***December SNG Thread***

[Pokertron3000]

Started playing the 3$ 9 mans today, will not be able to play regular while in Australia but really enjoyed the games today. I have a lot to learn about the 9 man and poker, my bubble play needs work finished 4th 4 or 5 times and finished down a dollor or two which I was happy with. Going to hopefully play enough to finish a 10$ stellar reward before jan.

Hopefully next year is a year that I can start learning the real concepts of poker now that life is a little easy for a few reasons.

 

[MrEpic94]

pretty nasty +$550 day yesterday. Then went and won a hundo at the local $20 live donkaments. Going to sleep today!

 

[pat3392]

pretty nasty +$550 day yesterday. Then went and won a hundo at the local $20 live donkaments. Going to sleep today!

How is up $550 nasty???

 

[MrEpic94]

How is up $550 nasty???

reverse implied adjectives? should add them to your game IMO

 

[Bwammo]

reverse implied adjectives? should add them to your game IMO

LOLOL

beautifully defined!

 

[pat3392]

heh wp

Anyone here check-raise bluff often? Is so, what sort of spots do you do it on?

 

[Bwammo]

Yep, it's a very nice tool to use.

Spots are hard to define...but basically any situation where you're OOP and have enough evidence to suggest that the person betting is weak, we have the option. Then we can look at the pot size and the relationship between how much we'd need to raise to and the percentage chance that the weak hand calls us anyways. Next thing to look at would be how the raise is going to affect our stack position...if the raise will hurt us or get close to hurting us, we'll need a better than average spot, whereas if we've got chips for days we can take the lesser but still profitable spots.

...roughly

 

[pat3392]

Hmm the only times I check-raise is if:

I have a good draw, will either check shove or 3 barrel depending on the stack sizes, won't always triple barrel

Fish makes a probing bet. This is $$$$ with ATC regardless it seems

Gain another bet when I think villain will stab

Only spots that I can think of. Hmm, I'm going to experiment with this some

I see plenty of players check-raise there sets, sometimes with funny min-raises. I recognise the check-min-raise by a fish to be a monster hand, but do other players? Would be a fun play if it works, start check-min-raise with air lol. Good way to play gut-shots on certain boards? Hmm

Or maybe another approach. For some reason beyond me, players love to call a check-raise and fold to a turn bet. I could abuse this leak by raising large and picking up more on the turn. Depends how much the chips mean to me really

You talk about consider how the raise will hurt our stack, but don't we have to consider the mandatory turn bet? Or don't fish call here as much in the higher games? Or are my check-raises too small or something?? Not sure how much I raise too...

 

[pat3392]

I played a video game today to get my mind of off poker. Ended up thinking strategies for that all day and applying poker concepts to it. I failed

 

[Lofwyr]

^^^

I'm a fan of c/r bluffing on very dry boards. It tends to work in lower stakes very well. A cbet from the preflop aggressor on a K83 board reps a VERY narrow range of strong hands and a very wide range of air. Ofc, at higher stakes this can backfire as you c/r reps a similar range (narrow strength, wide air).

edit: ofc = of course

 

[pat3392]

^^^

I'm a fan of c/r bluffing on very dry boards. It tends to work in lower stakes very well. A cbet from the preflop aggressor on a K83 board reps a VERY narrow range of strong hands and a very wide range of air. Ofc, at higher stakes this can backfire as you c/r reps a similar range (narrow strength, wide air).

edit: ofc = of course

Hmm interesting. How many players would try to stab if the preflop aggressor doesn't fire? May work against the guys with a high AFq

Perhaps paired boards would be great for a check-raise? Hmmm

Haven't figured out how people view a check instead of a c-bet. If I raise pre, get 1 caller and the flop comes QKx, I usually do a delayed c-bet instead. The idea is that it hits there range pretty hard, but it also hits my range pretty hard too, so people may think that I'm pot controlling with QT or trying to suck them in and hence, play pretty straight forward. Not sure if that's good reasoning though

 

[Bwammo]

You talk about consider how the raise will hurt our stack, but don't we have to consider the mandatory turn bet? Or don't fish call here as much in the higher games?

Well, fish are fish Bad players respond pretty similarly at all levels, except for the super micro players who are bad because they don't even know what they are doing (just pressing buttons and watching things move).

