Jump to content


Ak Getting Squeezed


  • Please log in to reply
92 replies to this topic

#41 GrinderMJ

GrinderMJ

    Original

  • Members
  • 7,525 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 April 2007 - 12:13 AM

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 12:26 PM, said:

Don't be a sarcastic prick. We're all here to help each other. Look me up on the pokerdb and tell me what percentage of times I have been in the money compared to the best online players in the world. Like I said granted I play for smaller stakes, but I still like my approach.Answer me this question.You have played your friend heads up 1,000 times. You have beat him 780 of those times. The 1,001st time you play him, with 5,000 chips to start, 25,50 blinds that never go up, he moves all in on preflop the first hand, and you look at AKo/s. Based on his range, you know are a 55% favorite to win, because you went to your computer and looked it up on pokerstove. However based on your history of playing flops with him, you are a 78% favorite to win the match.Would you still call just because this is a +EV spot? Calling here is a big mistake because you will only win 55% of the time by calling, and you will win 78% of the time by playing flops against him.
Here's what you don't get. Nobody (99% of people) has a big enough edge on the field playing small ball to pass up +ev situations, not you not me, not anyone. The best tournament players almost never pass up +ev situations because they realize they aren't good enough to and you certainly aren't good enough to either. You don't seem to understand how bad the structure generally is in online MTTs and how much you are costing yourself in the long run by passing up +ev situations. Seriously, it's a huge leak.

#42 SlackerInc

SlackerInc

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,290 posts
  • Interests:tennis, music, politics (I'm a Democrat)
  • Favorite Poker Game:Tournament No-Limit Hold 'Em (2nd: Razz)

Posted 15 April 2007 - 12:39 AM

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 12:47 AM, said:

Go back to pokerstove, and add in all the percentages of us stealing bigger blinds against weak/tight opponenets in the big blind. Add in the percentage of pots we will win in position against one weak opponent. Add in the percentage of pots we will sense weakness in our opponents and pick up the pot.
But you can do those things more easily with more chips.

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 12:47 AM, said:

I look at it like this. If you had 99 and I had AK off, would you put everything you own, assets, cash, personal property, everything, on the line in hopes of doubling it because you were a 6 to 5 favorite? What if you knew that you could work with those assests and at your job to slowly make more and more money in the future, but if you lost you were broke for the rest of your life?
Flawed analogy. Unless, for some reason if you bust out of this tourney before the money you will never be able to play another one?I don't mind disagreeing btw. Nothing wrong with a good debate! :)ETA: if you are 78% against the field in tournaments you play, you should go pro and be on TV! I mean, I know you're a good player (didn't you win one of our tourneys?), but I'm just sayin'...

#43 Zach6668

Zach6668

    FCHL Champion.

  • Moderators
  • 48,133 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON

Posted 15 April 2007 - 02:55 AM

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 2:47 AM, said:

http://philivey.com/...hp?learntips=67"There were also factors beyond the math that I should have considered. For instance, given the table dynamics, there was no need for me to risk one-third of my chips on this hand. If I had folded, I could have gone back to stealing, padding my stack while risking only a fraction of my chips. What's more is that, after I lost, I had to become more conservative, as I no longer had a big chip advantage over the other players. "Read this article.
I'm not Phil Ivey. You are not Phil Ivey (I assume). Perhaps he is in the 1% Grinder was referring to.

