ICM OR NOT: Storm 10+R

Posted by

Posted by posted in Mid Stakes

ICM OR NOT: Storm 10+R

Blinds: t25,000/t50,000 (6 Players) BN: 1,635,285
SB: 1,157,324
BB: 718,387 (Hero)
UTG: 1,015,753
MP: 4,217,331
CO: 1,577,182
not much to say about vilain, 120 hands 15/13, seen him raise/call a shove+overshove with AKs
Preflop (75,000) Hero is BB with 7 7
3 folds, BN raises to 100,000, SB folds, Hero raises to 713,387 and is all in, BN calls 613,387
Flop (1,481,774) 9 5 J
Turn (1,481,774) 9 5 J 3
River (1,481,774) 9 5 J 3 Q
Final Pot BN wins and shows a pair of Queens.
BB lost and shows a pair of Sevens.
BN wins 1,481,774

so is this a standard reshove at 12 left. I put everything in ICMIZER and it gives a TT+, AK range for reshoving vs a 8% open, if I increase the range at 14% 77 is 0$ev
what's your thought?
thanks

Prize pool
1 2907EUROS
2 2118
3 1561
4 1175
5 825
6 657
7 502
8 347
9 231
10-12 177
13-15 146

15 Comments

Loading 15 Comments...

Arnaud Lafaurie 10 years, 3 months ago

My second comment is as I play not on a regular basis mean let's say 1000 tournament year to date, do I have to take all the spot that are slightly ev+?

Jeff 10 years, 3 months ago

The button should be opening way wider than the 8 and 14% you used as his range. Given how wide he should be 77 is an easy shove with your stack size.

SPrince 10 years, 3 months ago

Was he opening only 8% on the button?
I dunno, with these stack sizes i think he should be opening close to 40% (someone correct me if im wrong), so seems like an easy shove. But if hes opening 8%, he might just be ubbernitty and raise-call with 100% of his opening range, so flatting or stop n go could be better.

Arnaud Lafaurie 10 years, 3 months ago

not too much history with this guy, he only open a couple of times and seems not open at optimum frequency in late position. I think earlier I made a big mistake against this guy as well, but over the samples of hand I have he only show up 2 times QQ, 1 time KK, 1 55, and 1 AKs

JerseyGrinder23 10 years, 3 months ago

77s pretty standard shove with 14bbs. I think flatting is out of the question here. The btn will most likely be raising 30-35% of hands here. Even at 15/13 I'm sure he is opening wide here. I'd only fold here if the next payout is a huge difference, or there are many other 7-10bb stacks.

ZenFish 10 years, 3 months ago

Noteworthy point:

We are not comparing shoving to folding, we are comparing shoving to flatting 1 bb to win ~4.5 bb + implied odds + (some) possibility of winning showdowns unimproved, while having the option to get away from bad flops and play future hands with 12bb.

It's not enough that a shove is profitable (i.e. better than folding). It has to outperform all other options, both calling and folding. Calling 1bb in 4.5 bb with implied odds and the possibility of winning some showdowns unimproved seems like a legitimate and profitable option to me (even if we can not calculate the EV exactly).

If calling is profitable, we need to do better than EV > 0 to make a shove. We have to do EV (shove) > EV (call), and also taking the value of playing future hands with 13bb into account.

Right?

Rapha Nogueira 10 years, 3 months ago

Yes, Solskjær you are right. The solution of flatting is reasonably assumption heavy so constructing a range that allows you to x/s with determined frequency with good equity would make the option of flatting 77 easier. People tend to shove 77 with 100% frequency HU. If SB comes along I'd be more inclined to flat.

JerseyGrinder23 10 years, 3 months ago

@ZenFish interesting point. All the calculations I do with under 15bbs is shoving vs. folding. I should also consider flatting like you said and not be so stubborn to think under 15bbs is ALWAYS a shove. In certain situations like you mentioned flatting might be the best option. Never really thought of calculating if flatting with 13bbs is more profitable than shoving.

I understand the point you are making, just not sure how to do the right calculations. Basically the hypothesis is that calling a raise with 77 and 13bb is more profitable than shoving, and it is more EV+ in the long run to flat?

Arnaud Lafaurie 10 years, 3 months ago

thanks guys.
as I played not a huge volume and bust so many times after 5, 6 hours of play at around final 2 to 3 tables this year that, I think I'm too result oriented/risk averse.

ZenFish 10 years, 3 months ago

JerseyGrinder23:
Basically the hypothesis is that calling a raise with 77 and 13bb is more profitable than shoving, and it is more EV+ in the long run to flat?

Not necessarily, but if flatting is profitable (and it certainly appears to be, paying only 1bb), we need to compare the EV of shoving vs the EV of flatting and choose the best of the two. Estimating EV (flat) is of course the tricky part, but the principle remains. We need to compare our profitable options, not only looking at EV (shove) in a vacuum.

We can also think about variance. If we have a profitable set mining spot (plus some EV from getting to a free or cheap showdown unimproved, plus some bluff EV that we might find, but let's ignore those things), then almost always we either play on with 12bb or with a significantly bigger stack. If we shove, we often double or bust, since we expect limited fold equity versus a big stack (when he has a 2x/fold range the presence of shorter stacks behind him means he should 2x tighter, since he will get jammed on more often).

These future prospects might sway is in one direction or the other, depending on our goals for the tournament and our risk tolerance.Shove could be best, but flatting has a lot of upside and minimal downside for us, and could also be the max +EV option.

mourathales 10 years, 2 months ago

Do you guys know how is being part of the best poker team in Brazil?
Well, you may have heard about André Akkari, PokerStars Pro. I'm on his team now and I'm going to spend January in a trainning center of Poker. Something new worldwide! Follow my journey on instagram: instagram.com/mourathales

Be the first to add a comment

Runitonce.com uses cookies to give you the best experience. Learn more about our Cookie Policy