There is no mandatory bet on the turn if we're check/raising with air, it's certainly an option and something we might consider if it also doesn't hurt our stack terribly bad. Really all of the same thoughts go into whether or not to bet out on the turn as they did on the check/raise on the flop.

Example: pot size is 350, guy bets 200 and we think he's full of crap...we've got 3k in our stack, he has 2k, and blinds are 25/50. If we decide to check/raise to 550, for instance, it's costing us 550 to win 550. If this was a cash game or something, we'd only need this bet to work like 55% of the time to call it profitable...in a tournament we'd want around a 60%+ success rate. But...if the board was good enough for us to check/raise, we're assuming they missed it or their hand just isn't even good enough to call a raise regardless of if they missed or not. Since hands only hit the flop 66% of the time(and then another few percentage points can be tacked on for the times they just don't hit well enough to call the check/raise), we're probably going to end up getting about a 60-65% fold rate. Note: I'm accounting for the fact that some hands who are behind and haven't hit will STILL call the bet because the player is too bad to fold.

 

[pat3392]

Holy alpaca, I just realised I don't think I've ever check-raised a c-better OOP with air. Wow I suck

I'm thinking that my approach to poker is flawed, trying to come up with moves and stuff when really, it's all about villain's range and that is different in every spot

The reference to cash was interesting. Even though ICM makes a breakeven chip play -ICM wise, shouldn't we still take it because of the gigabet dilemma?

 

[MrEpic94]

the gigabet dilemma?

explain???

 

[cjatud2012]

explain???

If I'm not mistaken, it's sort of along the lines of taking a marginally EV or even -EV spot with the hopes of setting yourself up for some very +EV spots later on.

 

[pat3392]

If I'm not mistaken, it's sort of along the lines of taking a marginally EV or even -EV spot with the hopes of setting yourself up for some very +EV spots later on.

Spot on. This deserves a fair amount of consideration in the 45(my game) because everyone at the FT is so incredibly short, being able to make massive cEV shoves without the risk of going broke is just huge

 

[Bwammo]

The reference to cash was interesting. Even though ICM makes a breakeven chip play -ICM wise, shouldn't we still take it because of the gigabet dilemma?

I don't really know the specifics of the gigabet dilemma because I'm a shut in and teach myself...but from what I know of it, the theory is similar to one I've developed as well where we are trying to stay within or move between certain brackets of stack ranges. So if we can take a -ev move that might put us into a higher stack bracket (one where we will gain +ev plays as a result of having more chips), then it changes the expected value of the move.

That all being said, the theory comes into the calculation of our decision, but it doesn't suddenly turn all -ev plays into good ones.

 

[cjatud2012]

I don't really know the specifics of the gigabet dilemma because I'm a shut in and teach myself...but from what I know of it, the theory is similar to one I've developed as well where we are trying to stay within or move between certain brackets of stack ranges. So if we can take a -ev move that might put us into a higher stack bracket (one where we will gain +ev plays as a result of having more chips), then it changes the expected value of the move.

That all being said, the theory comes into the calculation of our decision, but it doesn't suddenly turn all -ev plays into good ones.

Much more eloquent than what I said, lol.

Damn I miss poker. I WILL play again soon!

 

[pat3392]

I don't really know the specifics of the gigabet dilemma because I'm a shut in and teach myself...but from what I know of it, the theory is similar to one I've developed as well where we are trying to stay within or move between certain brackets of stack ranges. So if we can take a -ev move that might put us into a higher stack bracket (one where we will gain +ev plays as a result of having more chips), then it changes the expected value of the move.

That all being said, the theory comes into the calculation of our decision, but it doesn't suddenly turn all -ev plays into good ones.

From what I know, it's more to do with considering our stack size at future blind levels. We can cause havok with 6 M at a FT, but we have to be tight with 3 M. But yeah considering current stack sizes at current level probably falls under it

Of course, but in the check raising spot where you said that we should take a slightly bigger edge may be incorrect because the gained chips have the potential to make big $$. It would depend on the tourny structure too really; in the 45 with strong bubbles and little room to play it probably is pretty important, but in a actual MTT it probably isn't so, at least early game anyhow


Thoughts on preflop here?