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 2:47 AM, said:

Is this not a similar situation? Granted we are not the big stack at our table in this situation but personally I feel that I am a favorite to outplay people at the $10 level and win more pots without a showdown. Show me all the math you want, I still don't see anything wrong with passing up a marginally +EV situation when you feel that your edge over the rest of the field is greater than this almost even money situation. If this was the 2001 WSOP final table (which was absolutely stacked) I would call, but I feel confident enough in my play that I can chip up slowly without having to engage in these big showdowns, unless I found myself at table full of professionals.Go back to pokerstove, and add in all the percentages of us stealing bigger blinds against weak/tight opponenets in the big blind. Add in the percentage of pots we will win in position against one weak opponent. Add in the percentage of pots we will sense weakness in our opponents and pick up the pot. Furthermore, I think the range Zach put the villain is a little off. He is putting more than half of his stack at risk. Is he really going to do that with pocket 6s or A J? Not if he is even a decent player. Run that back through pokerstove with the villain's range as 10 10+ and AQs+ . Which I think is much more accurate, then tell me how close it is.
You understand that the title of this post has to do with us being squeezed. You know a squeeze play can be made with any two cards? Doesn't necessarily mean he has ATC, but PokerStove doesn't allow for a bluff %age. Furthermore, you don't think AQo, AKo make this play? Really?That's all I've got for now.I'm not a tournament player. I'm really just a theorist in this department, but it's interesting to me to see that we have a guy who final tabled the Sunday Million, and is an all around great tourney player (prolly ranked, I have no idea), and another great all-around player backing me up on this. I'm not trying to single you out NEtwo, but this has been debated ad nauseum in here, RGP, 2p2. If Paul Phillips and Greg Raymer aren't good enough to give up these edges, neither are you.It's not close.
QUOTE (serge @ Tuesday, May 12th, 2009, 7:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
LETS GO PITTSBURGH
QUOTE (Acid_Knight @ Monday, March 10th, 2008, 4:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Zach is right about pretty much everything.

#44 simo_8ball

simo_8ball

    Multipass

  • Members
  • 9,277 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Favorite Poker Game:PLO/NLHE

Posted 15 April 2007 - 03:04 AM

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 7:47 AM, said:

http://philivey.com/...hp?learntips=67"There were also factors beyond the math that I should have considered. For instance, given the table dynamics, there was no need for me to risk one-third of my chips on this hand. If I had folded, I could have gone back to stealing, padding my stack while risking only a fraction of my chips. What's more is that, after I lost, I had to become more conservative, as I no longer had a big chip advantage over the other players. "
If you fold you have to play more conservatively and 'chipping up' is more difficult than you are making out. Also, he is Phil Ivey, and he is playing with a slow tournament structure.Oh, and his statement 'factors beyond the math' is wrong. I kow what he means, but I hate people using such generic statements about mathematics. Those 'other factors' are part of the math. He means pot odds, but poker math is about much, much more than that.

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 7:47 AM, said:

Read this article.Is this not a similar situation? Granted we are not the big stack at our table in this situation but personally I feel that I am a favorite to outplay people at the $10 level and win more pots without a showdown. Show me all the math you want, I still don't see anything wrong with passing up a marginally +EV situation when you feel that your edge over the rest of the field is greater than this almost even money situation. If this was the 2001 WSOP final table (which was absolutely stacked) I would call, but I feel confident enough in my play that I can chip up slowly without having to engage in these big showdowns, unless I found myself at table full of professionals.
How many times does this need to be said? 55/45 is not marginal. Your intuition is wrong.

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 7:47 AM, said:

Go back to pokerstove, and add in all the percentages of us stealing bigger blinds against weak/tight opponenets in the big blind. Add in the percentage of pots we will win in position against one weak opponent. Add in the percentage of pots we will sense weakness in our opponents and pick up the pot.
Not what pokerstove does. Anyway, if you can chip away so easily without showdown, why would you ever risk your tournament life? Just keep chipping away until you win. Fold to an allin in all cases. Sorry to be sarcastic, but with an M of <18 and rising blinds you are only borderline comfortable. These 'better spots' aren't that easy to find. Blind stealing is not that easy. You need to steal the blinds about 1.5-2 times a round just to keep your M at a reasonable level.

