---

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

Luceboy and Al IRL:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4o2PDwKdcA&feature=relmfu

Well, maybe not so much Luceboy, but Al sounds exactly like Moss...

Time Link to 00:45:11

Hi Luceboy & Al, nice video.

With this 44 hand on the bubble, it seems that the more likely the big stack BB will fold to the small stack BTN shove, the more inclined that you should be to call/shove yourself to try to end the bubble.

I noticed that you observed that ending the bubble will stop the big stack from bullying the table. However, I was also trying to understand why SNG WIZ would favour your call/shove if the big stack was calling tightly.

Am I correct that the chips that the BTN would gain if both you and the BB folded to his shove, would increase his tournament equity so close to yours, that that is why you should be calling/shoving with a hand that might be a favourite against his range to try to eliminate him (if the BB is tight) ?

I really like your HUD setup. Care to upload?

I really like your HUD setup. Care to upload?

Sorry for the late reply, i had to make sure the .pdf I made was touched up properly. You can find the guide along with my HUD in the following .zip.

https://rapidshare.com/files/1613665830/HUD.rar

Thank you. Looks very good!

First hand 98o BvB. If you discount an ace because he limped, then raising for protection is less of a viable option since he's also less likely to limp 2 overcards to your hand. Also if you discount good hands from him limping, isn't this a very clear raise pre? In cashgames I'd raise all day long here and I doubt fish play different in SNGs.

First hand 98o BvB... In cashgames I'd raise all day long here and I doubt fish play different in SNGs.

This is undoubtedly a +$EV raise in a cash game, however there are a couple of differences in strategy between SNG's and cashgame, you can always spot the cash game players in a SNG because they isolate the from the button more, and raise in position more when the blinds are small.

In a Sng The best thing to do early is to only get involved when you have a chance to hit a monster with great Pot Odds and huge implied, or raise, bet and protect your premium hands. This is because winning 500 chips is not as valuable as losing 500 chips, so there are reasons to keep the pot small often.

However you are right in saying that you could play this hand profitably by raising, you may even be able to make a tiny difference to your $Expectation from this tourney (assuming on average you make an extra 5 chips compared to when you check). The reason to play online poker is to make money, the only thing that matters is hourly rate. You can raise 98o here, and increase your $EV in this tournament by a tiny amount and have to play more complex and marginal situations early, but that will require more concentration.

The alternative is to check, play the hand more simply and not quite as proitably, but by not getting involved in marginal attention grabbing situations like this you may find you have the attention spare to play an extra few tables at once, which will boost your hourly rate more than getting involved with 98o will.

Having said all this, raising with 98o would be a fine option generally, but against the loose-aggressive fishbowl I think checking will be best, you will only be bloating the pot rather than creating any fold equity. In a spot like this in a SnG you want to get in as cheap as possible on the flop with the fishbowl, and if you hit well, try and take him to the cleaners.

My general preference for limping rather than raising, regardless of who has limped, is due to ICM, this is the subtle effect that ICM has even in the early stages of a SnG. People think it only matter on the bubble or when the blinds rise, but ICM shold influence and dictate all your plays until it is no longer a factor. The only time is ceases to be a factor is HU.

With all that in mind then, why did you raise the flop? That seems to accomplish the exact same unwanted things as raising preflop.

Also, just theorizing here, but a 2000 stack has an indirect ICM advantage over a 1000 chip stack. Other people should shove tighter on your blinds as you're calling off less $ for the same amount of chips so you can call wider. You can also shove wider later on when you cover people. So a chiplead will increase your bb/100 to compensate for the $value of each chip being less. I don't play SNGs but always thought an unconventional LAG approach focussing more on chip EV would crush the regs because of the bigstack advantages they seem to overlook in their strategy.

Hi Luceboy & Al, nice video.

With this 44 hand on the bubble, it seems that the more likely the big stack BB will fold to the small stack BTN shove, the more inclined that you should be to call/shove yourself to try to end the bubble.