CO: t1500 75 BBs
Hero (BTN): t1490 74.50 BBs
SB: t1100 55 BBs
BB: t1500 75 BBs
UTG: t1500 75 BBs
UTG+1: t1500 75 BBs
UTG+2: t1480 74 BBs
MP1: t1500 75 BBs
MP2: t1930 96.50 BBs

Pre Flop: (t30) Hero is BTN with T

T

3 folds, MP1 calls t20, 1 fold, CO raises to t60, Hero ?

Opponents were randoms who didn't have anything out of the ordinary stat wise, small samples though

 

[pat3392]

Much more eloquent than what I said, lol.

Damn I miss poker. I WILL play again soon!

How come you haven't been playing?

 

[Bwammo]

From what I know, it's more to do with considering our stack size at future blind levels.

Guess what? Unless the blinds are moving up next hand, we've got more hands to play at our current level Typically in MTTs the blinds are moving up even slower as well.

where you said that we should take a slightly bigger edge may be incorrect because the gained chips have the potential to make big $$

General theory debate tip: give some evidence, hehe

In the example I laid out earlier, we're only picking up 550 chips when we already have 3k at 25/50 blinds. The blinds would need to increase all the way up to around 100/200 with ante for those 550 chips to even begin to change the way we play. Essentially for 4 entire blind increases must occur for us to care about the chips we took a -ev proposition to get(assuming a worse situation than the one i described flops, so we think we have a lesser chance of success).

 

[10058765]

I love this game. What does committed mean anyway?


Full Tilt - $1+0.10 $1 + $0.10 Sit&Go (Sup Turbo) (#204743508) - Blinds: 15/30 No Limit Hold'em (9 players)
Full Tilt Hand Converter Tool from CardsChat.com

SB Malanvr: $315
BB Chiribirinights: $300
UTG chipp ahoy: $300
MP jaotraesel: $300
MP+1 xiochimilco: $300
MP+2 mr_harpoon: $300
LP petey8787: $300
CO cardplayer52: $300
BTN Trying2getRich: $285

Pre-flop: ($45) Hero is CO and dealt
4 folds, petey8787 calls $30, cardplayer52 raises to $297, 3 folds, petey8787 calls $267
Flop: ($639) (2 players)
petey8787 checks, cardplayer52 bets $3 (All-in), petey8787 folds, cardplayer52 returned $3

obviously petey8787 prefers to play very lowstacked

 

[ph_il]

Thanks to a nice finish in the Fall CC league game, I now have a BR to build up. I've decided to look into either playing Satellite SNGs or the Steps up to step 3. Which is the better option?

1. Sats:
I played 8 $2 sats for a seat in a $5.50 super sat. Cashed in 5 in for a nice profit in tournament $. These games are really soft and they out 3 places. I can 4 table these games and would have to only cash in two to show a profit.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think BRM can be a bit more lenient for Satellites? If I do decide to build a BR off of Satellites, I'll probably grind the $2 > $5.50 Super sats until i have 20 buy-ins for the $5.50 sats > $22 Double Deuce. Then probably grind that out until I have a solid BR for the $11 SNGs.

2. Steps:
Another game that has caught my eye are the step programs. Especially since, at step 3+, you can unregister and be credited a tournament ticket. $26 for level 3-can be used in any $26 buy-in game.

*Does anyone know if this includes $26 Sats or $26 9-seat SNGs?*

Steps pay very similar to satellites. a $3, 9-seat game pays 5 places, 1-2 advance, 3-5 get a second chance. I'm interest in trying these and aiming to hit Step 3. Unregistering and collecting as many $26 tournament tickets as I can. Then, if possible, I'll hop onto a $26 sat/SNG and hopefully take one down/finish in the Sat money and be able to build a BR from there.

The biggest thing here is that I'll be jumping from $8 Step (2) SNGs into potentially a $26 SNG-which is way above any game I've ever played. So, there is a bit of risk involved, but also a lot of reward as well. Much less risk if I play a satellite, but risky none the less.

I may give steps a try just to see how it goes, but only if I'm positive I can use the $26 tourney ticket to buy into an SNG/SNG sat.

....Opinions on which would be better?

 

[MrEpic94]

If I'm not mistaken, it's sort of along the lines of taking a marginally EV or even -EV spot with the hopes of setting yourself up for some very +EV spots later on.

oh so sort of like taking a flip to get a big stack?

 

[MrEpic94]

oh and philthy, doing the steps and using the 26$ for a matrix SNG is a good way to go. You can use the $26 in any tourney with that buy in afaik.

Whats the structure of the double duece sats?