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 7:47 AM, said:

Furthermore, I think the range Zach put the villain is a little off. He is putting more than half of his stack at risk. Is he really going to do that with pocket 6s or A J? Not if he is even a decent player. Run that back through pokerstove with the villain's range as 10 10+ and AQs+ . Which I think is much more accurate, then tell me how close it is.
equity 	win 	tie 		  pots won 	pots tied	Hand 0: 	50.825%	  40.51% 	10.32% 		 374539788 	 95413566.00   { TT+, AQs+, AQo+ }Hand 1: 	49.175%	  38.86% 	10.32% 		 359277240 	 95413566.00   { AKo }
By calling you gain 480 chips. That's 15% of your stack. I'm not actually talking about this specific example though. Here I don't mind folding because I think SB's range does not include AQ, and TT would be rare. I haven't checked pokerstove, but I think against that range we would be marginally -EV (<42%).

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 7:47 AM, said:

I look at it like this. If you had 99 and I had AK off, would you put everything you own, assets, cash, personal property, everything, on the line in hopes of doubling it because you were a 6 to 5 favorite? What if you knew that you could work with those assests and at your job to slowly make more and more money in the future, but if you lost you were broke for the rest of your life? If you were sick in the head you might, but its EVERYTHING at risk on a slight favorite situation. It's the same case here. In this specific tournament, the hero has a bankroll of 3500 or whatever. Why would he put it all at risk when he's not even sure if he's slightly behind, and he could be far behind? Tournament poker is about surviving and thriving. You can thrive much easier later on without having to risk not surviving at all later.
Worst. Analogy. Ever. It's just horrendous. I don't even know where to start.Oh, 'survive and thrive' is the worst tournament advice you could ever give someone. It encourages weak tight play. Survive and thrive means don't move allin with combo draws. It means call down to see if you hit and then get paid.

#45 simo_8ball

simo_8ball

    Multipass

  • Members
  • 9,277 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Favorite Poker Game:PLO/NLHE

Posted 15 April 2007 - 03:04 AM

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 7:47 AM, said:

I don't see the point in taking that risk if you feel like you are a much better than 6 to 5 favorite against any one opponent heads up in position in a pot, which I feel that I am against the majority of the players at this level. Bottom line is that it is OK to pass up these situations when you feel that you have a better chance of slowly chipping up later.I agree that passing up +EV situations is a mistake in cash games, but to win tournaments, there are other ways to get chips more safely.Sorry we get into these disagreements sometimes, you guys are still my friends. :club:
In these tournaments, if you chip up slowly you will get left behind and your M will drop. You need to chip up quickly. In the Sunday Million, 6k players drop to 1 in about 9-10 hours. You need to accumulate chips quickly.Oh, and yeah, this is nothing personal. I hope you do realise that. I'm sarcastic and curt, but it's just my views on this issue and nothing directed at you personally.

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 8:26 AM, said:

Don't be a sarcastic prick. We're all here to help each other. Look me up on the pokerdb and tell me what percentage of times I have been in the money compared to the best online players in the world. Like I said granted I play for smaller stakes, but I still like my approach.Answer me this question.You have played your friend heads up 1,000 times. You have beat him 780 of those times. The 1,001st time you play him, with 5,000 chips to start, 25,50 blinds that never go up, he moves all in on preflop the first hand, and you look at AKo/s. Based on his range, you know are a 55% favorite to win, because you went to your computer and looked it up on pokerstove. However based on your history of playing flops with him, you are a 78% favorite to win the match.Would you still call just because this is a +EV spot? Calling here is a big mistake because you will only win 55% of the time by calling, and you will win 78% of the time by playing flops against him.
If your friend is that bad I still call. If I've played 1k games against him I will take this edge, because it is likely that we will keep on playing more games and it becomes a cash game. You do realise how absolutely unrealistic 78% win rate HU is though? He could do better moving allin with almost every single hand preflop. Again, it's a bad analogy.

