mikewebb68 said:

With no one being out of line, I actually find a fold here (and I'm a maniac). I think too many times there is not guarantee EP is folding, and too many times either a) EP has a monster, or b) they both play and you're up against something like A-J and 8-8. And since they are both fairly short the reward if you hit is not heaps of chips. In a lot of other  dynamics, I am getting it in and high fiving the monitor, but not in this scenario.

Thanks for the reply mike.  I agree with what you said.  As played, I folded, and EP also folded.  I thought about the spot some more, and think me getting it in depends on my stack size.  If I'm under avg, and need a double up, I think I stuff it in, as I may not find too many better spots for a double.  On the other side, If I already have heaps, and losing the 11k doesn't effect the style of poker I can play then I will play the hand.  Given my current stack size, I don't think the risk was worth the reward.

packallama said:

I am definitely going to have to go with the AK in this spot. EP's open indicates strength by opening 18bb, but many players raise/fold that stack size so I would not immediately assume it nutted. The 3b shover's range is probably around: 88+, AQo+, AJs+ and AK does very well vs that range. The most likely outcome after reshipping AK is that the original raiser folds and we get AK in preflop vs a range we dominate with dead money. The original raiser could wake up with JJ+ and call it off, but that is rare and we will still have plenty of equity to balance out the times we get it in flipping or dominating vs MP. HUD stats on both players involved would certainly affect my decision. If EP is very nitty and is always raise/calling then MP's 3b shove is likely much stronger than the range above and AK could become a fold. 

Reshoving AK in this spot is too profitable to fold. I do think you are overthinking stack preservation even you expect to accumulate chips stealing the blinds with your current stack size. I reshove AK here regarless of having 100k or 12k. Tournaments are all about accumulating chips and this spot is too good to pass up on. We are not too concered about ICM with so many away from the bubble so the best play is usually the most +cEV play. 

AK has a cEV of 858 (1.7bb) versus the range of 88+, AQo+, AJs+.  The more pairs you add to this range, the more your cEV goes down.  You need about 46% equity to have +cEV in this spot, and TT has just under 48% equity.

So, do you think TT is a call also?

Switching gears slightly.  Lets say you try to steal the blinds on the button with a miniraise, and the SB will call or 3bet w/ 12% of hands, and the BB will call or 3bet w/ 15% of hands.   Just to keep things simple, and closer to a worst case, you will give up your hand once the blind steal fails.  So you are going to check, and fold once anyone calls or 3bets.  The cEV of that play is +645 (1.3bb).

Personally, I'd rather take the 1.3bb of cEV and risk 1k, instead of 1.7bb of cEV and risk 11k.  I just think I can find so many better +cEV spots that risk so much less.  And like I said before, if I lose the 11k, then I limit the weapons in my arsenal.  But, there is some merit in adding those 13k chips to my stack.  I might be able to roll over the table.

I'm still curious what other people have to say.

-mike

packallama said:

Motherfuggle, I think you are way overestimating the average number of bb's you make by stealing. 12% and 15% are a really narrow ranges and post flop play has a considerable effect on stealing's profitability in a vacuum, but that is a whole other discussion. I also think that we can discount AA and KK from MP's range if not exclude them because he would most likely 3b to induce or flat AA some of the time. That should increase AK's equity vs MP's range enough to make it a clear reshove.

Good point, 12% and 15% might be too narrow, but post flop play only adds to the +cEV of the play IMO.  Playing in position w/ initiative is a recipe for success in NLHE, but being able to estimate is difficult.

Removing AA and KK from his range gives us 52.7% equity VS 49.3% with them in.  This adjustment would give +1753 cEV (3.5bb), which is double what it was before.  I'm not sure we can safely remove those from his range, but it does give us an idea of the impact it has on the situation.

I've been trying to find a way to bring cEV, and amount of chips risked together in some kind of equation to properly guage the true value of a situation in an MTT.  Also, even before we hit ICM calcs in a tourney, chips lost are still more valuable than chips won, so pure cEV needs to always be slightly discounted, how much, I don't know.

I think we can agree that a +2bb play that risks 10bb is different than a +2bb play that risks 50bb, and that the one w/ less risk is in some way better.  In a cash game this doesn't make much of a difference because we should have a bankroll big enough to handle the risks, but in an MTT, your stack is all you have.  I guess you could say that it doesn't matter in MTTs either because you will play enough of them to reach the “long run”, but I'm not sure if I totally buy that.  All that said, I would much rather take the less risky play if I can be given both options with the same frequency.

Thanks for all the input packallama, i really appreciate it.

-mike