1. I've noticed some of the SNG coaches and other veteran players have slightly different hand requirements for shoving in different positions. You can look at a few push/fold charts and see that they vary as well.

    My question is, what are some of the best ways to go about figuring this out for yourself?

    Like if someone tells me "AQs is a +EV shove with 8 BBs from the button", Obv I believe that and my gut tells me that yes this hand is definitely strong enough to shove here no matter what their calling ranges are ...but how do they get to this conclusion concerning more marginal spots? I'm just the type of person that wants to really figure this out for myself as well, otherwise I just always feel that I'm trying to do nothing more than replicate someone's style and am missing out on truly understanding the concepts.

    Do most successful players just simply use SNGWiz for different ranges vs different types of opponents and use that to base their real time estimations on? Or the NASH ICM website tool?

    What brings me to this originally is that I know two very successful players with long, high ROI, track records....but one of them shoves much wider from much earlier than the other one does. Player A might suggest shoving a hand from a certain position that Player B says is very spewy. And sometimes both of their ranges differ from what SNG Wiz suggests. So seeing that two strong players can differ so much confuses me.

    Thoughtful insight appreciated.
    Add Hustlr to Rail
  2. Run your push / fold spots through the Nash calculator at the end of a session. Do this enough times and you will start to remember what you should be doing.

    This has helped my game dramatically.
    Add thearthurdog to Rail
  3. What about when SNG Wiz and Nash don't get along?

    Example:

    PokerStars Game #24541033436: Tournament #138139880, $25+$2 Hold'em No Limit - Level V (75/150) - 2009/02/02 20:19:50 ET
    Table '138139880 1' 9-max Seat #3 is the button
    Seat 1: mudd25 (7445 in chips)
    Seat 2: givememyleg (990 in chips)
    Seat 3: enriquegor (1350 in chips)
    Seat 6: dapunisher1 (800 in chips)
    Seat 7: jzieg2313 (1550 in chips)
    Seat 8: Hustlr (1365 in chips)
    dapunisher1: posts small blind 75
    jzieg2313: posts big blind 150
    *** HOLE CARDS ***
    Dealt to Hustlr [Tc Ad]
    Hustlr: raises 1200 to 1350 (y/n?)

    I usually push here. ICM Nash says to push. But no matter realistic range you assign the other players in SNG Wiz, it says to fold. I know that neither one take into account the approaching blinds. I know that two of the players are on the loose side and the other three are tight. How do winning players make a final decision for their range here?
    Raise
    Thread StarterAdd Hustlr to Rail
  4. I think (?) you can adjust SNG Wiz to get pretty close to Nash.

    I trust Nash ! many of the top SNG players agree that it is the optimal method to determine your ranges.

    I still think it is important to not follow it religiously if you have determined that a player is being tight / loose. You need to modify your ranges accordingly. EG if you are on the botton late in a SNG with the two blinds being VERY tight. Loosen up and shove almost ATC.

    In the example above I'm not suprised Nash says to push. I'd follow Nash there.
    If a loose caller flips over K5 then you are in front. If someone flips over AA then GG and pray for a KQJ flop.
    Raise
    Add thearthurdog to Rail
  5. Hmm, not sure what ranges you're giving in SNG Wiz with the AT hand, but this has to be +EV almost always. The only way it isn't is if everyone's calling you with only hands that are chopping or better (aka AT+/a bunch of pocket pairs), which just isn't happening unless you're at a complete donk table. Most ICM calcs should be the same and give you roughly the same result for these types of hands if you have them configged properly. The only difference I find is that when some say you should push 20%, it refers to top 20% of hands, and when other says push 20%, it means top 20% of hands vs. the caller's range. So some will cut out a lot of weaker broadway type hands and put more suited connectors in the shoving range. Which makes sense, but I think for practical purposes you just need the idea. Like if it says to push 98s+, if you push 97s or 87s it's pretty much the same result, b/c you'll have the same equity if you're called within like 1%.

     
    Originally Posted by Hustlr View Post

    I've noticed some of the SNG coaches and other veteran players have slightly different hand requirements for shoving in different positions. You can look at a few push/fold charts and see that they vary as well.