#46 NEtwowilldo

NEtwowilldo

    Poker Forum Groupie

  • Members
  • 691 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Favorite Poker Game:Mostly 10-20 Crazy 8s and my local B&M

Posted 15 April 2007 - 11:32 AM

Ugh. Agree to Disagree.I guess I'll keep playing like a weaktight ***** and that will keep me stuck at this atrocious 17.5% ITM and 2.7% win rate for MTTs with an average field size of 890. Lock it up.
Lol Donkaments

Jeff Madsen doesn't eat his food, he just re-raises it until the nutrients fold into his stomach.

See What I've Been Up To

#47 simo_8ball

simo_8ball

    Multipass

  • Members
  • 9,277 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Favorite Poker Game:PLO/NLHE

Posted 15 April 2007 - 11:44 AM

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 8:32 PM, said:

Agree to Disagree.
I don't agree to that.Oh, and spouting your statistics is pointless. If you are passing up 55/45 edges knowingly your results aren't as good as they could be.

#48 simo_8ball

simo_8ball

    Multipass

  • Members
  • 9,277 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Favorite Poker Game:PLO/NLHE

Posted 15 April 2007 - 12:24 PM

I heard David Singer talking about a hand recently where he flopped the king high flush, and Brad Booth overbet shoved with the nut flush draw. He commented that he felt he could fold there even if he knew Booth's hand because even though he is >70% to win, his tournament life would be on the line.This shows how even very good players can have very flawed concepts of what is correct.You having a 17.5% ITM and 2.7% win rate doesn't mean you can't improve.

#49 Zach6668

Zach6668

    FCHL Champion.

  • Moderators
  • 48,133 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON

Posted 15 April 2007 - 12:29 PM

View Postsimo_8ball, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 4:24 PM, said:

I heard David Singer talking about a hand recently where he flopped the king high flush, and Brad Booth overbet shoved with the nut flush draw. He commented that he felt he could fold there even if he knew Booth's hand because even though he is >70% to win, his tournament life would be on the line.This shows how even very good players can have very flawed concepts of what is correct.You having a 17.5% ITM and 2.7% win rate doesn't mean you can't improve.
lol, I watched David Singer on FTP one night... playing LO8 for 5 BB buyins at a time, usually raising to get down to his last BB or 1/2 BB, and folding on the river, lol. So, I'm not sure exactly how much weight I'd put on his advice, lol.
QUOTE (serge @ Tuesday, May 12th, 2009, 7:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
LETS GO PITTSBURGH
QUOTE (Acid_Knight @ Monday, March 10th, 2008, 4:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Zach is right about pretty much everything.

#50 NEtwowilldo

NEtwowilldo

    Poker Forum Groupie

  • Members
  • 691 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Favorite Poker Game:Mostly 10-20 Crazy 8s and my local B&M

Posted 15 April 2007 - 12:32 PM

1. 2005 NLHE Final Table at the World Series of Poker:Three Handed between Joe Awada, Scott Fischman, and Kent WashingtonFischman Raises with JJ, Kent Washington goes all-in with AK.Fischman folds JJ face up, then proceeds to tell his friend that he knew Washington had AK, but that Washington is a sitting duck.2006 Main Event of the World Series of Poker:Player A (Dustin Wolfe maybe??) raises with A K. Humberto Brenes (with a stack around average) reraises with JJ. Folds back to Player A who goes all in, and has Humberto covered. Humberto stands up and says that he knows he has the best hand, but he is not a gambler, and proceeds to muck his hand.Now not only did these players pass with dead money in the pot, they passed knowing they had the best hand!!Maybe you could tell these multiple bracelet winners about all the flaws in their game, and how much they need to improve for passing up the +EV situations that they did. 2.And even though my heads up example is a little off topic and not the best analogy, it is still extremely foolish to take a 55/45 edge when you can just wait for a 78/22 edge.3. "Survive and Thrive" Paragraph title in the tournament hold 'em chapter in Play Poker Like the Pros. Page 169. Author Phil Hellmuth, ten time world champion of Texas Hold 'Em. (Hardly a "weak tight" player in my humble opinion)4. That article was by Phil Gordon, not Phil Ivey, not that it matters really. 5. I realize you can't put all of that stuff about stealing blinds and playing in position into pokerstove, which was exactly my point. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but you can't just punch some numbers into a computer program and say, there you go, you're wrong, I'm right, see the computer said so.6. I, as well as several other people on this forum, have a considerable edge over the vast majority of the players remaining, with just under half the field remaining in a ten dollar donkament online. If it was the final table of the $100 rebuy, I would probably be the biggest underdog at the table, if I was ever lucky enough to make it so far in such a huge tournament, in which case I would make this call in a heartbeat.7. As far as the range of the villain, Zach said a squeeze play can be made with any two cards. However in this spot, the villain is putting over half his stack at risk to increase it by only about 1/10. It's safe to assume that he has a premium hand.8. As for the comment about never going all in, ideally you don't want to. Being all in means that you have a chance to be knocked out. When the decision is for your tournament life, you want to have a big edge. If this wasn't the case, Humberto and Scott both would have called in the situations I described above. However they understand that it was a marginal spot, which is why they didn't make the call. And yes, 55/45 is marginal, when you can get someone to commit a lot of chips when they are drawing slim in a later spot.
Lol Donkaments

