Author Topic: Big $11 - Seemed Standard but I'm now not convinced  (Read 9223 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Charlie44

  • Silver Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 276
Re: Big $11 - Seemed Standard but I'm now not convinced
« Reply #15 on: November 18, 2013, 23:56:51 PM »
Interesting discussion. I can see some people don"t agree but in my opinion the maths is very important.

Yes assumptions will need to be made. But I think it is very useful to prove without doubt, given the villains raising/calling ranges, that it is marginal at best to push with AQs in this situation (as shown by Noble1). From other responses I don"t think correct pushing range is immediately obvious. I think by considering pushing/calling ranges using these tools off the table we are more likely to make better decisions at the table. 

The other issue is ICM. As I understand it when making decisions which are likely to put your tournament at risk there are always at least some ICM considerations unless all the remaining prize money will go to the winner - i.e you are playing heads-up or in satellite with only one seat.

So IMO any all- in decision will always be less ev in a tournament situation than in a cash game. In other words you correct calling requirements in any one given situation will always be tighter than in a cash game. It is only the extent to which you should tighten up will depend on the tournament prize structure, how close you are to the prize money and your chip stacks compared to other competitors.


That"s my understanding but happy to be proved wrong

« Last Edit: November 19, 2013, 00:05:39 AM by Charlie44 »

TheSnapper

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1061
Re: Big $11 - Seemed Standard but I'm now not convinced
« Reply #16 on: November 19, 2013, 00:25:47 AM »


lol - can I retract the "so much"? I can"t really quantify this mathematically without poker stoving it or something - I think from experience/general maths the AJ is an easier Jam generally in this type of spot - especially when we get a villian with much looser calling tendencies as we dominate/flip more hands. This shifts odds in our favour against many hand match up"s which I can only conclude is positive??



Fair play, most would dig in deeper in your spot, kudos for dropping the shovel.

The exercise though is about comparing action with the next hand up on the hand strength ladder. I find it helps to identify when spots are close enough to be indifferent or marginally plus EV.
"Being wrong is erroneously associated with failure, when, in fact, to be proven wrong should be celebrated, for it elevates someone to a new level of understanding."