    This is b/c it all depends on the opponent. A chart can't adapt to someone who's gonna call wide/call barely anything. Charts will only be +EV based on the ranges they're giving, and the more the calling ranges deviate from that, usually the less +EV the action becomes. Either b/c you're missing value when you could shove wider, or b/c you're getting called so wide that you can't profitably push some of the range. Some hands you can just push no matter what, aka 'an unexploitable' shove, where it's at least a bit +EV to shove no matter what they're calling. AKA shoving AQ from the button is going to be unexploitable until you're a huge amount of BB deep, although it'd just be terrible to shove 50BB on the button with AQ.

     

    My question is, what are some of the best ways to go about figuring this out for yourself?

    Experience assigning ranges/adapting to them. Assign someone a calling range, plug it into an ICM calculator to see what's +EV to shove if they're calling xx+, xx+.

     

    Like if someone tells me "AQs is a +EV shove with 8 BBs from the button", Obv I believe that and my gut tells me that yes this hand is definitely strong enough to shove here no matter what their calling ranges are ...but how do they get to this conclusion concerning more marginal spots?

    Well when you play with ICM calculators enough, you'll notice spots where it's ridiculously +EV to shove b/c of stacksize, position etc. Like with <10BB it'll be +EV to shove any A from the button almost always, and if you plug it into a calculator and check the range that they'd have to call to make it -EV, you'll see why; because people are never realistically calling that wide. Same as shoving almost ATC in the SB with <10BB, most people just aren't calling with A2/KT/33 and whatever else they'd have to call with to make shoving 32o unprofitable. Obv you can't ALWAYS shove any 2 in the SB into any stack, because if someone has 10 times the chips that you do and you've shoved into them 3 times, they're probably not laying down A2/22 or even K2. But for most purposes in SNGs, in the common situations that come up, it's profitable.

     

    Do most successful players just simply use SNGWiz for different ranges vs different types of opponents and use that to base their real time estimations on? Or the NASH ICM website tool?

    Um, Nash is a good tool definitely for understanding ICM, but I'd say SNG Wiz/SNG PT/SNG EGT type programs are better, just because you can plug in what you feel people are calling with and maximize your EV. Nash won't account for the people who are going to fold AT in the BB when you shove 10BB in the SB, where you could literally shove 32o any make a profit. It also won't account for people who will call you with any face card and a bunch of suited connectors, in which case you'll be losing a ton of money shipping 80% of hands into them. But yea, to maximize your profit, you need to change people's calling ranges, and adapt your pushing ranges to fit that. The closer you are to people's real ranges, and the smaller edges you can push, the more money you'll make.

     

    What brings me to this originally is that I know two very successful players with long, high ROI, track records....but one of them shoves much wider from much earlier than the other one does. Player A might suggest shoving a hand from a certain position that Player B says is very spewy. And sometimes both of their ranges differ from what SNG Wiz suggests. So seeing that two strong players can differ so much confuses me.

    Generally if 2 players disagree, it might be b/c they put the people on different calling ranges. If you can assign them calling ranges, your pushing range isn't really arguable. I guess some people don't want to risk 15BB or something for .1% edge, but that's just a case of what people feel is MOST +EV or optimal. Some people would rather open raise/fold to shove at 15BB than shove 15BB getting 0.1% edge. Usually if it's +EV to shove then anything is better than folding, but it's arguable whether shoving is better than raise/folding, or the other way around. There's also the argument that you might have 0.1% edge in this spot, but if you fold you'll get a way better spot. Super arguable again, there might be merit to it, but generally in your common SNG scenarios, there just aren't that many spots where you can mess around and wait for better spots, you can't predict if it's gonna be your last +EV spot for 4 orbits or not.

    But yea, if some pro sees one hand and says 'xxx shove is spewy', he'll be making a ton of assumptions based on his experience of what the players ranges PROBABLY are. But, he can't know anything for sure unless he's played in that SNG and played the hands that the other has, in order to know what ranges the villains are calling. There's also the possibility that one winning player may know push/fold ranges better than the other, and although he thinks that it's a push/fold in a certain spot, it might not be, or it might be so close that it could go either way.

    lol, ok this is pretty long but hopefully that gives you a good idea of how it works. I'm no pro but I'm working on it, and I'd like to think that I have a good idea of the concept of ICM and how to use it, even if I don't always put it into practice perfectly yet.
     1
    Raise
    Add Vekked to Rail
  6. This kind of hand is so borderline it really doesn't matter...both of your friends are probably right
    Add L0bstaM0bsta to Rail
  7. Thanks for the replies guys, alot of good points.