Jeff Madsen doesn't eat his food, he just re-raises it until the nutrients fold into his stomach.

See What I've Been Up To

#51 GrinderMJ

GrinderMJ

    Original

  • Members
  • 7,525 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 April 2007 - 12:47 PM

Ok, first. What is your stars name? The one you put on the first page isn't coming up, and I'm curious about some of your stats. Second, Quit posting articles where players you see on TV folded in a +ev spot. Something that you should realize from the articles that you don't seem to get is why these are memorable situations. Why is that memorable you ask? It's unusual for them BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T GET RICH PASSING UP EDGES. Yes, there are spots in poker where you can pass up +ev spots, we all do it. However, these are very rare and there are top 20 ranked players who never pass up any edge ever. You are seriously seriously seriously overestimating your edge on the field. I can't quantify it for you, but I promise you, your edge on the field is not as big as you think it is. Maybe this approach will help you see a little better. My edge on the field is that I am able to see and exploit +ev situations over and over again. I don't pretend to be an amazing hand reader who always knwos what people have on complicated hands that go to the river. My edge on the field every time I sit is that I make better decisions than my opponents, and I create +ev situations. If you are capable of seeing these edges and still not exploiting them, then you are just foolish and costing yourself a lot of money.

#52 NEtwowilldo

NEtwowilldo

    Poker Forum Groupie

  • Members
  • 691 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Favorite Poker Game:Mostly 10-20 Crazy 8s and my local B&M

Posted 15 April 2007 - 12:50 PM

You're obviously an all or nothing player. I don't think you're putting enough value on tournament life.My stars name is southrnctowl. I've played 74 real money tournaments, with buy-ins ranging from 25 cents to $15. Needless to say I prefer live play, but I just don't like people telling me I have huge flaws in my game when I obviously have very respectable statistics against recreational players.
Lol Donkaments

Jeff Madsen doesn't eat his food, he just re-raises it until the nutrients fold into his stomach.

See What I've Been Up To

#53 GrinderMJ

GrinderMJ

    Original

  • Members
  • 7,525 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 April 2007 - 01:07 PM

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Monday, April 16th, 2007, 1:50 AM, said:

You're obviously an all or nothing player. I don't think you're putting enough value on tournament life.My stars name is southrnctowl. I've played 74 real money tournaments, with buy-ins ranging from 25 cents to $15. Needless to say I prefer live play, but I just don't like people telling me I have huge flaws in my game when I obviously have very respectable statistics against recreational players.
Wow. First, 74 is such a retardedly small sample size that it is literally meaningless. You must not understand tournament variance if you think 74 is a big enough sample to flaunt at somebody. Second, I don't want to sound arrogant but my game is light years ahead of yours and it makes me laugh that you think you can give me advice. Do I make mistakes? Yes, a ton of them. Do I have leaks? Of course. However, this is not one of them and you clearly don't have enough experience or knowledge to diagnose my leaks. Total Profit: $97,001Total Buyins: $51,095Total ROI: 189%Total Played: 587Keep in mind, this is since I turned 18 and got new names on sites. I had roughly 10-15k profit and 300 or so played.

