Check out our brand new Local Poker Communities! Get updates and interact with poker players in your area.
Visit the United States Poker Community | Visit the California Poker Community | Read more about the Launch of P5s Local

Article: Making Tough Decisions Easier

Reply to Thread
  1. grapsfan grapsfan is offline Head Curmudgeon

    Rosemount, MN
    United States

    Posts: 7,980
    Joined: Jun 05

    Dec 15th, 2008 (12/15/2008 2:34pm)

     
  2. x walks x x walks x is offline

    London
    United Kingdom

    Posts: 1,295
    Joined: Mar 08

    Dec 15th, 2008 (12/15/2008 10:42pm) in reply to grapsfan

    <p>(S N) = ½ (S + N + 2.5)</p>
    <p>2(S N) = S + N + 2.5</p>
    <p>S = 3N + 2.5</p>
    <p>3N = S 2.5</p>
    <p>N = 1/3 S - .833</p>
    <p>Yup, made my decision easier fo sho.</p>
  3. Tim Lock Tim Lock is offline

    FL
    United States

    Posts: 7,834
    Joined: Nov 05

    Dec 15th, 2008 (12/15/2008 10:50pm) in reply to grapsfan

    <p>Where did you get a hand grenade?</p>
  4. qjuice14 qjuice14 is offline

    Posts: 3,989
    Joined: Aug 07

    Dec 16th, 2008 (12/16/2008 1:48am) in reply to grapsfan

    <p>The depth of decision making is not nearly as indepth in poker as it is in chess.  </p>
     
  5. genetic genetic is offline

    West Haven, CT
    United States

    Posts: 11
    Joined: Nov 06

    Dec 16th, 2008 (12/16/2008 3:42am) in reply to grapsfan

    <p>Good advice on how to stray from ABC poker...</p>
  6. dgillis dgillis is offline Moderator

    CA
    United States

    Posts: 1,903
    Joined: Mar 08

    Dec 16th, 2008 (12/16/2008 5:28am) in reply to grapsfan

    <p>chess is a game of complete information, you can clearly see every piece and in theory anticipate all possible moves. Poker is a game of incomplete information, you can not know what your opponent holds and because the possibilities are greater for each set of information poker decisions are infinitly more vast.  Perhaps if you are playing at the lowest level and sticking to the rules of "ABC" poker, but in that case your using an if-then theory that is marginally successful at best. with the adaptation of "next level" thinking the rules of probablities make it nearly impossible to argue that chess is more "in depth". I hear your argument, you are trying to consider the broad scope of all possible moves in chess, but so should you be in poker. You think its an accident that the "donkey" that overshoved on you twice does it a third time, you call, and he flips the rockets? maybe but I doubt it.</p>
     
  7. dgillis dgillis is offline Moderator

    CA
    United States

    Posts: 1,903
    Joined: Mar 08

    Dec 16th, 2008 (12/16/2008 5:28am) in reply to grapsfan

    <p>oh and vn article as always sir.</p>
     
  8. saxman saxman is offline

    Posts: 14,156
    Joined: Mar 06

    Dec 16th, 2008 (12/16/2008 5:46am) in reply to grapsfan

    <p>Another fine article by Graps. TY sir.</p>
  9. jackaaron jackaaron is offline

    Mansfield, OH
    United States

    Posts: 2,653
    Joined: Dec 05

    Dec 16th, 2008 (12/16/2008 6:26am) in reply to grapsfan

    <p>Graps,</p>
    <p>I've done this often.  However, at one point I thought, "Am I actually just making a bet so I HAVE to call his shove?"</p>
    <p>What if calling the player's reship is wrong from a range vs. range point of view (pre-decision)?  For example, if I have 75o, and I do what you say to do, then I'm actually betting for the purpose of HAVING to call a shove.  </p>
    <p>I'm not saying your wrong, just putting that up for discussion.  </p>
  10. Nate Avenson Nate Avenson is offline

    Park Rapids, MN
    United States

    Posts: 1,730
    Joined: Jan 08

    Dec 16th, 2008 (12/16/2008 7:54am) in reply to grapsfan

    <p>Graps,</p>
    <p>I use this play alot, but never if I am looking for a fold, I always do it to induce a shove from the blinds with a worse hand. </p>
    <p>I am usually doing this with A2+, K9+, QT+. My reasoning is this: </p>
    <p>If I have a weaker hand than these, do I really want to get it in at just even odds? Do I really want to create that situation? The answer is most likely dependant on the # of BB's I have. If I have 120, what the hell, I'll do it. But more likely my "big stack" is in the 30-50 BB range. In this case, do I really want to get it in as a dog with such a big portion of my stack, probably not.</p>
    <p>But, when I have the range that I noted above, the play makes more sense. With these hands, If I just shove preflop, I fold out a lot of hands worse than mine, and none of the ones that are ahead of me. But if I make the raise to 1500, then the hands that are ahead of me reship and I call (same result as if I had shoved). BUt, many of the hands behind me will reship (A2+, K2+,Q7+) hands that would have, in most cases, folded to my shove.</p>
     
