Options
Another limp spot?
BB is up over 200k maybe just a couple big cashes but I think im getting 3bet shoved on almost always if i open....I actually considered raise calling rather than folding before I did this...
I guess I could just shove but I think I'm worried about the small blind calling me a little light...
edit: now that i see the stacks I know why I didn't want to pile here
Poker Stars, $7.34 + $0.66 NL Hold'em Tournament, 1,500/3,000 Blinds, 300 Ante, 6 Players
JodaB. (BTN): 51,602
SB: 35,800
BB: 100,145
UTG: 14,695
MP: 62,146
CO: 5,612
Pre-Flop: (6,300) Q
J dealt to JodaB. (BTN)
3 folds, JodaB. calls 3,000, SB folds, BB checks
Flop: (9,300) 5 7
8
(2 Players)
BB checks, JodaB. bets 3,000, BB folds
Results: 9,300 Pot
JodaB. showed Q J and WON 9,300 (+6,300 NET)
I guess I could just shove but I think I'm worried about the small blind calling me a little light...
edit: now that i see the stacks I know why I didn't want to pile here
Poker Stars, $7.34 + $0.66 NL Hold'em Tournament, 1,500/3,000 Blinds, 300 Ante, 6 Players
JodaB. (BTN): 51,602
SB: 35,800
BB: 100,145
UTG: 14,695
MP: 62,146
CO: 5,612
Pre-Flop: (6,300) Q
J dealt to JodaB. (BTN)3 folds, JodaB. calls 3,000, SB folds, BB checks
Flop: (9,300) 5
7 8 (2 Players)BB checks, JodaB. bets 3,000, BB folds
Results: 9,300 Pot
JodaB. showed Q
J and WON 9,300 (+6,300 NET)
Comments
suited broadway is huge in this spot, I dont think BB picks up a hand often enough for this not to be a profitable shove
He doesn't get as good of a price on a shove anymore, he gets to see a free flop, he has to think sometimes (although lame) I am actually trapping with aces.
Not opening here because it's a good reship spot is like not c-betting when it's a good board to check-raise on; if the villain hasn't even check-raised you once before don't start pot controlling or checking back with air, he might not even be capable of it.
Am I really not capable of profiling a player?
Or are you saying that in order to think hes capable I have to actually see him show up light in a 3bet spot like this? Because I think I can look at your opr and figure out that your capable in a spot like this?
Your thinking plays right into CL's hands (not poker hands lol)
/thread
I mean you can have all the information in the world but you still need to draw the correct assumptions from it. Knowing someone's OPR and sharkscope gives you ~0 info in this spot. There's randoms that are down heaps who would jam any 2, and there's regs who would only jam top 10% of hands or something. That's why I said, you need to have seen him reship frequently and/or seen him show up light in a similar spot in order to make that assumption. Don't just say "whoa he's up a lot of money, ok I'm not going to raise his big blind". I'm saying that if you're doing that then you're seeing monsters under the bed.
Not sure if the last question is rhetorical or not, but you def can't tell someone's reshipping range from there OPR stats.
The bottom line is you're risking 6k to win 6.3k. They need to be playing back at you at least ~30% of the time avg (BB needs to play back 30% AND SB needs to play back 30%, not combined).
~30%: 22+,A2s+,K5s+,Q8s+,J8s+,T8s+,97s+,86s+,75s+,65s,A7o+,A5o,K9o+,QTo+,JTo
Both villains either need to have a range like this, or if one villain is tigher (like the SB could be more like: 22+,A2s+,K9s+,QTs+,JTs,A8o+,KJo+,QJo, probably even tighter) then the other villain needs to be playing back with like 40% of hands.
This is just to make a pre-flop r/f +EV in a vacuum. On top of that, if the BB ever flats you're probably making a ton of money because nearly ever better hand will shove pre so his flatting range will be severely dominated. If he never flats then I have a hard time believing he's going to shove 40% or something in this spot. It's not unheard of but until someone proves that they're ripping it here a ton and is capable of identifying/exploiting ICM spots, I'm not giving them credit for being able to do that.
if he's jamming 100% I'm obviously raisecalling
yea fk ICM...
fuck someone who thinks he can exploit me by shoving 100%, he gets hurt more than me if I call lol
Edit: And if I catch him shoving 100% I'll force him to adjust also
no he doesn't? he can't bust, you bust 40% of the time with a 2BB stack in the game
I'll do some math on it later but I'm pretty sure it hurts him more. The difference between picking up blinds antes and out raise and getting it in with 35% equity is pretty huge for him. If you're in his shoes, are you gonna shove super wide again thinking "lol, he's losing value because of the shortstack, I'm losing a bunch of cEV this way but at least he's suffering to" ? Besides, even the final table of 180 mans is somewhat topheavy so that doubling up has a bunch of value
minraise fold still best line for hand in question
Yea don't worry about the math:
EV of darb raise/calling here is -$37.90
EV of BB shoving any 2 and darb calling with QJs is -$19.10
So it actually hurts us twice as much as it hurts him. Pretty sure whatever theoretical reasons for defending your cEV you have this isn't a good play.
care to show your work?