#54 GrinderMJ

GrinderMJ

    Original

  • Members
  • 7,525 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 April 2007 - 01:25 PM

The hardest thing to do in poker is admit you have leaks in your game. I've spent all year being told that I had major flaws by players much better than me and it sucked. You realize how much time you have put into poker and to hear that you are still a poor player really really blows. However, you will never become a top player if you aren't honest with yourself about your own shortcomings, and if you aren't willing to listen to advice of people more successful than you.

#55 NEtwowilldo

NEtwowilldo

    Poker Forum Groupie

  • Members
  • 691 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Favorite Poker Game:Mostly 10-20 Crazy 8s and my local B&M

Posted 15 April 2007 - 01:55 PM

I understand I'm not the greatest, and $500 pales in comparison to $97,000 or whatever, but I think the purest element of the game is getting a read on someone and acting accordingly, which is why I don't play for considerable stakes online. I had to back up my play somehow, and those were the only recordings I got. I've started keeping records of my live cash game play, and over ~35 hours of 1-2 NL games, I average a profit of over $11 per hour. (modest, I know, but I'm becoming more and more of a winning player of the past few years)I realize that there is always room to improve in this game, and obviously that's something I'm trying to do just by participating in this forum. Trust me, I understand all of the math you have shown me, but I believe their are some things that is just too hard to put a number on. You've come across with a very "I'm right, you're wrong" tone, which is why I've been so defensive in this thread, especially when I think that some of the top players in the world would agree with me. I'm only a 19 year old kid, but I'm extremely confident and passionate about my game, which is probably why I would fold the AK in the first place. Don't get me wrong though, I'm always looking to improve and learn from others. I believe that all of these aspects are necessary to succeed in this game, and keep continuing to get better. My thoughts on situations like these is that I'm not going to take such a slight edge, when I feel that I can make better decisions by playing hands out, which will allow me to get a better idea of where I stand on later streets. Overall, I feel that there is much less risk this way, and your decisions can be much easier on the whole. So all in all I appreciate everyone's help, and I'm sorry if my high level of confidence comes across as arrogance.
Lol Donkaments

Jeff Madsen doesn't eat his food, he just re-raises it until the nutrients fold into his stomach.

See What I've Been Up To

#56 simo_8ball

simo_8ball

    Multipass

  • Members
  • 9,277 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Favorite Poker Game:PLO/NLHE

Posted 15 April 2007 - 02:22 PM

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 9:32 PM, said:

1. 2005 NLHE Final Table at the World Series of Poker:Three Handed between Joe Awada, Scott Fischman, and Kent WashingtonFischman Raises with JJ, Kent Washington goes all-in with AK.Fischman folds JJ face up, then proceeds to tell his friend that he knew Washington had AK, but that Washington is a sitting duck.2006 Main Event of the World Series of Poker:Player A (Dustin Wolfe maybe??) raises with A K. Humberto Brenes (with a stack around average) reraises with JJ. Folds back to Player A who goes all in, and has Humberto covered. Humberto stands up and says that he knows he has the best hand, but he is not a gambler, and proceeds to muck his hand.Now not only did these players pass with dead money in the pot, they passed knowing they had the best hand!!Maybe you could tell these multiple bracelet winners about all the flaws in their game, and how much they need to improve for passing up the +EV situations that they did.
See my above example of David Singer. Just because someone is a great player doesn't mean they don't make incorrect decisions or have a poor understanding of the fundamental mathematics of poker.Also, I have never said you should take every possible edge. In those examples, without knowing the blinds and antes and how everyone at the table was playing it is impossible to say whether it is a good move or not. Needless to say, many players have large egos and overestimate their skill edge.

