock, sitelock_1