     
    Originally Posted by thearthurdog View Post

    I think (?) you can adjust SNG Wiz to get pretty close to Nash.

    There are a few hands I've run into that I simply cannot get SNGWiz to agree with Nash. Even if I basically put the same calling ranges into SNGWiz that Nash suggests for them to call with, SNGWiz still leans towards the more conservative side.

     
    Originally Posted by thearthurdog View Post

    I trust Nash ! many of the top SNG players agree that it is the optimal method to determine your ranges.

    Yeah, I've been using Nash alot. And I'm aware that it's suggesting the optimal play only vs other optimal players...and your hand range can drift in either direction depending on how much your opponents stray from the correct calling range.

    I know this has been discussed on here before, but I forget the details. Can someone breifly explain what the main differences are between SNGWiz/SNGPT and Nash that results in different answers sometimes? I thought both analyzed calling ranges and ICM. I thought it was just because Nash was "optimal vs optimal" and SNGWiz was based on your "assumed ranges" for your opponents.... but just want to make sure since like I said before, I can put in the Nash ranges into SNGWiz and it still won't agree with Nash like I thought it would.

     
    Originally Posted by Vekked View Post

    Some hands you can just push no matter what, aka 'an unexploitable' shove, where it's at least a bit +EV to shove no matter what they're calling. AKA shoving AQ from the button is going to be unexploitable until you're a huge amount of BB deep, although it'd just be terrible to shove 50BB on the button with AQ.

    Yeah. I'm fairly comfortable with the "unexploitable" shove ranges, these are often the easy ones that over time have become pretty obvious to me. Like alot of SB vs BB situations with a tight player in the BB.... I know that many times you can shove ATC when short and its +EV just based on how rarely they call you. And just basic situations where you know you are ahead of the range they are going to look you up with. However, the more marginal situations have been tricky.

    Obviously I'm on a slight downer. I have to admit that when things are running well and I'm winning with no problem, I don't spend much time looking over my game. It's the whole "why fix it if it's not broken" mentallity... even though I know thats being pretty short sighted and results oriented. I've recently been griding the $16/$27 Turbos and getting my ass stomped on. Nothing drastic and I know it could be variance, but wanted to make sure I'm studying the hands from my previous session in the best manner.

    This could be my mind playing games on me since I'm losing so many all ins lately, but I feel like I'm pushing way too wide sometimes. Any of the other $16T regulars have any thoughts on this based on the hands they've seen me show up with? I promise not to use your advice against you
    Raise
    Thread StarterAdd Hustlr to Rail
  8.  

    Can someone breifly explain what the main differences are between SNGWiz/SNGPT and Nash that results in different answers sometimes? I thought both analyzed calling ranges and ICM. I thought it was just because Nash was "optimal vs optimal" and SNGWiz was based on your "assumed ranges" for your opponents.... but just want to make sure since like I said before, I can put in the Nash ranges into SNGWiz and it still won't agree with Nash like I thought it would.

    That's exactly it, Nash is optimal vs. optimal, the others generally use ranges assigned to the opponent. Although, if you use a program that also assigns optimal calling ranges, the pushing range may differ from Nash simply because one program uses a different hand ranking, aka one bases the push range off of top xx% of hands overall, and the other uses top xx% of hands relative to the other person's calling range. It's really not THAT big of a deal though, since like I said, the equity difference between pushing 98s and 97s vs. a calling range isn't enough to realistically make one a push and the other a fold most times, imo.

     

    This could be my mind playing games on me since I'm losing so many all ins lately, but I feel like I'm pushing way too wide sometimes.

    Well, it's one thing if you keep running into big hands or the top of people's ranges, but if you're like 'oh this person would never call with 22/33 or A2o or K5s etc etc' and they do, then you might've pushed too wide. If they call with that stuff, you have to assign a new range, and check to see if your push was still correct or not, based on that range. Learning push/fold ranges is pretty much an endless task, because you can always finetune them more. It's one thing to get them good enough to be a profitable player, but the better you get at them, the more profitable you will be. IMO, use Nash to understand how stacksizes and position affect ranges, then use other programs to review real game situations in which you you want to know what your range should be vs. a certain calling range.
     1
    Raise
    Add Vekked to Rail
  9.  
    Originally Posted by Vekked View Post

    Well, it's one thing if you keep running into big hands or the top of people's ranges, but if you're like 'oh this person would never call with 22/33 or A2o or K5s etc etc' and they do, then you might've pushed too wide.

