$2000 NLHE STT: Step 7 HH AQo to UTG min raise

[Zybomb]

$2000 NL HE STT: Step 7 HH AQo to UTG min raise

6 Players remain, Final Step for wsop seat. 4-6 seat a Step 6 Ticket, 2-3 Repeat Step 7, 1 Wins Seat. Have not seen villain min raise yet, and hasn't been in a position to shoved pre this tournament as of yet.

Standard ship or avoid the spot?

full tilt poker Game #21688604330: Step 7 to the Main Event (167044110), Table 1 - 80/160 - No Limit Hold'em - 17:32:04 ET - 2010/06/17
Seat 2: TheSecret08 (2,345)
Seat 3: EunyTheSwa (3,370)
Seat 4: bluff Deez Nuts (1,537)
Seat 5: HERO (2,984)
Seat 6: WPThero (1,464)
Seat 8: JosselTheKiller (1,800)
HERO posts the small blind of 80
WPThero posts the big blind of 160
WeleD (Observer): TheSecret and Euny seemed 2 b playing really well
The button is in seat #4
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to HERO [Ac Qh]
JosselTheKiller has 15 seconds left to act
JosselTheKiller raises to 320
TheSecret08 folds
EunyTheSwa folds
Bluff Deez Nuts folds
HERO

If you fold what would the blinds levels have to be for you to change your mind OR how many chips would be have to have.

 

[dg1267]

With 6 left in it's an odd spot to min raise with junk, or even better than junk, because of the stacks that have re-shove potential. I would treat this as a good hand and fold AQo. AQs, I think we can flat here as long as the BB hasn't done anything crazy, but either way I'm not liking it. You're in 3rd spot and not really in bad shape to get to first. I wouldn't risk that on a hand you really know nothing about.

 

[workinonit]

Don't play SnGs/MTTs but genuinely looking forward to seeing thoughts on this.

Also judging by vague memories and a couple of sharkscope searches that's a pretty stacked table

 

[WiZZiM]

Any reads on the UTG open? ill assume he is a decent player, so i would think, the worst he is opening here is AJ, and i doubt hes calling all in with that. so i feel this is a fold. And since he min raised, i feel that his range is stronger, though it could be a meta game thing, im unsure. So i defo fold, if the blinds get bigger, and he's min raising with like 6bb's. Then we can probably ship over, but it would be kind of weird to see a 'good' player do something like that. I think he is min raising, simply because he has12 bb's or whatever. he could be raising with a hand like AJ, hoping to get more fold equity by min raising, as it looks stronger, again, dont know.

so blind levels, anything past 100-200 i think id shove it in here, but again, i think were unlikely to see him min raise past that point.

Later on, ill create a full tilt 'steps' tournament structure in SNG wizard, ill put in all the parameters and we can see how the differant factors affect things. Until then, what would you assume his range to be here? ive got him on something like ATs+ 88+ AQ+ (i put ATs to account for metagame things, like raising with weak hands utg to gain loads of fold equity, its pretty hard to ship over this, even with a hand like AQ)

 

[dg1267]

With 6 players left in, and what it took to even get to this SnG level, I would think that 88 would be a little too weak to risk even a min raise here. I would put it more like TT+. Just my thoughts.

 

[bhood1776]

I may have kinda cheated here because I don't know if you did this at the start of the sng or not, but I just sharkscoped the guy and he's a total high stakes sng shark. 3 bet bluffing can be very common at this level, so I think he's trying to look weak here to induce a shove from someone. Would have to say fold this one and look for another spot.

 

[Zybomb]

Any reads on the UTG open?

Until then, what would you assume his range to be here? ive got him on something like ATs+ 88+ AQ+ (i put ATs to account for metagame things, like raising with weak hands utg to gain loads of fold equity, its pretty hard to ship over this, even with a hand like AQ)

UTG has played fairly tight throughout thusfar. His first min raise as of yet, but also the first spot where shipping it pre would be a consideration.

Sharkscope indicates villain is a strong winner at the $200 SNG level. 10k+ SNGs, 8% long term ROI

Initially I'd agree with your ATs+ 88+ AQo+ range, but I think I might also include some 'cute hands' in this range as well as well as possible KQs

But thinking a little more, With 12 BBs left, my thought process is that there's only 2 reasons to min raise rather than open shove

1) He's got a big hand and he's trapping

2) He's leaving himself room to fold

This makes me really polarize his range to QQ+ or hands that he isn't calling with. Im wondering if 2 is more likely than 1 though, since we assume villain to be good, and know that our initial read on the min raise from a good player would be 1 thus he can open light a lot here.

