This is a discussion on HU SnG all in every hand within the online poker forums, in the Tournament Poker section; 1500 starting stacks blinds 10/20 in 6 mins go up to 15/30 and 6 mins after that 20/40. BI $1.50 with $0.12 rake. We're up 


#1




HU SnG all in every hand
1500 starting stacks blinds 10/20 in 6 mins go up to 15/30 and 6 mins after that 20/40. BI $1.50 with $0.12 rake. We're up against someone who just shoves every hand, if we ever limp or raise he shoves anyway, what is the best play? We need 54.3% equity to beat the rake. How wide would you call his shove to maximise ROI?

#3




Quote:

#4




re: Poker & HU SnG all in every hand
Quote:
You cant expect to have higher equity than 65% against a constant pusher. I mean you cant sit and wait for aces forever whilst blinding out. For that to be optimal you would need to be like at least 3000 buyins deep, and then your aces would still loose more often than you would like. 
#5




Have you only just run into these sort of players? If so, you have been lucky lol.
I run in to them probably 1 out of 10 games if not 2 out of 10. Anyway when the blinds are still this low, you really can just sit back and wait a good while. Once they do start to increase (usually of stopped by this point if they don't think you're willing) They are frustrating but I'm calling any Ace, K,8s+,Q,10+,etc any broadway hands. People might say this is to wide but hmfm, 
#6




Quote:

#7




Quote:

#8




re: Poker & HU SnG all in every hand
Actually thinking about it in terms of hourly rate I suppose it's acceptable to accept a cut in equity against these sorts of players Lets say I'm up against a very bad player and I have 75% equity and I play 100 matches at $1.50 level, each match takes 20 minutes. so 2000 mins total and I win $57 so in 33.3 hours I win $57. I have an hourly rate of about 1.71$/h.
So winning/hours = 1.71$/h to average same hourly rate. We can play 400 games since games are 0.25 the time. So (276E150)/33.3 = 1.71 becomes (4*276E)((4*150))/33.3 = 1.71. so 1104E 600 = 57 so 1004E = 657 so E = 0.59. This means to make the same $/h we can call as wide as 59% equity. Think ramdeebams range is rpetty good then now I’m thinking about it properly. I was thinking about it before in terms of individual matches but looking at it in terms of monetary view we can call so much wider than what I was thinking to still average a good $/h. Lets give villian abit more credit and say we have 60% equity an ok which we will do against villians at lowest level. We’ll change length of match to 15 mins since villain isn’t ultra passive. So 100 games now takes 25 hours. Use formula generated earlier or (276E150)/t = $/h we now have (276E150)/25 = $/h E = 0.6 so $/h = 0.624$/h now say we still take 5 mins per game against shove all in every hand guy (3*276E(3*150))/25 = 0.624$/h. E would now equal 0.5623… so we only need 56.23% equity against villianto average some $/h as against an average person who we have 60% equity against. Sometimes I need to do all the maths before something comes clear.Should have known why I could call wider without having to do all that shitty working out and now having 2 pages of formulas. 
#9




Thinking about it more calling wider means we can plays more games/hour. so we can call even wider than that. A good range to still average the same win rate as playing someone we have over 60% equity against would would be 44+, A2s+ A4o+, QJo+, QTo, K8o+, JTs+, Q9s+ K6s+. We can call about 2% of hands so on average matches should take 8 hands. We can probably do that in about a minute, not the 5 minutes I estimated earlier. Lets compare with a villian we have 60% equity against and matches take 15 mins. We already worked out $/h = 0.624. so (15*276E(15*150))/25 = 0.624. E now would equal 0.547 so we only need 54.7% equity against any two cards meaning we can widen our range even further than previously stated.
Conlucsion, against somebody who shoves 100% of hands we can just call with only a 0.5% edge over break even and we'll still average the same $/h as playing a better opponenet who takes 15 mins to beat yet we win 60% of the time. I'm going to bed now but I mgiht try and work out optimal E that would give us greater $/h. Sorry about the long posts with maths in them, just got me thinking and wrote down what wa sin my mind. 