Yes, this is exactly the case.

I noticed that you observed that ending the bubble will stop the big stack from bullying the table.

If the Bigstack is a good player, than he will abuse you the most on the bubble as the middle stack. Therefore it is -$EV for you if the bubble continues. If the Bigstack is not a good enough player to utilise his BigStack properly against you, then it is not something to be concerned. There is less need for you to try and end the bubble if you are not getting the worst of it.

However, I was also trying to understand why SNG WIZ would favour your call/shove if the big stack was calling tightly.

Essentially, marginal hands like 44 are not going to be huge favorites, and ICM generally means you need to be ahead of someone range by a large amount, or have very enticing pot odds to make marginal calls (particularly on the bubble). If the Bigstack is more likely to call, then you are more likely to make the money by folding. Making a marginal call is not smart if folding will be more +$EV, and folding becomes more and more +$EV in this situation, the wider and wider the bigstack calls.

With all that in mind then, why did you raise the flop? That seems to accomplish the exact same unwanted things as raising preflop.

To be honest you are so deepstacked here that I have no doubt you play this in a $EV way, and likely even a more $EV way than checking given your impressive cashgame background (this is the situation most similar to a cashgame in a SNG, excluding HU, as ICM has the its smallest influence here).

With a hand like 98o I will be raising with not a huge amount of fold equity, with a holding which plays well, but is unlikely to be a favorite against his calling range. On the flop I am now a large favorite, and you need to be a significant favorite to risk chips in a SnG (here less than most cases since everyone has a starting stack at low blinds so ICM is not as huge a factor as normal).

I felt confident I was a significant favorite on that flop, therefore I was happy to build the pot as a favorite.

I don't play SNGs but always thought an unconventional LAG approach focussing more on chip EV would crush the regs because of the bigstack advantages they seem to overlook in their strategy.

This is indeed true, an important skill for maximising profitability is spotting Inflection points which will change the stack dynamics on the bubble and taking -$EV opportunities at these points in order to take advantage of the multitude of future +$EV spots that will occur if your move succeeds and you are on the BigStack against 2 regs who understand ICM.
However this is when you should look to apply that theory and play in a way that more reflects your approach of looking at chips rather than $EV, rather than just ignoring $equity calculations. If you are not against 2 players (on a 6-max bubble) who understand ICM then the bigstack will not create as many future +$EV spots, as the player with a poor understanding of ICM will inevtiably be calling wider than he should, reducing the number of profitable pushes and steals you will be able to take advantage of.
If this is the case then it is certainly unwise to ignore looking at situations based on how much $ you will win rather than how many chips you can win, because there is less advantage to being bigstack, so $EV and ICM calculations are an indeed true representation of what play will make you the most money.

Time Link to 00:15:08

are you guys comfortable committing to any flop with a 8 or 10. Obviously we go with it if we flop any decent draw. I just feel like this is a fold because saving the 100 in chips is valuable to have more fold equity for preflop steals/resteals.

are you guys comfortable committing to any flop with a 8 or 10. Obviously we go with it if we flop any decent draw. I just feel like this is a fold because saving the 100 in chips is valuable to have more fold equity for preflop steals/resteals.

That's a hard question to answer and ultimately depends on the exact flop, its texture, the actions of the other players, their HUD stats and past history.

I can't say that i would be comfortable going with any 8 or 10 as i am sure that in some situations it will correct to check fold. Unfortunately there are so many different combinations of flops that this is particularly difficult to give a definitive answer.

What I can say is that considering that you are getting 5.5:1 closing the action you should consider calling here with T8s. You make a valid point in that perhaps you would want to save the chips for steals/resteals, however it is acceptable to speculate with good pot odds where you can. There is still some room for post-flop play and if you call and then have to check fold your stack is still large enough to effectively resteal with fold equity. I can understand that this hand may be tricky to play OOP against two opponents so I do not mind folding here.

I have a question about the KQ hand. I don’t play many SNGs/MTTs, which is probably why I don’t fully understand this play and I’m probably approaching the situation from a very basic level.

