PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t1200 (2 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)

Hero (t9330)
Button (t17670)

Preflop: Hero is BB with Q, K.
Button raises to t9675, Hero???.


Just started HU play the hand before this. Villain wasn't very aggressive up till now and the size of this raise was quite out of character for him, so I figured he had something. His raise was clearly designed to force me to call off all my chips. Is KQs good enough here, or should I assume I'm behind a PP or a good Ace? I've only started playing turbos recently, so I'm still getting the hang of late-stage turbo play.

What does Sage say?

I fold here approximately never. I think he can be shoving KJ/QJ/JT/etc.

Incidentally, sage agrees with you AINEC. Not that I think it's the be-all and end-all of heads up strat, but for simple shove/call questions, there's no good argument for going against it in clear-cut situations like this.

Isn't SAGE designed for either making push/fold decisions as the shortie, or call/fold decisions in the face of pushes from shortie? In this situation I am the shortie but I'm facing a raise from SB that will put me all in. Maybe I misread SAGE, but I don't think it technically applies here.

I call here. in my opinion.... he can be pushing anything. not just the hands you mentioned. call and hope your ahead. and if not, just suck out.

I think we call here and see a smaller pocket pair a lot more than Ace-rag. These micro donks have seen pros limp aces HU too much on TV that it is becoming an epidemic online. We are ahead of pretty much any Kx and Qx, and a lil' behind a pocket pair.

The only real information we have is our opponent really isn't interested in seeing a flop with his hand.

It makes no difference who the shortstack is. The chipleader is only ever playing with an effective stack equal to the other player anyway.

OMFG are u kidding me?




Phew.

Easy call. Don't worry about it if you called and he had you beat. He has such a low M, he should be pushing with a HUGE range.

That doesn't really bring down his range when he is so short stacked. BB is 1200 so he is correct to push anything in his raising range.

Yeah, missed the 1200 BB. Relax, I voted shove just like everyone else regardless

I'm the one with the really low M, not him. With 17000 chips and blinds of 600/1200, he does have a bit of breathing room.

simo, doesn't it have to depend on who the shortstack is? SAGE is based on the fact that the player who is very short is desperate, so he should be pushing a wide range; and based on that, the bigger stack's calling range opens up accordingly. But this is a situation in which the bigger stack has made a raise that will put shortie all in. Even if he should be raising with a wide range, he doesn't have to be - and keep in mind that this is a $1.75 tourney.

I think you're wrong - I think sage is actually just strategy for general short-stacked play. This doesn't mean the players have to be short in relation to each other, but just short in relation to the blinds. If you both had 10k chips here you could still apply sage.

The big stack here is open-pushing every hand that he's opening (or he should be), and his range for opening should be pretty wide. I mean it's not even like he might have KJ here sometimes....he should have like J8+ here, and you're way way ahead.

Heads up, with such a low stack, and a shove from the button...I cant fold this.

Yeah, he could have a huge hand, and crush us.
Yeah, he could have Ax or a PP and be in close to a race

but IMO, he shows a hand WE dominated a lot; K8s+, Q9s+, J9s+ maybe some mid suited connectors and one gappers

I call this in a heartbeat

Sage IS about short stacked jam/call play. A bet by the large stack that puts the shortie all-in is effectively an all in bet. The large stack EFFECTIVELY has the same stack size as the shortie, where the extra chips can be viewed as rebuy chips. Sage applies in this hand, and decisively favors a call. You need a power index of 30 to call, and your hand is about 40.

You're right, I just read the article again. I misinterpreted it as applying to a more limited set of scenarios than it actually does. Okay, easy call.