Shove or take free flop Here?

[AAroddersAA]

PokerStars Hand #103784639521: Tournament #784850101, $2.28+$0.22 USD Hold'em No Limit - Level IV (50/100) - 2013/09/07 14:16:55 WET [2013/09/07 9:16:55 ET]
Table "784850101 8" 9-max Seat #8 is the button
Seat 1: 33teetwo33 (2155 in chips)
Seat 2: iRaiseProffs (1370 in chips)
Seat 3: simakos (1966 in chips)
Seat 5: dmitiy804 (5115 in chips)
Seat 6: aggenebes (1840 in chips)
Seat 7: ShtikTZ (1486 in chips)
Seat 8: Shigap (1568 in chips)
Seat 9: vicioncic (1830 in chips)
vicioncic: posts small blind 50
33teetwo33: posts big blind 100
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to 33teetwo33 [ ]
iRaiseProffs: folds
simakos: folds
dmitiy804: calls 100
aggenebes: folds
ShtikTZ: folds
Shigap: calls 100
vicioncic: calls 50
33teetwo33:

I know one of the limpers will sometimes call lighter.

[Fatcatstu]

Take the free flop. 1010+ I am just piling it in this early though. The amount of early doubles that you get off people looking to gamboooool early when you have big hands in these is hilarious

[Charlie44]

Personally I think 21 BBs is too much to push here even with 3 limpers, especially when you feel you have an edge - which I assume you do. Next level would be a push for me. Of course small raise would also be bad playing oop, and with likely 2 overcards on flop . Just cross fingers and hope to hit miracle set.

[AMRN]

Unless you flop a set you"re never proceeding in this multi way hand post flop and likely to be giving up the chips you"ve invested..... i shove here to take what"s on offer in the pot, and happy to get called by overcards or underpairs .

[hi_am_chris]

Prefer Jamming here, checking and folding too often with whats almost certainly the best hand at the moment.

[deanp27]

All in

[dwh103]

Easy shove. It"s hard to find a lower risk spot to increase your stack by 15%.

[Drewski]

I"m shoving this spot. Not only is it a good spot to add 15% to your stack, but its going to deter a few steals from your big blind for a couple of orbits too.

[AAroddersAA]

Unless I have lost my counting skills I add 20% to my stack if they all fold. This makes it a clear shove right?

I also play quite well against their calling range.

[Charlie44]

Had further thoughts abouts this -let"s do a little maths on the chips ev. Very early in tourney so we can use this as estimation of $ev.

If you and push and get called (assume bigger stack for simplicity) by an overpair then you will be winning a pot of 2155x2+150 on average 20% of the time and you will be putting in the rest of your stack 2055.. So ev = ((2155x2)+150)*20% - 2055 =-1193.

Called by 2 higher cards that becomes ((2155x2)+150)x 55% - 2055) = +393.

If we push and do not get called then we win the pot = +400.

So our expected ev is virtually the same whether we get called by higher 2 cards or everybody folds. So we do not need to estimate how often we get called by higher 2 cards. Lets assume worst case scenario we always get called by higher pair and never by lower pair.

The likelihood of a random hand holding a higher pair is (6x6)/  (50x49/2) = 2.93%. The trouble is of course that 3 oppos have already acted and difficult if not impossible to estimate likelihood that they are holding a higher pair. I think it unlikely they will be slow playing here. Lets assume for sake of arguement approx same as for a random hand. So lets assume that 10% chance that one of 3 oppos is holding bigger pair.

So we get overall expectation for pushing of :

(-1193x 10%) + ( 400 x 90%) = 240.7.


It is more difficult to the calculate the expectation of checking and trying to hit a set, and we have to make some assumptions. For the sake of argument let"s assume if we do not hit our set on the flop somebody will bet and we will fold. If we do make our set we will win the hand and the big stack will double us up. The likelihood of hitting our set on the flop is approx 12.5%.

So ev for this option is ((2155x2)+150-2055) x 12.5% = 300.6.

I know the assumptions are a very dubious and arguable on the latter option, but whilst pushing is +ev, checking and hoping for a set may be winning more on average, and is less variance. Quite happy to be  questioned on assumption or maths. At least I think thought provoking.

[hi_am_chris]

Sometimes we get called by a smaller pair too and when checking it"s going to be really hard to figure out our expectations as we don"t how often we are going to get paid off fully although obviously it helps that we have 3 people trying to hit the board. Also we don"t always win when hitting our set :\

[Charlie44]

Sometimes we get called by a smaller pair too and when checking it"s going to be really hard to figure out our expectations as we don"t how often we are going to get paid off fully although obviously it helps that we have 3 people trying to hit the board. Also we don"t always win when hitting our set :\

Agreed. I"ve tried to keep it simple, though I fully apreciate that by ignoring these possibilities it may be changing the outcome of best option.

[dwh103]

Sometimes we get called by a smaller pair too and when checking it"s going to be really hard to figure out our expectations as we don"t how often we are going to get paid off fully although obviously it helps that we have 3 people trying to hit the board. Also we don"t always win when hitting our set :\

Agreed. I"ve tried to keep it simple, though I fully apreciate that by ignoring these possibilities it may be changing the outcome of best option.

Your maths is mostly right, however the assumptions are definitely flawed. You can make numbers say pretty much what you want to - in your case the equity of checking, hitting a set and always doubling only just outdoes jamming and getting called only when we"re crushed. You"ve gone best case for checking and worst case for jamming.

You"re correct in that we"re fairly indifferent cEV wise if overs call or fold, so it"s best to analyse the limping and calling ranges and work out how often Villains will pass pre-flop.

- What limping range do you give them?
- What hands will they call with?

[Santino67]

Unless you flop a set you"re never proceeding in this multi way hand post flop and likely to be giving up the chips you"ve invested..... i shove here to take what"s on offer in the pot, and happy to get called by overcards or underpairs .

+1 Get it in good and let the fockers suck out on you  

[Charlie44]

Your maths is mostly right, however the assumptions are definitely flawed. You can make numbers say pretty much what you want to - in your case the equity of checking, hitting a set and always doubling only just outdoes jamming and getting called only when we"re crushed. You"ve gone best case for checking and worst case for jamming.

You"re correct in that we"re fairly indifferent cEV wise if overs call or fold, so it"s best to analyse the limping and calling ranges and work out how often Villains will pass pre-flop.

- What limping range do you give them?
- What hands will they call with?

Just to clarify I was not trying to prove or justify my earlier reasoning - I accept that some of my reasoning flawed and I don"t believe my figures by any means proves that checking is the best option. Just making the point that because pushing is +ev not necessarily the best option.

With the checking option we have of course ignored the reasonable possibility that we will win the pot without hitting a set on the flop e.g if it is checked to showdown, or checked flop and hit set on turn . This may conunteract the realtively overall small possibility of hitting our set and losing the hand.

If we consider the possibilty of a smaller pair calling our shove the ev is ((2155x2)+150)*80%-2055 = +1513. Won"t bore you with the maths but I make for pushing to be the preferred option, one of the oppos will have to have a small pair, limp and call a push more than 5% of the time.  The likelihood of one of 3 people being dealt a lower pair is less than 10% and I"m getting bored with this now as I"m sure most of you are !!