    It's definitely a combination of both. I've been snapped off by a few of the regulars that have called me wider than I thought they would. So I'm probably pushing a little too light vs players that know me.

    I wish I could find the hand where "Im an fn sta" hurt my feelings on the bubble. Regardless of whether his call was correct or not, it was still outside of what I suspected his range to be. And I know "Wavegoodbye" has also ripped me a new one when I wasn't expecting it.
    Raise
    Thread StarterAdd Hustlr to Rail
  10. Another situation. This is a bubble from a $16 Turbo. I know player in the BB pretty well by now. He's another regular at this level.

    http://www.pokerhand.org/?3806747

    So I'm shoving 67s from the BU with about 4 BBs, and the BB has less than 3 left behind after posting. I wasn't sure about this one on the spot. But what made me go for pushing was that the SB is a clown and I definitely cannot count on him to push anywhere near as wide as he should. If he folds I'll puke. So I opted to push. And again, Nash says to fold but SNGWiz says to push (even when I put in the same Nash calling %'s into Wiz).

    http://www.pokerhand.org/?3806779


    Then 2 hands later, he shoves on my BB. Since I know him, I felt that KTs was a pretty good call here. Turned out both of us were pretty close to what Nash suggests for push/call.

    http://www.pokerhand.org/?3806785

    And then next orbit. I have A2o in the BB and he raises again. Now I just called with KTs the last time. I felt like he wasn't pushing as wide this time. I folded. I think SNGWiz and Nash both suggest to fold here.

    Any thoughts on these hands? Especially the first hand... I'm not too sure about about that one.
    Raise
    Thread StarterAdd Hustlr to Rail
  11. So this is a hand that I usually shove from from the CO with about 6 BBs.

    Assume Button and SB call with "44+, A9o+, A7s+"
    Assume BB calls with "A2s+, A5o+, 22+, KTs+, KQo"

    In this case, SNG Wiz says it's a push. I think these are pretty realistic ranges for most people. I would expect the BB to call me somewhat loose, but not as loose as Nash suggests.

    Nash says for me to push with:
    <table border="1" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="2"><tbody><tr><td>30.3%, 22+ Ax+ K7s+ KTo+ Q9s+ QTo+ J8s+ JTo T8s+ 98s </td></tr></tbody></table>

    And for the BB to call with:
    <table border="1" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="2"><tbody><tr><td>24.3%, 22+ A2s+ A4o+ K9s+ KTo+ QTs+ QJo JTs
    </td></tr></tbody></table>

    But like I said, I don't think the average player calls as often as 24% of the time. But at the same time, I'm not shoving as wide as Nash says to either. So if I doubt the players left to act are <span>calling </span>as wide as Nash, then I should be <span>shoving </span>wider than Nash?

    PokerStars Game #24565621005: Tournament #138313657, $15+$1 Hold'em No Limit - Level VI (100/200) - 2009/02/03 16:16:39 ET
    Table '138313657 1' 9-max Seat #6 is the button
    Seat 1: chrisosis (1925 in chips)
    Seat 2: soulwax (1755 in chips) is sitting out
    Seat 5: Hustlr (1130 in chips)
    Seat 6: Sunblizzle (3015 in chips)
    Seat 7: Mariklus (1870 in chips)
    Seat 9: Imgonna1 (3805 in chips)
    Mariklus: posts small blind 100
    Imgonna1: posts big blind 200
    *** HOLE CARDS ***
    Dealt to Hustlr [4h Ac]
    Imgonna1 said, &quot;gg&quot;
    chrisosis: folds
    soulwax: folds
    Hustlr: raises 930 to 1130 and is all-in
    Sunblizzle: folds
    Mariklus: folds
    Imgonna1: folds
    Uncalled bet (930) returned to Hustlr
    Hustlr collected 500 from pot
    Hustlr: doesn't show hand
    Raise
    Thread StarterAdd Hustlr to Rail
  12.  