 

[Poker Orifice]

Typically a 'good player' when playing 'other good players'.. isn't going to min-raise w monsters (while on 12bb's) and shove the rest of their range. They're going to shove their entire range so as to add some deception (sure in $5 - $10 sng's, you can min-raise on a SS & expect some donkey to ship over your min-raise, actually thinking you'll fold or that they're in good vs. your 'min-raise-monster range')
In this hand it's kinda hard to say. Not only do we need to ask ourselves, "Is villain a good player".. but also "what does villain think of the rest of the table".
incidentally WPTHero has some good live results & does poker coaching/training vids. but he has the shits for results online (although not in this particular hand obv).

I think I'd fold the AQ here. Maintaining a good-sized stack is probably better off than shipping it in here & being behind villain's range... possibly way behind. Folding does seem kinda weak though.

If we're in villain's shoes here.... what are we min-raising with on 12bb's? Personally I'm shipping 88+, AJs+.... & if considering a 'min-raise' it'd be with AA/KK/QQ (maybe AK with intentions obv of getting it in on any flop)

 

[appaz86]

Typically a 'good player' when playing 'other good players'.. isn't going to min-raise w monsters (while on 12bb's) and shove the rest of their range. They're going to shove their entire range so as to add some deception (sure in $5 - $10 sng's, you can min-raise on a SS & expect some donkey to ship over your min-raise, actually thinking you'll fold or that they're in good vs. your 'min-raise-monster range')
In this hand it's kinda hard to say. Not only do we need to ask ourselves, "Is villain a good player".. but also "what does villain think of the rest of the table".
incidentally WPTHero has some good live results & does poker coaching/training vids. but he has the shits for results online (although not in this particular hand obv).

I think I'd fold the AQ here. Maintaining a good-sized stack is probably better off than shipping it in here & being behind villain's range... possibly way behind. Folding does seem kinda weak though.

If we're in villain's shoes here.... what are we min-raising with on 12bb's? Personally I'm shipping 88+, AJs+.... & if considering a 'min-raise' it'd be with AA/KK/QQ (maybe AK with intentions obv of getting it in on any flop)

i would have to agree 100% with this analysis

the ONLY other option i can even come up with is its a blind steal in diguise, by min raising UTG he has us all thinking "monster or very decent hand" and nobody wants to shove over the top with hands like our hero's AQ as he has been playing very tight until now.

he may have a hand with some chemisty that he doesn't mind being called to see a flop with 9T suited or similar, but he's folding to a shove. if everyone folds he's not as short stacked as he would be if he doesn't take this pot. he's BB next hand and this move can buy him a little more time before he's shoving with a larger range of cards then he wants to. if he gets re-raised or shoved on then he's at the point of having to shove with atc sooner then he would of liked but he's not dead.

he also has the potential to repeat the same move with a monster later to keep the table guessing and prehaps tempt someone to shove.

more then likely option 1 or 2 discussed above by Zybomb

this 3rd option is unlikely but a possibility

 

[dg1267]

So how did this hand play out? Did you call/raise/fold?

 

[tenbob]

Hero snap folds and should'nt really regret it.

A good player playing MTT steps at this time of year realises exactly one thing, there are more bad players than usual playing. A leak in a game like this is calling wide from the blinds with a shallow stack, it also allows room for a shove to seem like a good option. A few years back (fair enough players were pretty bad then) when I played STT's I'd probably be looking to stop/go from the sb rather than shoving pre when my M was ~7. I'm getting more folds from missed AK's than when I shove pre.

I think his thoughts are.

1) A monster, looking for an shove.

2) A monster looking for a call.

3) Mid-low pair looking for some cheap FE.

 

[OzExorcist]

Avoid the spot and fold IMO.

There'll be safer spots to accumulate chips, a shove is pretty much never getting called by worse and we're probably not even flipping very often. There aren't a lot of flops we're going to be confident on so calling puts us in a gross spot, it also invites the BB to shove-squeeze if he's so inclined or otherwise make our lives difficult.

 

[Zybomb]

and we're probably not even flipping very often.

you mean you're giving his UTG raising range as QQ+, AK ??? surely that can't be even close to right can it?

 

[Marginal]

I dont see how people can be saying this is a snap fold. It may well be a fold but to say snap fold and act like his range is QQ+ is ridiculous. I am not even going to put too much thought into the min raise, this is the point in the tournament where the stack/blind ratio is not that great and raising less preflop is going to be an advantage (committing 320 instead of 380 or 420 is not going a bad idea seeing as you are still going to produce almost the same amount of folds with less risk). I think a lot of players will be raising smaller at this stage and we shouldnt think too much into it.

I also think that in steps at this stage where everyone is guaranteed a step 6, people will be looking to gamble a little bit to secure a better chance at a win. A decent player is also going to be raising a little wider from UTG than we think. I am not 100% on this but I lean towards a shove. I think we will get a decent amount of folds, be in a decent amount of races and occasionally be dominated but I think it has reached that time when we must. We also need to take some sort of risk because we are only looking for first place and we have the luxury of a cushion if we fail to get there. Remember this is no normal stt where we are looking to cash first, we have to win. Nothing else.

