Poker Video: MTT/SNG by vandweller (Mid Stakes)

Time Link to 00:45:19

You should really wiz those hands, I think this is another mistake. You are just risking way too much. In an earlier hand you were called in a similar situation and concluded that it was a bad call. But given that you will be called wider than correct, those pushes become bad very quickly.

Same thing next hand, plus his calling range widens with every time you shove.

Time Link to 00:53:50

Stop focusing on how bad your opponents calls are. Include those bad calls in their range and check if your push is still good.

Stop focusing on how bad your opponents calls are. Include those bad calls in their range and check if your push is still good.

U sir are a troll! Ty Van great video

Yeah when I do ranges, I am trying to account for typical calling ranges by an unknown. If someone is looser, we see it, but if they are tighter, we don't. It's easier therefore to get worked up about looser calls and say "HEY DUMMY INCLUDE THOSE IN YOUR OPPONENTS' RANGES!!!" but we forget that often guys will make absurdly tight folds as well and we never truly know what they are.

I wouldn't say that I "focus" on how bad my opponents' calls are as an end in itself. It's merely as a point of interest how certain hands perform against certain ranges adjusting for the prize structure, and to make sure any newbies watching aren't tempted to make the same plays. If that's "focusing" on my opponents' bad plays, so be it.

Yeah when I do ranges, I am trying to account for typical calling ranges by an unknown. If someone is looser, we see it, but if they are tighter, we don't. It's easier therefore to get worked up about looser calls and say "HEY DUMMY INCLUDE THOSE IN YOUR OPPONENTS' RANGES!!!" but we forget that often guys will make absurdly tight folds as well and we never truly know what they are.

Well, in my experience weaker players don't like to raise/fold a lot, therefore they will NOT make very tight folds. For this play to work you need a very specific opponent, one that is "bad" enough to raise wide without realizing he can't call beforehand and at the same time "good" enough to then fold, because he realizes he can't call after your reraise.

I wouldn't say that I "focus" on how bad my opponents' calls are as an end in itself. It's merely as a point of interest how certain hands perform against certain ranges adjusting for the prize structure, and to make sure any newbies watching aren't tempted to make the same plays. If that's "focusing" on my opponents' bad plays, so be it.

You analyzed several of your opponents' calls without ever analyzing one of your pushes. It should also be a point of interest, that the pushes you advise are bad against certain ranges.

That said reraising on the bubble is a powerful weapon, but IMO it is not as foolproof as you make it out to be. While it may be cool to own people on the bubble, there is a pretty big downside if your estimation of their ranges is off.

I'm sorry if my comments were out of line. I would appreciate it, if you could rereview those hands and take a deeper look into the pushes against wider calling ranges.

U sir are a troll! Ty Van great video

I have to disagree on the first part.

Hi Van, great job doing these videos. I find them awesome.:-) I wanted to ask a question concerning sngwiz. There are two equity models ICM and Chip. When do I exactly use the second one? Like in 180man sng when there are still like 78 players left? Cause I think ICM doesnt have that much of an effect there. Thanks a lot for answer. Just wanted to make sure how things really work.

I'm no vandweller, but I can provide some answers here.

There are two equity models ICM and Chip. When do I exactly use the second one?

To calculate your stack's worth with ICM, you need to know every stack involved. I don't know a poker site where you would get stack sizes from other tables, so you need to use Chip equity model when you're not in the final table.

In case you're interested in how ICM works, vandweller has made a great video where he teaches you on how to make your own ICM calculator that might help you understand the underlying theory better.

http://www.deucescracked.com/videos/79-Blackboard/738-Vandweller_2_ICM_from_Scratch

Like in 180man sng when there are still like 78 players left? Cause I think ICM doesnt have that much of an effect there.

You're quite correct here, the farther away you are from a pay level change and the smaller the changes in pay level, the less effect ICM will have on your decisions. This means when you're far away from the "good money" you can be basing your decisions to chipEV. When you understand ICM, you can see some implications even outside the final table in larger MTTs even though you would not be able to do precise calculations.

[quote]I'm no vandweller, but I can provide some answers here.

Thank you very much, I was a little unsure about that one, I've seen Van's video about ICM, it was very instructive.:-)

I have one last question. Can I use this Chip model also in 18man sng when there are still 2 tables? I know already that I cant use ICM model there so I figured it has to be Chip model. But just want to be sure. Thanks for reply.

I have one last question. Can I use this Chip model also in 18man sng when there are still 2 tables? I know already that I cant use ICM model there so I figured it has to be Chip model. But just want to be sure. Thanks for reply.

You can't use ICM model when there's two tables remaining, but 18 men tournaments run very similarly to 9 men tournaments, which mean that you should look for plenty of edge when you're analyzing early game situations. ICM matters a lot in 18 men tournaments even when you can't exactly calculate it.

You can't use ICM model when there's two tables remaining, but 18 men tournaments run very similarly to 9 men tournaments, which mean that you should look for plenty of edge when you're analyzing early game situations. ICM matters a lot in 18 men tournaments even when you can't exactly calculate it.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the issue is more the limitation of existing ICM calculators such as Wiz, right?

Certainly the equity model still applies in multi-table formats, and I see know reason why you couldn't brute force the calculations (say with a spreadsheet as in one of Vandweller's Blackboard videos) if you wanted to. It's just harder to calculate.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the issue is more the limitation of existing ICM calculators such as Wiz, right?

Certainly the equity model still applies in multi-table formats, and I see know reason why you couldn't brute force the calculations (say with a spreadsheet as in one of Vandweller's Blackboard videos) if you wanted to. It's just harder to calculate.

Yeah, it can be calculated even in multi table situations, but it's a hassle because you don't get everyone's stack size in the tournament. It's not only a tool issue. You get only stack sizes for your own table. So you can calculate ICM values for stacks even in multitable situations, but it's not practical. Tools could be quite easily patched if data would be easily available.

Well, you can get the stack sizes on most sites by going to the lobby and looking at other table[s]. But of course they don't appear automatically in your HH, so it would be a pain to load them in any calculator tool.

---
Also, I do know the difference between no and know, despite my previous post.

Time Link to 00:28:20

I have to agree with rubbishaka80 on some of the hands, especially those "bubble ownage" plays. They usually don't raise fold, unless they have done it in the past and they're just trying to steal the blinds with a min-raise (very bad players.)

I have tried that play at the lower limits and it ended up badly for me

Of course this is bad to begin with because you have to shove 88 in that spot not min-raise it, so the question of whether this is a good player or not is solved when he makes that min raise.

But yea, please make more videos like this one