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 9:32 PM, said:

2.And even though my heads up example is a little off topic and not the best analogy, it is still extremely foolish to take a 55/45 edge when you can just wait for a 78/22 edge.
Not if you can just play him again whenever you want. If you have played him 1000 times, it's likely that you are playing very regularly. Then it just becomes a modified cash game.

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 9:32 PM, said:

3. "Survive and Thrive" Paragraph title in the tournament hold 'em chapter in Play Poker Like the Pros. Page 169. Author Phil Hellmuth, ten time world champion of Texas Hold 'Em. (Hardly a "weak tight" player in my humble opinion)
Quote from previous page by Paul Phillips:"The "hellmuth thing to do" doesn't mean he's better than the field, it only means he's (visibly, exploitably, overly) averse to going broke."Being risk averse makes you a weak player. Hellmuth is overly risk averse.

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 9:32 PM, said:

4. That article was by Phil Gordon, not Phil Ivey, not that it matters really.
You're right. It doesn't matter. That situation is hugely different to what we are talking about. There he didn't have a real edge against his opponent's range, and there was very little in the pot. Also, his table was overly timid.

#57 simo_8ball

simo_8ball

    Multipass

  • Members
  • 9,277 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Favorite Poker Game:PLO/NLHE

Posted 15 April 2007 - 02:23 PM

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 9:32 PM, said:

5. I realize you can't put all of that stuff about stealing blinds and playing in position into pokerstove, which was exactly my point. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but you can't just punch some numbers into a computer program and say, there you go, you're wrong, I'm right, see the computer said so.
You can, it just requires estimation. Pokerstove simply isn't designed for it.

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 9:32 PM, said:

6. I, as well as several other people on this forum, have a considerable edge over the vast majority of the players remaining, with just under half the field remaining in a ten dollar donkament online. If it was the final table of the $100 rebuy, I would probably be the biggest underdog at the table, if I was ever lucky enough to make it so far in such a huge tournament, in which case I would make this call in a heartbeat.
Noone is denying that you have an edge. All we are saying is that your edge is not as large as you think it is.

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 9:32 PM, said:

7. As far as the range of the villain, Zach said a squeeze play can be made with any two cards. However in this spot, the villain is putting over half his stack at risk to increase it by only about 1/10. It's safe to assume that he has a premium hand.
Yeah. I actually have no problem folding here. I think we are only about 37-40% against his range. I'll have to check pokerstove though.

View PostNEtwowilldo, on Sunday, April 15th, 2007, 9:32 PM, said:

8. As for the comment about never going all in, ideally you don't want to. Being all in means that you have a chance to be knocked out. When the decision is for your tournament life, you want to have a big edge. If this wasn't the case, Humberto and Scott both would have called in the situations I described above. However they understand that it was a marginal spot, which is why they didn't make the call. And yes, 55/45 is marginal, when you can get someone to commit a lot of chips when they are drawing slim in a later spot.
With your MTT stats, are you claiming you win 890 player tournaments 2.7% of the time? I'm guessing that's what you are saying. I could be wrong.890 = 2^xlog 890 = x log 2x = (log 890)/(log 2) = ~9.8You need to double up 9.8 times to win an 890 player tournament.y^9.8 = 0.027, where y is your probability of doubling through.9.8 log y = log 0.027log y = (1/9.8) log 0.027y = 0.027^(1/9.8) = 0.69So, if your statistics are accurate, you personally shouldn't call an allin unless you are >70% to win.Please don't spout statistics until you have a reasonable sample size.Grinder has posted his statistics, and even though he has over 500 tournaments logged, I'm sure he will agree that it is in no way a large enough sample size to accurately show his true win%, ITM% or average ROI%.I apologise for the tone of these two posts. They are overly curt and sarcastic. You just seemed to be dogmatically ignoring the points we were making.