 

[OzExorcist]

you mean you're giving his UTG raising range as QQ+, AK ??? surely that can't be even close to right can it?

Close to it - note that I said "not very often" instead of "never".

FWIW I think Tenbob has the range about right. Most of the time it's a monster, occasionally it's a middle pair. Even against the range WiZZiM gave above (ATs+ / AQ+ / 88+) we're only 40-60.

In a $5 SnG I might treat this differently. But while I've never played a steps tournament this high myself, I figure it's probably reasonable to assume the villain isn't a complete drooler who's doing this with KTo or something.

What range are you putting him on

 

[bhood1776]

Why was the result of the hand never posted? Kinda been wondering who was right.

 

[c9h13no3]

Kinda been wondering who was right.

Because that has very little to do with the results of the hand.

 

[bhood1776]

Because that has very little to do with the results of the hand.

But my point was we never got the result for the hand.

 

[vanquish]

But my point was we never got the result for the hand.

The idea is that the discussion of the situation is more valuable without the biases associated with the result of this particular decision. It's more interesting to analyze the scenario without being influenced by the way it may have played out in this particular instance (ie. OP jams and the guy snapcalls with AA and someone who was advocating a fold says "I told you so" whereas everyone advocating a jam says "But no, you see, his range could still be wider..." etc.)


I was under the impression that this was a pretty trivial jam...

 

[bhood1776]

The idea is that the discussion of the situation is more valuable without the biases associated with the result of this particular decision. It's more interesting to analyze the scenario without being influenced by the way it may have played out in this particular instance (ie. OP jams and the guy snapcalls with AA and someone who was advocating a fold says "I told you so" whereas everyone advocating a jam says "But no, you see, his range could still be wider..." etc.)


I was under the impression that this was a pretty trivial jam...

Yes guys I understand why you give time for discussion, but it's been weeks since discussion stopped. The OP will usually come back and tell the result by now. I don't think that's a hard concept to understand.

 

[vanquish]

Yes guys I understand why you give time for discussion, but it's been weeks since discussion stopped. The OP will usually come back and tell the result by now. I don't think that's a hard concept to understand.

What would be the benefit of providing the result? Will it somehow provide the thread with closure (despite the fact that it would be a single-sample data point in scenario outlined by a vast array of different variables)? Will it allow the folks who posted in the thread who argued for a certain side to sleep better at night knowing they "won" the discussion?

Accepting that the best resolution to a discussion about a hand is that there is no necessary resolution is the best way to approach a situation like this, as it reinforces dynamic thought and ability to delve beyond the restrictions of a single sample point. (re: next time, rather than thinking "Jeepers, remember that hand where Zorba jammed AQo into that guy's KK? I better fold AQo to a UTG min-raise right about now funk soul brother," you'll come to a conclusion based on various viewpoints about people's ranges/other variables that determine the best play in this scenario.)



I don't think that's a hard concept to understand.

 

[vanquish]

:withstupi

 

[bhood1776]

What would be the benefit of providing the result? Will it somehow provide the thread with closure (despite the fact that it would be a single-sample data point in scenario outlined by a vast array of different variables)? Will it allow the folks who posted in the thread who argued for a certain side to sleep better at night knowing they "won" the discussion?

Accepting that the best resolution to a discussion about a hand is that there is no necessary resolution is the best way to approach a situation like this, as it reinforces dynamic thought and ability to delve beyond the restrictions of a single sample point. (re: next time, rather than thinking "Jeepers, remember that hand where Zorba jammed AQo into that guy's KK? I better fold AQo to a UTG min-raise right about now funk soul brother," you'll come to a conclusion based on various viewpoints about people's ranges/other variables that determine the best play in this scenario.)



I don't think that's a hard concept to understand.

Finding out the result can help us all. Once we know the outcome it's let us know if our thinking in the situation was correct or if one of the other stated ideas was of better thought. It was never about rubbing it in anybody's face, just what line of thinking was right.

Also I've seen others ask for a result once a thread is over and nobody thought it was a big deal, but nevermind I guess trying to figure out the correct thinking here is unimportant.

 

[vanquish]

How does knowing the result allow us to "figure out the correct thinking?"


edit: Sigh, I'm trying way too hard here. NEVER MIND LOLS WE CAN USE THE RESULTS OF THAT HAND TO KNOW WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO IN THOSE KINDS OF SITUATIONS ARF ARF


HERES A PICTURE OF A HAPPY ASIAN KID

 

[c9h13no3]

Once we know the outcome it's let us know if our thinking in the situation was correct

I was gonna type up a long response to this, but in honor of vanquish being back I'm just gonna say...

"lol, no"