Another kind of ridiculous pre-flop spot with QQ

[Stick66]

Anyway, we shouldn't overthink and try to figure out what the best move is and how good players would play and therefore what they must have to make this move. You are playing more bad players than good players here.

Even considering folding the third best starting hand is craziness. It's of course different if it's a 25K buy-in against world class players but that is not the case here and we need to stop thinking it is when we consider what to do in a hand.

Then at what level do we start respecting our opponents' shoves? $50 buy-in? $500?

This is a $20+2 buy-in and I would tend to respect their moves a bit more than at $5+.50. Heck, I've seen a few pretty good players in the $1 jobbies.

Besides, Harrington and Sklansky say not to risk all your chips on close decisions early in a tournament. IMO, lack of a read makes this decision closer than the results would indicate.

 

[rob5775]

Given the range we can agree on for the villain, we are slight favorites.

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 51.336% 49.93% 01.40% 220586148 6203094.00 { QQ }
Hand 1: 48.664% 47.26% 01.40% 208782096 6203094.00 { JJ+, AQs+, AQo+ }

Well, more like a coinflip... But this is the high end of villains range, and I agree with Snake that the range could be much wider here. If we expand the range...

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 57.891% 56.75% 01.14% 320666112 6451800.00 { QQ }
Hand 1: 42.109% 40.97% 01.14% 231490608 6451800.00 { 99+, AQs+, AQo+ }

Now this isn't a cash game so we can't make decisions based on +ev this early, we must also figure in tournament life. BUT, if we are decently ahead here (which we are against anything other than AA, KK and AK) then we enhance our tournament life with a early double up.

I would like to say I would make the call read dependent, but I can't lay down QQ in this situation.

 

[jeffred1111]

Insta-fold for me as I don't like calling the all-in with QQ. But I agree that in the SB, this looks like ANY pocket pairs looking to get you out of the pot or call in order not to be outplayed by you since you have position. It's really a damned if you do damned if don't kind of hand that doesn't come very often (at least that early with no reads).

I don't like villain trying to "squeeze" us as early in the SNG, especally since UTG was the original raiser. Early like that in the tournament, you gotta give UTG more credit than that. On the other hand, if he wanted to play his pp, a rereraise was the only option, as him calling insured that he was probably behind to at least one of the original raisers.

 

[mrsnake3695]

So, rather than assume a player is good until you have evidence otherwise, assume they're, well, the same kind of players you've seen before at that level. Even second hand in, with your tourney life on the line? Not disagreeing entirely with the idea; I have a tendency to assume my opposition is all CC level which is never the case. Just thinking that early on some conservativism might be warranted.

Good discussion all around.

Actually yes sort of in this situation. I've seen players at all money levels play really really bad including $150 buy ins and up. The $20 level is not a magic level where all of a sudden most players are good. I don't assume the are good or bad until I start seeing them play hands. But I am certainly not going to think that they are good players makeing brilliant moves forcing me to lay down the third best starting hand in holdem. You will get AA, KK or QQ once every 55 hands or so, you going to lay it down when you do get it do someone who's range is pretty big. MY thinking is basically villan has hands that I dominate more often than hands that he dominates me so I call and make him show me AA or KK. Even if he has AK we are still slightly ahead. But most often we will see a smaller pair, AX or any other 2 cards 9 or higher.

If villan has AA or KK then I haven't wasted much time on this S n G and I can move on to the next.