Biggest donkout idiotic tourney I have ever seen

[BigPete33]

I absolutely did not miss it and declared that by saying "whilst I see your point..."


I merely asked for a better example.

[AJG]

This is probably one of the areas where I do not apply the math.

Odd then that you are using the math to justify the call?

[AJG]

And this is where it get's slightly hypocritical of Lee and his playing strategy and style.

Actually the chapter that came from wasnt written by Lee, and i dont think author meant it was to be taken as gospel. Plenty of players adhere to the "Ladder Principle" that each player you outlast ITM makes your own payday bigger, and the poker math introduced in that chapter just expands upon this. Players DO play depending on tournament payout structure whether they conciously acknowledge it or not (not all players admittedly, but alot), and the math in that post (from the book, cos I couldnt be bothered reworking the numbers to match the original example) simply puts this tendancy into a mathematical model.

Im not saying I play using all that math either, but I do often consider it. Especially the non-linearity of chip values...

Hey the great thing about poker is there are as many styles as players! If we all played the same the game would quickly get very boring...

[Garth Kay]

This is probably one of the areas where I do not apply the math.

Odd then that you are using the math to justify the call?

Not really. Two different areas. And one has more impact than the other.
And also my personal view. In a tournament it is one hand at a time.

[BigPete33]

Just quickly, and purely with respect to calling with 2 7 in the 5% of your stack situation presented earlier, if we apply a more sensible likely shoving range (courtesy of Aaron) the conclusion could be drawn that points made by both Garth and myself each have validity.

That shoving range was : Any pair 7's or above, AT suited or above, AT offsuit or above, KQ suited and KQ offsuit.

For pretty much anything in that shoving range that's not a made pair above 7's the split is effectively 70/30 in favour of the shover. That highlights Garths point made earlier in that 2 7 offsuit suddenly isn't so rubbish. Results are below:

ATs or above:

ATs vs 72s,72o = 68.946% vs 31.064%
AJs vs 72s,72o = 68.708% vs 31.292%
AQs vs 72s,72o = 68.744% vs 31.256%
AKs vs 72s,72o = 68.340% vs 31.660%

ATo or above:

ATo vs 72s,72o = 67.260% vs 32.740%
AJo vs 72s,72o = 66.988% vs 33.012%
AQo vs 72s,72o = 67.012% vs 32.988%
AKo vs 72s,72o = 66.576% vs 33.424%

KQs vs 72s,72o = 68.807% vs 31.193%

KQo vs 72s,72o = 67.068% vs 32.932%


However, once we look at pocket pairs 7's or above it's just not the same scenario, and this is the point I was alluding to earlier. Results below:

Any pair 7's or above:

77 vs 72s,72o = 92.174% vs 7.826%
88 vs 72s,72o = 87.709% vs 12.291%
99 vs 72s,72o = 87.556% vs 12.444%
TT vs 72s,72o = 87.352% vs 12.648%
JJ vs 72s,72o = 87.154% vs 12.846%
QQ vs 72s,72o = 87.283% vs 12.717%
KK vs 72s,72o = 86.847% vs 13.153%
AA vs 72s,72o = 87.139% vs 12.861%

As you can see it's now roughly 90/10 instead of 70/30 and that's much less favourable.

The point I was trying to make to benny the cunt earlier was that AS IF you don't need to consider what they're shoving with and that YES YOU DO need more information. If that doesn't at least highlight for you that some thought is better than zero thought in that previously given situation then I'm basically going to just ignore you

[AJG]

This is probably one of the areas where I do not apply the math.

Odd then that you are using the math to justify the call?

Not really. Two different areas. And one has more impact than the other.
And also my personal view. In a tournament it is one hand at a time.

You did also use math to justify a call with 73, and the situation you presented.
???

[Garth Kay]

I agree with you Pete.

But we were talking about a specific situation and the shoving range of a stack. If you know for a fact that he has 77 then you are the absolute best read in the world and should be making squillions.

What I was trying to elaborate on is this:

Whilst most people believe there are a certain heirachy to hands (which there are) in certain situations hands that are popular such as suited connectors and paint cards can actually have the same equity in a hand against an opponents likely shoving range. So if you are willing to call with 8,9os this should not change for hands such as 7,2s and the play remains the same for this specific example.

Also the other point I was trying to make is start thinking about your opponents shoving ranges not the particular hands he shows down with. Too many novice and intermediate players are too results orientated. Such as the comments: yeah he had KQ or KK so it was a good fold, yes that may be true, but against a LAG his whole shoving range is huge so it may have been a bad fold in certain circumstances from mathematical standpoint.

My original post was made in defence of a BB player calling a short stack's all in. It became apparent to me that some people just did not understand the thinking or the maths behind my defence and then I went on to test people's perceptions of hand strength against a certain hand. The message may have been lost in the evolution of this thread.

All I am trying to state is that when the pot odds are right it is the correct mathematical decision to make the call when you are an underdog. But there are external influences that may dictate a fold such as stack sizes, tournament stage and bubble or in the cash.

The simple fact of the matter is that anyone particular scenario can be played a multitude of different ways by individuals and all of the possible moves are neither right nor wrong.
But in the case of deciding to call an all in you do need maths to help you make that decision.

What is your opponents shoving range? How much is it to call and what are the pot odds offered? What is my equity in this hand against his shoving range?

Also it is a good idea always to have an understanding of basic odds of hands. 50/50 is pair against over cards, 60/40 - 70/30 is unpaired paint cards vs. suited connectors, 80/20 is Big Pair vs smaller pair. This is very basic but helps you make a decision quickly when required.

Starting hand strength is important but don't let your pre conceived notions of hand strength affect decisions you make on the felt pre and post flop. Especially when your edge may be the same with any rag hand in comparison to suited connectors.

[Garth Kay]

Odd then that you are using the math to justify the call?

Not really. Two different areas. And one has more impact than the other.
And also my personal view. In a tournament it is one hand at a time.

You did also use math to justify a call with 73, and the situation you presented.
???

You were discussing equity in a tournament and in a bubble situation.

I was discussing one hand where the situation has not been dictated but is just a one off example. The math I used was in direct correlation to pot odds and hand equity.

Definitely two different areas of gameplay.

[AJG]

Sorry if I got that wrong, but I thought you used math to justify calling an extra 252 from the BB with 73 and the example you introduced?

[Garth Kay]

This is probably one of the areas where I do not apply the math.

Odd then that you are using the math to justify the call?

The original quote was in regards to tournament equity and the bubble situation. I do not use any maths in these situations rather my playing style and what playing style I would like my opponents to adopt and the payout structure.