From what I understand the premise of this hand is that the short stack will keep the PFR honest and will prevent him from bluff c-betting. But doesn’t it do exactly the same to our hand, especially as we are out of position to the PFR? The only way we will win (vs PFR) is by hitting our cards and even then we may not be ahead as he may have us outkicked.

Based on his play, I would assume the short stack is shoving pretty much any flop. If our assumption is that he would do this with any hand would we not want to have position on the PFR? In that case, shorty can shove, if PFR folds we can call off light (with the assumption that he has air most of the time). If PFR calls or shoves we can fold if we think we are behind (as he is being “kept honest” by the short stack).

However in OOP, if we hit a K or Q (or draw) and shorty shoves we can only call when we hit a piece of the flop. And our range is very similar to the PF raisers range (possibly dominated) which surely means we’d never know where we are in the hand.

Regards,
Susanna

I have a question about the KQ hand. I don’t play many SNGs/MTTs, which is probably why I don’t fully understand this play and I’m probably approaching the situation from a very basic level.

From what I understand the premise of this hand is that the short stack will keep the PFR honest and will prevent him from bluff c-betting. But doesn’t it do exactly the same to our hand, especially as we are out of position to the PFR? The only way we will win (vs PFR) is by hitting our cards and even then we may not be ahead as he may have us outkicked.

Based on his play, I would assume the short stack is shoving pretty much any flop. If our assumption is that he would do this with any hand would we not want to have position on the PFR? In that case, shorty can shove, if PFR folds we can call off light (with the assumption that he has air most of the time). If PFR calls or shoves we can fold if we think we are behind (as he is being “kept honest” by the short stack).

However in OOP, if we hit a K or Q (or draw) and shorty shoves we can only call when we hit a piece of the flop. And our range is very similar to the PF raisers range (possibly dominated) which surely means we’d never know where we are in the hand.

Regards,
Susanna

Hi Susanna,

My apologies for the late response, I had to think about this one a litte.

It is true that the PFR will be kepy honest by the short stack in the SB. My hand does stand to be behind probably all of the PFRs raising range as he is UTG and does seem fairly tight, but almost certainly way ahead of the SB. The real question is, can i make a call here OOP given those facts, the stack sizes and the likely course of events.

In essence my call pre flop was to try and enter the pot with the loose aggressive guy, as i imagine he is likely to spew off the rest of his stack. My hand does play well enough, therefore allowing my to essentially play a hit-to-win strategy against him. Given the SBs stack size, if he shoves the flop I will be getting around 2:1 which will allow me to call with some straight draw/overcard combinations as well as any pair. The biggest issue here is obviously the PFR and how i perceive he will react.

The fact that I am OOP to the PFR is, as you said, a large problem. What you say about being in the middle of the sandwich is completely true as I may end up having to put chips in the middle before I have seen the PFR act. That said i can expect his reaction to the whole situation to be particularly 'pure' and so I expect to be able to determine where I am at on the flop. The biggest problem arises when you pick up top pair as you may be dominated or he may have an overpair. This is the real danger you will face calling here with KQ. It will be hard to get away from if you hit top pair so you really have to be comfortable calling preflop with that in mind.

It is my honest opinion that I probably overvalue KQ, especially when calling. You could perceivably fold this hand preflop because you're in a sandwich playing hit to win poker OOP against a raising range that is ahead of your hand. The factors that make me call are the range of the SB combined with the playability of my hand (if flops fairly well), plus the fact that i imagine the PFR will act sensibly.

Perhaps sometimes i am just too keen to get into a pot with a fish at the low blinds. If the SB had more chips i would have definitely called. He really is the only reason im entering that pot and so the better the implied odds I have the more likely it is that im going to call.

Luceboy

It sais on OPR you only have 2k in cashes

It sais on OPR you only have 2k in cashes

OPR sucks for sng tracking...

yah opr only tracks freezeouts mostly, sharkscope tracks just about everything