    So if I doubt the players left to act are <SPAN>calling </SPAN>as wide as Nash, then I should be <SPAN>shoving </SPAN>wider than Nash?

    Yea basically, wherever they're being tighter/looser than Nash, you do the opposite and you'll profit. You have to be careful though, that they are actually calling with a wider % of hands than Nash, b/c although most people won't call you with JT/QT, they may call you with a bunch more Ks than just K7s/KT, or they might call with any A. I also think if people are calling with A2s, a lot of times they'll just be calling with any A, suited or unsuited. These are the kinda things you have to think of when calculating ranges. Pokerstove helps a lot, so you can plug in the exact hands that people will call with, since some people might call with Ax+/Kx+ but only QT+ or something. It's really hard to assign randoms ranges that are that accurate, but if you play with certain regs a lot and get to see them make a bunch of calls, you'll soon be able to assign them ranges with pretty good accuracy. All that's left them is to plug that range into a calc and see what you can push profitably on them.
     1
    Raise
    Add Vekked to Rail
  13. I know people have been trying to address this topic, and thanks for the replies.
    But one more thing about SNGWiz/SNGPT vs Nash. It seems that Nash assumes a much wider calling range than what is realistic for a typical small stakes SNG player. And I get that... it's not natural to call off as light as Nash suggests to do, and takes work to learn when it's correct to do so.

    But Nash always seems to be much more aggressive than SNGWiz. So I'm using SNGWiz and entering in tighter, more realistic calling ranges in some scenarios. Yet SNGWiz is usually telling me to push tighter and Nash is saying to push wider. This seems contradictory to me, since tighter callers = looser pushing.

    Am I on crack or what? And I dont mean this to simply be, &quot;what is better? SNGWiz or Nash!?&quot; I'm just trying to get deeper into some of the theory behind SNGs.
    Raise
    Thread StarterAdd Hustlr to Rail
  14. It seems that Nash assumes a much wider calling range than what is realistic for a typical small stakes SNG player.

    I ground the $2.25 18 Mans at FT for ages and I found that the opposite was often true. Many players would say 'hell yes i'll call off my entire stack with Q7 suited'.

    Many players at these levels just don't understand the difference in starting hand values and really believe that Q7 suited is awesome.

    Player notes made a world of difference in these situations.

    Adjust, adjust, adjust.

    Nash is a great guideline but if you don't adjust to what you know about the other players you will be giving up ev.

    If you have player notes you can also use them to spot the regulars who you know have a great push / fold game. You can either avoid them entirely (I've got a couple of guys at Party I try not to play with) or sit in a spot where they can't bash you up.
    Raise
    Add thearthurdog to Rail
  15.  
    Originally Posted by Hustlr View Post

    I know people have been trying to address this topic, and thanks for the replies.
    But one more thing about SNGWiz/SNGPT vs Nash. It seems that Nash assumes a much wider calling range than what is realistic for a typical small stakes SNG player. And I get that... it's not natural to call off as light as Nash suggests to do, and takes work to learn when it's correct to do so.

    But Nash always seems to be much more aggressive than SNGWiz. So I'm using SNGWiz and entering in tighter, more realistic calling ranges in some scenarios. Yet SNGWiz is usually telling me to push tighter and Nash is saying to push wider. This seems contradictory to me, since tighter callers = looser pushing.

    Am I on crack or what? And I dont mean this to simply be, &quot;what is better? SNGWiz or Nash!?&quot; I'm just trying to get deeper into some of the theory behind SNGs.

    Typically, at almost all stakes, people aren't calling as much as they could, and aren't pushing at much as they could. What this means for us, is that we shouldn't be calling the typical player as light (since they're pushing decent hands), and we should be pushing on them lighter (since they're only calling with decent hands). Although, this is not set in stone, and I've played guys at the higher stakes non-turbo's who will call shoves with 62o/56o just ridiculous stuff for who knows what reason. So no matter what stakes you play, you're always going to have to assign your own ranges and have an idea of what you can profitably push.

    Also, post up some of the ranges you're putting in/getting told from SNGWiz and what Nash says and we'll try to figure it out. I'm not sure, but it could be that you might not have the structures set up right? Like payout structure can change ranges quite a bit in certain situations.

