cjatud2012
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Silver Level
In the past year or so I've gotten my roommate very into poker, he's actually a member here at CC but doesn't post very often. These days he's playing a ton more volume than me actually, he's been playing the $3.40 10-man turbos on pokerstars.
One of the things he complains about in these games (he complains about oh so many things ) is when he sees a big stacked player against a small stacked player bvb on the bubble, where he is one of the medium stacks either on the BTN on CO. He'll wait anxiously to see if the big stack will put the small stack all-in, and then when he sees the big stack fold he'll loudly curse at his computer screen
He says to me there's no reason for the big stack not to put the shorty all-in in that spot. But is there?
Some people will say that, as the big stack, by letting the short stack survive, you're creating opportunities for yourself to steal from the medium stacks who will be very risk-averse on the bubble. I tried using SNGWiz to analyze if this was true or not. The first two pictures I've attached are the $EV of the decisions associated with stealing from the medium stacks when we're on the BTN and in the CO. I've made some assumptions about the calling ranges of each player, which may or may not be accurate. The third picture is the $EV of shoving all-in on the short stack (the range I've given him is probably way too narrow, but that's not the point).
So it looks like there is more $EV associated with stealing from the medium stacks-- assuming they're calling very narrow. I haven't run it through Wiz yet, but I would assume this becomes was less profitable if our opponents aren't playing risk-averse, and that it'd be better to just try and attack the short stack in that bvb situation.
I'm not trying to say one play is right over the other-- I just thought I'd mess around with SNGWiz, post the results, and see what people had to say about it. So here we go-- what are people's thoughts on this type of scenario?
One of the things he complains about in these games (he complains about oh so many things ) is when he sees a big stacked player against a small stacked player bvb on the bubble, where he is one of the medium stacks either on the BTN on CO. He'll wait anxiously to see if the big stack will put the small stack all-in, and then when he sees the big stack fold he'll loudly curse at his computer screen
He says to me there's no reason for the big stack not to put the shorty all-in in that spot. But is there?
Some people will say that, as the big stack, by letting the short stack survive, you're creating opportunities for yourself to steal from the medium stacks who will be very risk-averse on the bubble. I tried using SNGWiz to analyze if this was true or not. The first two pictures I've attached are the $EV of the decisions associated with stealing from the medium stacks when we're on the BTN and in the CO. I've made some assumptions about the calling ranges of each player, which may or may not be accurate. The third picture is the $EV of shoving all-in on the short stack (the range I've given him is probably way too narrow, but that's not the point).
So it looks like there is more $EV associated with stealing from the medium stacks-- assuming they're calling very narrow. I haven't run it through Wiz yet, but I would assume this becomes was less profitable if our opponents aren't playing risk-averse, and that it'd be better to just try and attack the short stack in that bvb situation.
I'm not trying to say one play is right over the other-- I just thought I'd mess around with SNGWiz, post the results, and see what people had to say about it. So here we go-- what are people's thoughts on this type of scenario?