Youkay, hey there. Thanks for leaving a comment and let me apologize for taking two weeks to respond to it. This is a really interesting spot to me. Although it seems pretty basic, I struggle with knowing what to do. I think more than that I'm unsure of what factors should be the priorities in my decision making process. I mean the math is pretty simple and defined, but even once it's given me a solution, how do I weigh that solution vs other considerations, such as the variance involved, and the risk of busting the tournament. It appears I'm going into way more detail that I need to, as I tend to do, but while we're here.. I think EV is priority number one. I need to find out what my EV is and go from there. Priority number two is the variance/ percentage of the time I bust the tournament. Am I okay with a slightly +EV spot if it means I bust 40% of the time? I'm not sure. A big factor in that interplay is the amount of fold equity I have. I thought I had very little, and gave that as my reason for folding. Looking back, I think I should shove this hand. The guys got a mountain of chips and therefore is more likely to be opening wide. Furthermore, he's opening into a lineup of not that many reshove stacks, so that fact could very well widen his range as well. I think he has so much junk in his range, A7s type stuff, that he just won't have good enough odds to call a shove of mine here. There are a few people behind sure, but I think that even with that, I can still make good money here in this situation. 

Hey Maddsoul, thanks man. That's something I've had a lot of fun thinking about and playing with in recent months, and I'm glad it's not just me who likes it, haha. Cheers. 

I don't have one defined in my head, but it would be pretty wide. I'm getting good odds vs an opponent who at the time I preceived to be weaker. I think I can make really good decisions postflop and find myself in some profitable spots. This spot, like many, is one of those where I feel ones range should be wide with most hands that play well. 

Hey man, thanks! Good to hear from you again. 

@ QTs. Word!

@AKo: What are some of the things you think about in spots like this? It's obviously totally minor, with only the smallest of edges (if any) to be had either way. If you're playing a lot of tables you open yourself up to timing out after investing 2 of your 7 bbs.. That's not good. On the other hand, you can potentially get flat called by someone, usually the big blind, who doesn't see your stack as short before calling. Meaning they just see a min raise and defend vs it. Is this a net positive or negative for us? On the one hand, we get to extract more money in position from a hand we're beating. On the other we now give him a non-zero chance to win the pot, a pot that's pretty important for us at this stack. Based on that I think shoving is better too. Perhaps min raising on a 3 or 4 big blind stack would be better, since the bb is priced in with any 2 cards, now we give ourselves more of a chance to get some folds. Just don't ever time out though!

@AKo 3b BB vs OTB: Yes, this is my standard size. Vs a player as strong as J Thadeus I need to be very careful about what kind of odds I give him preflop. The current size still gives him 2:1, he has to call 260 more into a 535 pot. That's pretty good odds right there in and of itself, so I think anything less and I'm asking for trouble. Against weaker players or guys who won't flat 3bs too wide, I can reduce my size a bit. In general I tend to keep my 3b sizings bigger than most at deep stack depths though, to prevent my opponent from getting too good of odds that they're compelled to continue. Also, yes I would bet/call both AA and AQ there. That turn card isn't great for those hands, since it can give him 2p very often. But it can also give him pair + OESD a lot, which is a hand he'll certainly call a bet with, and despite it's equity, it's still a hand I'm well ahead of. If we get it in and he has 2p, my equity is still reasonable with either hand.

A6o potential 4b: Cool, yeah looking back at this one I'm glad I folded too. All signs point to fold (except the A blocker; our stacksizes, the pychology dynamics, and the fact that the SB is shorter should theoretically tighten my range OTB a bit. 

Hey Liquid, thanks for leaving a comment. I'm really big on timing tells myself, and I think it's one of the most underrated aspects of today's game. It just doesn't get talked about much. It should too, because as you noted, it can change people's ranges, sometimes drastically so. 

I love how you said, in my experience I see X hand range when Y timing is present. The specific X and Y you defined are different from mine though, different from my experience. Of course this is different for certain player types, but I find that the majority of players don't shove quickly with their nutted hands (AA and KK in this spot). I would almost take them out of his range when running the numbers because of it. I also see a lot more marginal hands getting shoved quickly these days. I feel like the thinking goes like this "Okay I've got an okay hand, I'm pretty sure I can make money reraising allin here, but if I do it quickly he might think I'm more confident and therefore stronger, and I might get more folds". What's funny is that can be a conscious thought, or it can happen completely subconsciously. When it happens subconsciously I feel like that's the exact reasoning for why they act in that way, with that speed. 

It's never too late with this notification system - what a useful tool for this purpose. Too busy "eliting"? Do not be silly, my friend! Poker is poker, and I'm here for all of it just the same. I'm not concerned about what tab my comment will fall under.