    Also, more important than exact ranges at the lower stakes is getting the concept down. You should be able to crush smaller stakes with mainly recognizing situations and adapting to them. Ranges and exact ICM come into play a lot more when you play similar people and can assign them close ranges/push small edges, since at some of the higher levels you need every edge you can get.
     1
    Raise
    Add Vekked to Rail
  16.  
    Originally Posted by thearthurdog View Post

    It seems that Nash assumes a much wider calling range than what is realistic for a typical small stakes SNG player.

    I ground the $2.25 18 Mans at FT for ages and I found that the opposite was often true. Many players would say 'hell yes i'll call off my entire stack with Q7 suited'.

    Many players at these levels just don't understand the difference in starting hand values and really believe that Q7 suited is awesome.

    Player notes made a world of difference in these situations.

    Adjust, adjust, adjust.

    Nash is a great guideline but if you don't adjust to what you know about the other players you will be giving up ev.

    If you have player notes you can also use them to spot the regulars who you know have a great push / fold game. You can either avoid them entirely (I've got a couple of guys at Party I try not to play with) or sit in a spot where they can't bash you up.

    Yeah man, you are definitely right in the fact that there are many players that are way too loose. Those players that call you with KJo vs your 15 BB resteal on the bubble with another 1 BB shortstack left. So when that happens, my assumption was way off. We both made -EV plays in that case, and the only people benefitting from the play are the two other players that are laughing at us.

    But you also have your fair share of players who are way too conservative. They are the ones that are mocking you when they see you call with King high in the BB vs a SB shove from another regular player. They are the ones that berate you when your T4o resteal gets called by KJo on the bubble. They aren't complete nits, but don't know how to be selectively LAG when it's required.

    Maybe I'm way off on the whole SNGWiz and Nash differences. I just felt that regardless of what type of player is more common at a certain buyin level, that even if you plugged in &quot;tighter than Nash&quot; calling ranges into SNG Wiz that it still suggested for you to push tighter than Nash did.
    Raise
    Thread StarterAdd Hustlr to Rail
  17.  
    Originally Posted by Vekked View Post

    Also, post up some of the ranges you're putting in/getting told from SNGWiz and what Nash says and we'll try to figure it out. I'm not sure, but it could be that you might not have the structures set up right? Like payout structure can change ranges quite a bit in certain situations.

    Yeah I will. This is probably the case that the problem is a user error. I'll find some good examples and post them soon though.
    Raise
    Thread StarterAdd Hustlr to Rail
  18.  
    Originally Posted by Hustlr View Post

     
    Originally Posted by Vekked View Post

    Also, post up some of the ranges you're putting in/getting told from SNGWiz and what Nash says and we'll try to figure it out. I'm not sure, but it could be that you might not have the structures set up right? Like payout structure can change ranges quite a bit in certain situations.

    Yeah I will. This is probably the case that the problem is a user error. I'll find some good examples and post them soon though.

    Here are a few hands. I set the SNGWiz Calling Range for the opponents at the same percentage as Nash. I don't know how to set the exact range in SNGWiz though, but % call is the same.

    The difference in Hand 1 is negligible. I'm assuming its just from the small differences in Wiz/Nash excluding certain hands from the ranges, but % is still the same.

    Hand 2 is a pretty large difference however. With the call % in Wiz set equal to Nash, there are only very slight differences in the two actual call ranges. Such as, Nash usually adds an additional pocket pair to your opponent's call range but has one less Ax in that range, and vice versa for Wiz..but that's not a huge deal. So what causes the difference between pushing 7% to 16% of the time?

    Hand #1 - QJo with 6 BBs into 3 people

    Nash Push Range:
    <table border="1" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="2"><tbody><tr><td>27.9%, 22+ A2s+ A3o+ K8s+ KTo+ Q9s+ QJo J9s+ JTo T8s+ 98s </td></tr></tbody></table>
    SNGWiz Push Range: Basically identical at 27.6%.
    <a target="_blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://www.pokerhand.org/?3818571" >
    Hand #2 - A9o with 7 BBs into 5 people</a>

    Nash Push Range:
    <table border="1" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="2"><tbody><tr><td>16.3%, 33+ A7s+ A5s-A2s ATo+ K9s+ KJo+ QTs+ JTs </td></tr></tbody></table>
    SNGWiz Push Range: 6.8%, 88+ AJ+
    Raise
    Thread StarterAdd Hustlr to Rail
  19. Good thread. My only advice would be to cross your fingers and hope the Jen posts, and if so listen carefully to everything she has to say.
    Add mleone3333 to Rail
  20.  
    Originally Posted by Hustlr View Post

    What about when SNG Wiz and Nash don't get along?

