Folding JJs with with 2 all in shoves before you?

[ph_il]

Lets do some actual equity calculations in Equilab instead of all this guessing. First the pot odds. Being in small blind with a 12BB stack, Hero is paying 11,5BB to win a pot of around 38BB. Hero need 30,3% equity to break even on pure chip EV, and since everyone agree, there is no big ICM pressure here, let us just use that number. Let us also ignore, that a very small percentage of the time big blind will call as well, and it will be a 4-ways pot.

First I will assign some relatively wide but I think realistic ranges to both players:

UTG+1 is jamming 77+. AJo+, KQo, A9s+, JTs+
CO is overjamming 99+, AQ+, AJs, KQs

Result: Hero has 36,89% equity

Now lets go in the other direction and assume, they are both extremely tight:

UTG+1 is jamming 99+, AQo+, AJs, KQs
CO is overjamming JJ+, AK, AQs

Result: Hero has 29,2% equity

Now lets tweak the tight scenario by removing AA and KK from UTG+1s range, since a lot of players would do something trappy like min-raising or limping with these hands from EP.

Result: Hero has 31,4% equity

Now lets explore the upper boundary off, how profitable this might be, if for instance UTG+1 is jamming wide being fed ud with his status as a short stack:

UTG+1 is jamming 66+. A9o+, JTo+, A4s+, K8s+, T9s+
CO is overjamming 99+, AQ+, AJs, KQs

Result: Hero has 39% equity

Conclusion: Even in an extremely pessimistic scenario Hero is very close to breaking even, and in more realistic scenarios he is making either a slightly profitable or extremely profitable call. Unless its very important for Hero to stick around a bit longer in this tournament, the best decision is to call.

this is an awesome write up and use of equilab.

 

[blix177]

Lets do some actual equity calculations in Equilab instead of all this guessing. First the pot odds. Being in small blind with a 12BB stack, Hero is paying 11,5BB to win a pot of around 38BB. Hero need 30,3% equity to break even on pure chip EV, and since everyone agree, there is no big ICM pressure here, let us just use that number. Let us also ignore, that a very small percentage of the time big blind will call as well, and it will be a 4-ways pot.

First I will assign some relatively wide but I think realistic ranges to both players:

UTG+1 is jamming 77+. AJo+, KQo, A9s+, JTs+
CO is overjamming 99+, AQ+, AJs, KQs

Result: Hero has 36,89% equity

Now lets go in the other direction and assume, they are both extremely tight:

UTG+1 is jamming 99+, AQo+, AJs, KQs
CO is overjamming JJ+, AK, AQs

Result: Hero has 29,2% equity

Now lets tweak the tight scenario by removing AA and KK from UTG+1s range, since a lot of players would do something trappy like min-raising or limping with these hands from EP.

Result: Hero has 31,4% equity

Now lets explore the upper boundary off, how profitable this might be, if for instance UTG+1 is jamming wide being fed ud with his status as a short stack:

UTG+1 is jamming 66+. A9o+, JTo+, A4s+, K8s+, T9s+
CO is overjamming 99+, AQ+, AJs, KQs

Result: Hero has 39% equity

Conclusion: Even in an extremely pessimistic scenario Hero is very close to breaking even, and in more realistic scenarios he is making either a slightly profitable or extremely profitable call. Unless its very important for Hero to stick around a bit longer in this tournament, the best decision is to call.

Your numbers came really close to what I had, 31% at worst 38% at best.

 

[UkoChebuko]

UTG+1, 14bb, shoving with AA. Every time. No 2x, but shove. What is the buy-in? $215? Here 88 also is a call. Imo..."very far from the final table". This is $10 max. Big MTT, no many regs yet. This guys can have such a wide ranges. And, if they don't, you are still OK. AJo snap over shove, 66 as well. So often...KQo, KJs...Come on...Nits...

 

[Poker Orifice]

First of all - if he's up against A/K and A/Q (best case scenario) he is at best 45%. Unlikely though, and the results show. My initial response was nearing FT - where I'm not putting big money on the line with shit JJs vs 2 opponents. You can make the call if ya want - and watch FT from the rail. LOL

However - my edit - being that this is not nearing FT with a short stack - easy call, and most likely lose, but still gotta gamble with this short of a stack.

'IF' he's up vs AK, AQ (< this is actually not the best case scenario.... there are many others that would be even better) He's 52%


"the results show" < this doesn't have much merit. Player's ranges could've been much different.

When there's no ICM implications I'd be more than happy to more than triple my puney stack in this spot instead of bein' a min-casher attempting to ladder up a tad.
Even if it's 'nearing' final table, I am probably never folding in this spot (of course it'd depend if there were some huge ICM implications.... ie. if it was a Turbo and there were a ton of super short stacks below 10bb's).
Folding and waiting for 'better'(?) spots is a losing way to play nlhe tournaments.

 

[blix177]

'IF' he's up vs AK, AQ (< this is actually not the best case scenario.... there are many others that would be even better) He's 52%


"the results show" < this doesn't have much merit. Player's ranges could've been much different.

When there's no ICM implications I'd be more than happy to more than triple my puney stack in this spot instead of bein' a min-casher attempting to ladder up a tad.
Even if it's 'nearing' final table, I am probably never folding in this spot (of course it'd depend if there were some huge ICM implications.... ie. if it was a Turbo and there were a ton of super short stacks below 10bb's).
Folding and waiting for 'better'(?) spots is a losing way to play nlhe tournaments.

If it is near break even or break even, shouldn't folding make more sense? It is much easier to find a +EV spot moving forward, than going on a break even play.

Lets assume playing poker in general is a negative EV game because of tournament fees and rakes. If we only make break even plays, on average we will lose 10% ROI to rake fees.

 

[theANMATOR]

If it is near break even or break even, shouldn't folding make more sense? It is much easier to find a +EV spot moving forward, than going on a break even play.

Lets assume playing poker in general is a negative EV game because of tournament fees and rakes. If we only make break even plays, on average we will lose 10% ROI to rake fees.

I see your point - however hero has already cashed, assuming he has made his money back +rake he is now essentially freerolling the event. Any additional earnings are +EV so tripling up here and making a run to FT is a higher reward than risk choice here in this spot.

I originally thought the same as you - but I miss read the OP and thought this was nearing final table, in which case - I agree with you. But being far out from FT I think the reward outweighs the risk here.

 

[fundiver199]

Taking a break even spot does not prevent us from taking other and more profitable spots. We wont be able to find any spots in the tournament, if we bust, but this is compensated by the fact, that we stand to last longer and find more spots, when we tripple our stack. In top of that as I already said there is little edge to be found, when we are a short stack. If Hero fold, he is down to 11,5BB, so he dont have much time to look for spots, and typically people dont make huge mistakes facing a 10-11BB open jam.

With 38BB however its a whole different situation. Hero can last many orbits, unless he run into some kind of cooler, he can get involved in postflop play, and he can apply pressure to short stacks. So while difficult to quantify I think, there is more long term EV in being in one tournament with a 38BB stack than in being in 3 tournaments with a stack of 11,5BB in each of them. And really this is the way, we need to look at it. This is not a one-off like the wsop main event, where if we bust, we cant play it again for an entire year.

The stage of the tournament matter though. If this was in the bubble or on the final table, where we have a chance of getting a payjump simply by watching other players bust, then there is much more value in surviving. However in the money but "far from the final table" the payout structure is usually very flat. If for instance 72 places get paid, then finishing as 36 might only pay 20% more than finishing as 72. And therefore there is no real value in simply surviving for another orbit or two, before for instance we jam A9s and get called by someone, who has QQ.