#58 GrinderMJ

GrinderMJ

    Original

  • Members
  • 7,525 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 April 2007 - 02:33 PM

View Postsimo_8ball, on Monday, April 16th, 2007, 3:23 AM, said:

You can, it just requires estimation. Pokerstove simply isn't designed for it.Noone is denying that you have an edge. All we are saying is that your edge is not as large as you think it is.Yeah. I actually have no problem folding here. I think we are only about 37-40% against his range. I'll have to check pokerstove though.With your MTT stats, are you claiming you win 890 player tournaments 2.7% of the time? I'm guessing that's what you are saying. I could be wrong.890 = 2^xlog 890 = x log 2x = (log 890)/(log 2) = ~9.8You need to double up 9.8 times to win an 890 player tournament.y^9.8 = 0.027, where y is your probability of doubling through.9.8 log y = log 0.027log y = (1/9.8) log 0.027y = 0.027^(1/9.8) = 0.69So, if your statistics are accurate, you personally shouldn't call an allin unless you are >70% to win.Please don't spout statistics until you have a reasonable sample size.Grinder has posted his statistics, and even though he has over 500 tournaments logged, I'm sure he will agree that it is in no way a large enough sample size to accurately show his true win%, ITM% or average ROI%.I apologise for the tone of these two posts. They are overly curt and sarcastic. You just seemed to be dogmatically ignoring the points we were making.
1k tourneys played should be a good sample, I'd say I'm close total if you add my first accounts, but ya I'm still a little short.

#59 SlackerInc

SlackerInc

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,290 posts
  • Interests:tennis, music, politics (I'm a Democrat)
  • Favorite Poker Game:Tournament No-Limit Hold 'Em (2nd: Razz)

Posted 15 April 2007 - 02:57 PM

When I woke up this morning, strangely enough I was mulling this issue and thought of a caveat to my previous assertions. In a structure like PAD or a satellite that awards just one prize to first place, there would be no caveats since you need to collect all the chips or you get nothing. Best cash game strategy is pretty much the same as optimal tournament strategy. But in a flatter structure, the person who accumulates all the chips only gets a fraction of the prize pool. And those who straggle into the money with small stacks which they soon lose to the big stacks nevertheless get more money back than they put in (even if they never actually increased their starting stack by as great a proportion as the payout they get). So there does have to be some adjustment there--but it is hard to quantify. I guess this is the whole issue of EV vs. tEV. Most people would say that they are close to the same if you are far from the money; but even that is not quite right since you could go on the greatest tear of all time in the early going that would make you incredibly rich in a cash game, but even if you take 90% of the chips (or all the chips for that matter) in the first blind level, you still only get that same fraction of the prize pool for first place, and someone still gets every other prize that's awarded--even if only because they arrived late to the tournament and thus still had chips left when everyone else lost theirs! So if the blind structure is slow enough and if the payout structure is flat enough, and if the other players are weak enough, there may be some value to passing up early marginal edges. But that's a lot of "ifs".

#60 Zach6668

Zach6668

    FCHL Champion.

  • Moderators
  • 48,133 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON

Posted 15 April 2007 - 03:03 PM

I think something that a lot of people do, notably those who advocate passing up xx% edges, is think they're edge is massive.This is simply untrue. Poker is such a marginal game. Noboday has a massive edge in ANY form of poker. Poker is played on the marginal hands. Everyone is a winner with AA, KK, etc, but not everyone can win in the marginal postflop situations, but that edge is very small. It's just the nature of the game, where no hand is worse than a 4-1 dog preflop, etc. I'm not a real math guy, so I don't have much to back this up, but it's been discussed here and other forums. A great player's edge in a tourney is very small. Too small to pass up a 60/40, 55/45, etc.- Zach
QUOTE (serge @ Tuesday, May 12th, 2009, 7:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
LETS GO PITTSBURGH
QUOTE (Acid_Knight @ Monday, March 10th, 2008, 4:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Zach is right about pretty much everything.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users