    Example:

    PokerStars Game #24541033436: Tournament #138139880, $25+$2 Hold'em No Limit - Level V (75/150) - 2009/02/02 20:19:50 ET
    Table '138139880 1' 9-max Seat #3 is the button
    Seat 1: mudd25 (7445 in chips)
    Seat 2: givememyleg (990 in chips)
    Seat 3: enriquegor (1350 in chips)
    Seat 6: dapunisher1 (800 in chips)
    Seat 7: jzieg2313 (1550 in chips)
    Seat 8: Hustlr (1365 in chips)
    dapunisher1: posts small blind 75
    jzieg2313: posts big blind 150
    *** HOLE CARDS ***
    Dealt to Hustlr [Tc Ad]
    Hustlr: raises 1200 to 1350 (y/n?)

    I usually push here. ICM Nash says to push. But no matter realistic range you assign the other players in SNG Wiz, it says to fold. I know that neither one take into account the approaching blinds. I know that two of the players are on the loose side and the other three are tight. How do winning players make a final decision for their range here?

    The difference between Nash and SNGWiz here will be

    - Nash will base it's calling ranges on perfect play, whereas unless you enter the same exact ranges in SNGWiz you'll get a different result.
    - Nash does take into account the approaching blinds, whereas SNGWiz does not, unless you use it's &quot;future game simulation&quot; feature.
    - SNGWiz asks you for a minimum edge, whereas Nash doesn't have one. Wiz will therefore be tighter because it will eliminate hands where you do not meet the minimum edge.

    How I would look at this situation:

    Start with Nash:

    <TABLE class=simple cellSpacing=2 cellPadding=3 border=1><TBODY><TR><TH width=40>PU</TH><TH width=40>CA</TH><TH width=40>OC</TH><TH>Range</TH></TR><TR><TD>UTG</TD><TD><TD><TD>13.7%, 88+ A7s+ A5s-A3s ATo+ K9s+ KJo+ QTs+ JTs&lt;&lt;your &quot;perfect&quot; shoving range </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD>UTG+1</TD><TD><TD>5.9%, 88+ AJs+ AQo+ </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD><TD>CO</TD><TD>1.4%, QQ+ </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD><TD>BU</TD><TD>0.9%, KK+ </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD><TD>SB</TD><TD>1.8%, JJ+ </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD><TD>BB</TD><TD>0.9%, KK+ </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD>CO</TD><TD><TD>5.9%, 88+ AJs+ AQo+ </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD><TD>BU</TD><TD>1.8%, JJ+ </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD><TD>SB</TD><TD>2.6%, TT+ AKs </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD><TD>BB</TD><TD>2.6%, TT+ AKs </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD>BU</TD><TD><TD>4.2%, 99+ AQs+ AKo </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD><TD>SB</TD><TD>1.8%, JJ+ </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD><TD>BB</TD><TD>1.4%, QQ+ </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD>SB</TD><TD><TD>8.4%, 55+ ATs+ AJo+ </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD><TD>BB</TD><TD>3.9%, 99+ AKs AKo </TD></TR><TR><TD><TD>BB</TD><TD><TD>5.9%, 88+ AJs+ AQo+ </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
    http://www.holdemresources.net/hr/sn...amp;s8=&amp;s9=

    Then look at the calling ranges. If you feel they are accurate, go ahead and shove. Personally in most cases, I believe that your opponents will call wider, and therefore, you don't have as much FE as Nash suggests you do, so there is lower value in shoving. Therefore I would tighten up a tad, and might only shove 10-11%.
    Raise
    Add Jennifear to Rail
  21.  
    Originally Posted by Jennifear View Post

     
    Originally Posted by Hustlr View Post

    What about when SNG Wiz and Nash don't get along?