Darb EV after raise/fold = $194.43
Darb EV after raise/call + win = $275
Darb EV after raise/call + lose = -$194.43
+$80.57 x 0.60 = $48.34
-194.43 x 0.40 = -$77.77
$48.34 - 77.77 = -$29.43
no, darb's action always, we're assuming the villain's shoving 100% remember?
also bb will call looser than nash will say because he knows i can shove light, and might know my range is capped...
also why risk our whole stack with shorties on the table and the chipleader left to act with plenty of chips if he loses.
Richard, do you think that I can't make all of those same arguments myself? I've played a few tournaments before, and thought about these spots once or twice. I'm not just spouting b.s. for the sake of it, believe it or not.
and yet you'd rather take it up the ass from the imaginary craziest BB on the planet than find justification to mess with him and put yourself in the driving seat for the final 5? You speak of giving up monetary EV but then you leave it at that and don't add the proper weights to the other side of the scale of this decision
I've given up trying to say that this play is wrong or that play is right a couple of posts ago itt. I'm simply trying to see both sides of everything, so that I can make my own decision with all the information avaible to me. And with the imaginary BB shoving 100% scenario we're HEAVILY into metagaming, I have all kinds of respect for you as a pokerplayer but in this case I doubt your ICM numbers paint the whole picture
Are you saying 1 call is going to change his range from 100% - 50%? Or that we are going to change our range to change his range. Because if we are changing our range to make him adjust we lose a lot more. Also I don't think more chips helps us that much as far as future edge goes in a spot like this because we have most of the arsenal we need vs this table.
Maybe Im not in the same conversation though
I'm leaving it at that because this situation is quite extreme, like the math shows. You're underestimating a 5 buyins mistake and overestimating the EV you'll gain from metagame. The metagame will be that he won't reship on us nearly as light after we make the call, maybe (what if he actually has AK/AQ this time, then there's a decent chance he won't adjust his ranges or we will decide not to call his shoves as light because maybe he just had hands).
In order to see a profit from this metagame wise we will have to get in a situation where it's an extreme ICM situation again where he's on our left with a stack that covers us and we're relatively deep as well. This is going to happen sooo rarely to begin with. Then once it does happen it means that our steals go through 30% more or something (even if he tightens up by 50%, it doesn't make our steals go through 50% more because of the other villain/villains we have to go through). So we're making 30% of $EV of stealing the blinds and antes if we get into this specific situation again.
I honestly don't know the odds of it, but it's going to be [% we final table together] x [% he gets put on our left] x [% he has a lot of chips AND out chips us AND we have a stack we can raise/fold] x [% of the time we get an opportunity to steal where our QJs call is going to tighten up his range]... it would be absurdly hard to calculate the odds of this but I have a feeling that it would be a very high number, so it would take an absurd amount of games to make up this much EV. If we were burning like half a buyin or something it might be more reasonable.
I was reading a hand on 2p2 where people were talking about a somewhat related topic (although the hand was completely different), but basically a huge drooler on our left reships 140BB early game and we have AK. Some people were arguing to fold based on the fact that we would have many future opportunities to stack him if this was the case, but then someone else came in and basically showed that the chances of us actually realizing the future EV of the drooler doing this were so low, and there was a much greater chance that someone else would be getting the benefits. The consensus was that taking our immediate edge was way more important than hoping for a future one.
Here the inverse is true, that NOT taking our -EV play is way more important than hoping that by taking it our EV will be regained in the future, because the future opportunities we will gain from a metagame perspective are so rare.
If you want to burn money and justify it with metagame then by all means go ahead. I definitely have and do make plays with this in consideration, but in general it's when the ICM isn't quite as extreme, and the advantage we get from winning the hand is more tangible.
yes, ICM is not everything, and yes, it is important to consider other theoretical factors in making you decision, but you use these considerations more in spots where calling is ~breakeven $EV, so you weigh-in the other considerations to see if you can justify making a call, but when calling is very -$EV it's not the spot to be thinking about the other stuff. You use that stuff when decisions are close, not when they are clearly -$EV.