  11. Nate Avenson Nate Avenson is offline

    Park Rapids, MN
    United States

    Posts: 1,730
    Joined: Jan 08

    Dec 16th, 2008 (12/16/2008 8:10am) in reply to grapsfan

    <p>I forgot to mention. After he reships and you call, if you find yourself behind and needing to suckout, then, when you inevitably hit your miracle card, it is always appropriate to type/saythe following:</p>
    <p>weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee e</p>
     
  12. racer racer is offline

    Gananoque
    Canada

    Posts: 994
    Joined: Oct 08

    Dec 16th, 2008 (12/16/2008 8:17am) in reply to grapsfan

    <p>you did mention losing fold equity if you just shove it all in. </p>
    <p>but your tip basically discredits fold equity anyway.</p>
    <p>I understand the percentages getting 2-1 on your money, even as a dog in the hand, but whether or not your opponent has a tight or loose shoving range, shouldnt you leave yourself some fold equity?  </p>
    <p>some good points though graps, maybe this strategy could be compared to 'squeeze play' , possibly you could clear this up for me ..ty.</p>
  13. grapsfan grapsfan is offline Head Curmudgeon

    Rosemount, MN
    United States

    Posts: 7,980
    Joined: Jun 05

    Dec 16th, 2008 (12/16/2008 11:24am) in reply to grapsfan

    <p>Thanks for reading, everyone....</p>
    <p>Jackaaron, I think there are orbits when you'd just fold rather than making an "N" bet.  You're right that it's about being better than 2:1 against the entirety of his shipping range.  A lot of smaller hands don't add up right.  75off might be OK, but 94off, not so much.  It'd take a lot of playing around with a utility like PokerStove to figure out what ranges you feel comfortable with.</p>
    <p>Nate, I'm definitely tightening up my range with 30-40 blinds...basically, I want to make sure I'm not putting more than about 20% of my stack at risk.  I just pulled that number out of thin air a bit, but you're right that it's a monster stack play.</p>
    <p>Racer, I'm not sure if I'm understanding your use of "fold equity" in this case.  It's not about MY fold equity...it's about sizing your bets such that your opponent doesn't have any.</p>
    <p>This play is completely different than a squeeze play, where there's a couple of people limping, or raise & call, in the pot, and you shove over the top.  That's a play, as Bond mentioned in a recent article, which has fallen out of favor some recently in tougher MTTs...and I use it sparingly in the smaller buy-ins I play.  The problem with the squeeze play is that everyone's written about it.  When Phil Gordon knows...everyone knows.  In that case, you have less fold equity than you'd think because everyone puts your range at ATC.</p>
     
    Thread Starter
  14. racer racer is offline

    Gananoque
    Canada

    Posts: 994
    Joined: Oct 08

    Dec 16th, 2008 (12/16/2008 1:02pm) in reply to grapsfan

    <p>ok, so your opponent doesnt have fold equity when you size your bet in regards to his stack, thats only if he calls your raise. If he flat calls, or reshoves, its like getting your hand caught in the cookie jar so to speak.</p>
    <p>Im not disagreeing with your point in the article, i understanding winning tournaments takes timely moves such as the one you point out, but many times a BB will call a standard raise, and you have position to bet out and maybe out play an opponent post flop. Conversely, if you commit yourself as 2 to 1 on ur money, it will look more like a steal and when u get reshoved on you will likely be pricing yourself in as a dog in the hand.  </p>
    <p>I think if your one of the bigger stacks this would work just fine, maybe it will work a good majority of the time, if the timing is right, but my luck i walk into AA at the worst time late in tourney with  5,7o lol.</p>
  15. hokumfool hokumfool is offline

    Posts: 13
    Joined: May 08

    Dec 16th, 2008 (12/16/2008 7:06pm) in reply to grapsfan

    <p>Thanks for the greeat article.  Nice work.</p>
  16. Mouser1299 Mouser1299 is offline

    Murray, KY
    United States

    Posts: 19
    Joined: Dec 06

    Dec 20th, 2008 (12/20/2008 9:36pm) in reply to grapsfan

    <p>i think maybe the idea here is to make a bet that may PREVENT him from shoving light, knowing that you're giving yourself the odds to call his shove...I'm sure that ultimately, the idea is not to force yourself to get it in bad. Thoughts?</p>
  17. ulaf ulaf is offline

    Posts: 2
    Joined: Feb 08

    Dec 23rd, 2008 (12/23/2008 11:29am) in reply to grapsfan

    <p>If your raise is smaller, there range is wider, so the equity should be the same imo. If you're raising 5 bb it's so obvious that you will call that villain will be tight instead of very loose if you only raise 2.5bb.  You should also fold K4 and 75 in this position imo.</p>
    <p>Not very useful article imo.</p>
Reply to Thread