    Example:

    PokerStars Game #24541033436: Tournament #138139880, $25+$2 Hold'em No Limit - Level V (75/150) - 2009/02/02 20:19:50 ET
    Table '138139880 1' 9-max Seat #3 is the button
    Seat 1: mudd25 (7445 in chips)
    Seat 2: givememyleg (990 in chips)
    Seat 3: enriquegor (1350 in chips)
    Seat 6: dapunisher1 (800 in chips)
    Seat 7: jzieg2313 (1550 in chips)
    Seat 8: Hustlr (1365 in chips)
    dapunisher1: posts small blind 75
    jzieg2313: posts big blind 150
    *** HOLE CARDS ***
    Dealt to Hustlr [Tc Ad]
    Hustlr: raises 1200 to 1350 (y/n?)

    I usually push here. ICM Nash says to push. But no matter realistic range you assign the other players in SNG Wiz, it says to fold. I know that neither one take into account the approaching blinds. I know that two of the players are on the loose side and the other three are tight. How do winning players make a final decision for their range here?

    The difference between Nash and SNGWiz here will be

    - Nash will base it's calling ranges on perfect play, whereas unless you enter the same exact ranges in SNGWiz you'll get a different result.
    - Nash does take into account the approaching blinds, whereas SNGWiz does not, unless you use it's &quot;future game simulation&quot; feature.
    - SNGWiz asks you for a minimum edge, whereas Nash doesn't have one. Wiz will therefore be tighter because it will eliminate hands where you do not meet the minimum edge.

    How I would look at this situation:

    Start with Nash:

    <table border="1" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="2"><tbody><tr><th width="40">PU</th><th width="40">CA</th><th width="40">OC</th><th>Range</th></tr><tr><td>UTG</td><td>13.7%, 88+ A7s+ A5s-A3s ATo+ K9s+ KJo+ QTs+ JTs&lt;&lt;your &quot;perfect&quot; shoving range </td></tr><tr><td>UTG+1</td><td>5.9%, 88+ AJs+ AQo+ </td></tr><tr><td>CO</td><td>1.4%, QQ+ </td></tr><tr><td>BU</td><td>0.9%, KK+ </td></tr><tr><td>SB</td><td>1.8%, JJ+ </td></tr><tr><td>BB</td><td>0.9%, KK+ </td></tr><tr><td>CO</td><td>5.9%, 88+ AJs+ AQo+ </td></tr><tr><td>BU</td><td>1.8%, JJ+ </td></tr><tr><td>SB</td><td>2.6%, TT+ AKs </td></tr><tr><td>BB</td><td>2.6%, TT+ AKs </td></tr><tr><td>BU</td><td>4.2%, 99+ AQs+ AKo </td></tr><tr><td>SB</td><td>1.8%, JJ+ </td></tr><tr><td>BB</td><td>1.4%, QQ+ </td></tr><tr><td>SB</td><td>8.4%, 55+ ATs+ AJo+ </td></tr><tr><td>BB</td><td>3.9%, 99+ AKs AKo </td></tr><tr><td>BB</td><td>5.9%, 88+ AJs+ AQo+ </td></tr></tbody></table>
    http://www.holdemresources.net/hr/sn...amp;s8=&amp;s9=

    Then look at the calling ranges. If you feel they are accurate, go ahead and shove. Personally in most cases, I believe that your opponents will call wider, and therefore, you don't have as much FE as Nash suggests you do, so there is lower value in shoving. Therefore I would tighten up a tad, and might only shove 10-11%.

    that A10 hand is a shove IMO...

    the last paragraph there is very good advice, the better the player is, the more he/she will adjust their calling ranges vs. you, what you have to realize though is that by calling so loose these same players get themselves into a world of hurt by calling to wide if they are off in their range, especially if it's bubble play.

    I didn't read this whole thread but some sound advice is just to watch the other players when you play, particularly the regs and see what hands they are calling shoves with in what spots. Usually the bad break even regs are the ones shoving too early and calling too wide, the good ones adjust there ranges based on the sitaution, stack sizes, # and types of players left etc.

    a good example is if you on the bubble the big stack shoves on you and you're left with a marginal hand to either call or fold(i.e small small +/- ev either way), you are equal in chips with the other two players left, but you these players have shown no clue of bubble play or proper icm strat. this makes the situation an easier fold imo, because by folding you are giving yourself a chance to take advantage of the other players poor play.
    Raise
    Add wavegoodbye to Rail

Similar Threads