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

Does turbo structure change pushbot ranges?

Reply to Thread
  1. rhinodash rhinodash is offline

    Las Vegas, NV
    United States

    Posts: 382
    Joined: Nov 05

    Mar 23rd, 2011 (3/23/2011 7:57pm)

    I have had extensive debates with some friends about this subject, basically if the MTT in question is a turbo does it widen proper pushbot ranges. My contention is that it has no effect as we cannot evaluate a decision based on future events(the blinds increasing soon). My friends seem to think that because its a turbo we now must push wider than the chart in order to accumulate chips more quickly. This logic seems very flawed to me the chart we use purports to show any shove that is +cEV and imo any +cEV shove is +cEV no matter when the blinds increase next. The only argument I can see is that with deeper slow structures it can be correct to pass on +cEV shoves if we feel our tournament life is more valuable so we dont have to push marginal edges. Possibly the converse of this is true in fast structures our tournament life is less valuable so we have to push every edge but I dont think this means we can push below the chart and take -cEV shoves just to try to get chips. Lets hear some opinions.
  2. nyy486 nyy486 is offline

    Uniondale, NY
    United States

    Posts: 2,123
    Joined: Aug 08

    Mar 23rd, 2011 (3/23/2011 8:17pm) in reply to rhinodash

    I don't use some stupid chart, but yes, you have to shove wider in turbos imo. Whether it be taking the small profitable spots that you may not when the blinds are not about to increase or not, I think you have to shove wider. With the more shallow stacks and quick structure, you have to maximize on fold equity just so you don't get crippled waiting for a better spot. Not a fan of charts that say what to shove and what not to shove. You have to factor table and player dynamics into your game, not just read off a chart. Very general example, but it's pretty awful to shove the same range against a 8/6 that you would against a 40/10 bvb. Looking at a chart, these two villains are all in the same.
     
  3. rhinodash rhinodash is offline

    Las Vegas, NV
    United States

    Posts: 382
    Joined: Nov 05

    Mar 23rd, 2011 (3/23/2011 8:36pm) in reply to nyy486

    well I dont wanna get into a discussion on whether charts are useful or not and I use them mostly as a guideline. However lets assume not using a chart but we have determined the exact cEV of a shove based on opponents calling ranges and our equity when called and chances of picking up the blinds(this is what charts are showing supposedly anyway). Using this range of hands to shove, the ones that are +cEV the people I have been discussing this with are arguing that we still need to shove wider than just the +cEV shoves because of the structure...

    edit: and I simply dont think this can be correct, moreover you mention maximizing fold equity which is already built into the charts basically the charts are computing based on eff M how many chips you stand to gain or lose on average making the shove. I believe the calculation is done using some sort of estimated calling ranges of our opponents left to act which obviously changes based on opponents tendencies, but I do trust sheets to have estimated these values pretty accurately on his chart that I use..
    Edited By: rhinodash Mar 23rd, 2011 at 08:41 PM
    Thread Starter
  4. nyy486 nyy486 is offline

    Uniondale, NY
    United States

    Posts: 2,123
    Joined: Aug 08

    Mar 23rd, 2011 (3/23/2011 9:37pm) in reply to rhinodash

    Yeah I know how these charts are calculated (in general). Guess I would have to see what these specific charts look like, but to answer your original question, I do think it is neccesary to shove wider in turbo mtt's. Whether it is taking more of the slightly +cEV spots or shoving iCEV spots would depend on what chart you're looking at. I'd guess it's the former though.
     
Reply to Thread