Your question is wonderful content itself. You demonstrated that you understand many aspects of opening very well. Let me see if I can add a couple of things to your acumen.

1. Note - I did not go back in the video to look at the specific hands (timestamp in the future please). I should be able to give you a useful reply talking in general terms, not to mention the fact that my understanding of this concept has developed significantly in the months since this video was first made, so I imagine I made some folds or opens I wouldn't if I were playing today. Even without the benefit of having HUD data on your opponents behind, I still think you can make a relatively informed decision. Granted this will not be ideal by any means - we'd much rather have the date to go on - but by using a statistically average villain for the opponents behind, we can operate reasonably well on that assumption. Now you're quite likely to already be doing this, so perhaps the difference is that we're making different assumptions. I've found that I can get away with opening a criminally wide range in EP a lot of times, because players (the "average" villain) simply don't punish me for it. I'm opening myself to exploitation, but in fact it's me who is doing the exploiting - exploiting them for not 3bing wide enough vs my true range. You know, guys get to playing a lot of tables and they just let people slide with opening wide. It's easy for them to say, "well I'll get him next time, I'll fold K9o". Or they simply get distracted by a bigger decision on another table. How do you feel about this thought?

2. I don't think you need such an extreme level of detail in understanding the math for every possible scenario as a prerequisite for opening. If you've done any of this math in the past, and it seems that you have, you're going to make damn good assumptions about your equity in these spots. If you're unsure, save the hand and run it later. That's an effective way to learn, because that spot is going to stick in your mind since you put so much conscious thought into it. And remember, your opponents are multitabling too, and they have to do the math on reshoving vs your range as well. Of course most villains won't have perfect math for these spots either, especially if your range is wider than they're used to dealing with. I like the reciprocity you create for yourself in these spots, because I think your math knowledge and estimations are going to be more accurate than most of your opponents in ambiguous spots like this. Lastly, what if we take a very simple approach? Can I get my open through enough of the time to make an immediate profit in and of itself? While very simple, this is a useful thought when considering to open, especially in turbos where people are flatting very infrequently from anywhere (and quite possibly including) the BB. 

3. This is a critical concept. When I stated earlier that I understand these spots better now than in months prior, this was the component I was primarily speaking of. Yes, stack functionality is very important, and is a factor in all of these spots. Do not take it lightly. Taking a 0EV spot, and/or a spot where you often lose, future EV should be considered. It is a very real thing, and it should keep you out of marginal spots like this. However, in a lot of cases I will still open these spots, knowing that I'll have to fold a neutralish EV spot, because I don't expect villains behind me to widen their range with the specific intent to threaten my stack flexibility and ability to achieve future EV. 

I have a couple of associated thoughts to finish with. I also like what it opening a wider range does for my future EV. The response chain works pretty favorably. At a given table I'll open very wide in EP to start. Opponents who have little history with my will initially give me credit, or at least not give me disrespect (which my true range would deserve!). Then they see that I've opened too many times for this to be a good run of cards, so they decide to start playing back wider. By this point I'm expecting it, and I can tighten my range a bit, and receive additional EV by my opponents responding to my old range instead of my current range. Now in practice, I often can't resist making this adjustment to tighten up, and to some extent this idea works much better in theory than in practice. I can also assume with some confidence that I'll start to get played back at wider with non allin 3bets, so I can adjust by calling more and 4betting more.

Disclaimer! My approach to these spots is far from steeped in science, but rather it's based almost entirely on my subjective experience. I think this experience has legitimate value, and I try to be honest with myself about how things are working in practice, and not just in an ideal sense in my mind. My advice to you is play a session where you push the limits of opening. Observe how your opponents respond, and see what you can get away with. Maybe play a lower stakes turbo session than your normal ABI and practice clicking raise. I'm very curious to what you think of my response here now, and I'd be interested in hearing how this experiment goes should you conduct it.

Hey man,

Looking back at this hand, I'd like to see myself call vs a LP shove. And I think this would be about the worst hand I'd call, perhaps ATs as well. I just think facing a villain there who is by all accounts a recreational player (VIP status, fact that I don't have him tagged) , I could be facing a wide variety of shove ranges. Some of these players will shove way too tight. Some will shove way too loose. I didn't appear to have a specific feel for that player. When I'm in a spot like that, "readless" I just assign him the average tendencies of the population of similar player types. That would result in me thinking he's shoving a bit too wide there, and make me compelled to call this hand. One thing to note, it's also important to note if the player does, or is likely to, have a flatting range here. If he does, that will take away some of his weaker shoves. For example, some players will flat with 55 here even though a shove is the superior option. If there were antes, this would be a slam dunk.

I tend to open quite wide in turbos, so that makes this even more of a call for me with the way my game is (though this may not have been the case at the time of this video.) But, I vote for a re-do and I make the call!