A lengthy rant about a marginally bad call

Hectorjelly

Chip Leader in a small mtt. You have around 4.2k, the villain of the hand is 2nd in chips with 3.2k. He is in second place.

For the $Ev calulations I have used Andy Wards EV Calculater which you can download from here: http://www.pokersoft.co.uk/freeware.htm

All fold to the villain who limps on the button. The small blind completes and you raise 600 with AJo. The button moves in for 2470 more.

So you have to call 2470 into a pot which will be 6740 big. FOr the call to be Chip EV neutral you need to have an equity in the hand of at least 36%. However this is a tournament and we are close to the money, so the value of chips are not linear. This means we need to look at the $Ev of calling.

Here are the three alternatives, with the chips stacks and $Ev beside them.


Folding

3410 $22 Imposter
2100 $16 Tourneque
4170 $25 hectorjelly
1285 $10 Culchie
2435 $17 Oscar

Calling and winning

7680 $36 Imposter
2100 $20 Tourneque
1285 $13 Culchie
2435 $22 Oscar

Calling and losing

900 $9 Imposter
2100 $18 Tourneque
6740 $33 hectorjelly
1285 $11 Culchie
2435 $20 Oscar

Before we go any further, look at the 3 players EV who are not in the hand. In every case their $EV is improved if the bet is called. That $EV cant be made out of thin air, its not in the big stacks interest to play a huge pot at this stage and you can clearly see the effects here.

So folding has an equity of $22.

Calling and winning has an equity of $36, and calling and losing has an equity of $9. The equity of calling is then %win (our equity in the hand, ie what % of the time will AJ hold up against the range you put the villain on) by $36, and the %lose by $9.

Against a range of KK - 55, Ak - At, AJ has an equity of 41%. Note that this is the range of a reasnably tight limp reraise, but I have left out AA becuase allthough AA or KK can be expected here from time to time, they are less likely to make this play.

So the equity of calling is .41 * 36 + .59 * 9, $14.76 + $5.31 = $20.07


Against a range of kk - 22, Ak - At, KQs - K9s, QJs - Q9s, Ajo has an equity of 50%. This is a much looser range and includes all pairs and some suited high/medium connectors.

So in this case the equity of calling is .5 * 36 + .5 * 9 = $22.50

So you can see that its a fold, unless you think that the villain is on a complete bluff. If you are one of the chip leaders in a stt (or final table of an mtt) you should be trying to avoid calling for all your chips (or most of them) unless you are fairly sure you have a dominating hand. Your chip positiion is valuable to you and its unprofitable to risk it even if it means giving up some chip EV.

However, if you are far from the money or are a shorstack then folding any + Chip EV situations is madness and you should be ashamed.

Imposter

I was waiting for this! You were just too quiet after you went out

Hectorjelly wrote:

Against a range of kk - 22, Ak - At, KQs - K9s, QJs - Q9s, Ajo has an equity of 50%. This is a much looser range and includes all pairs and some suited high/medium connectors.

So you can see that its a fold, unless you think that the villain is on a complete bluff. If you are one of the chip leaders in a stt (or final table of an mtt) you should be trying to avoid calling for all your chips (or most of them) unless you are fairly sure you have a dominating hand. Your chip positiion is valuable to you and its unprofitable to risk it even if it means giving up some chip EV.

As if you'd bluff!

Now to my thinking. You called from the button. For you that is unusual with noone having bet so far in the hand. Usually you try and steal blinds where possible. Going all-in to my raise made me think you were using my stupid call in the last tourny against me and trying to get me to fold. If you had a decent hand you'd probably have called. I had you on a small pair at best. A total bluff was also a pretty decent possibility. I'd of been a lot more worried if you'd have just called my raise.

If I would have folded and you became chip leader I would have been in a lot of trouble. You were before me to act in most hands and you can play a big stack well. Tourneque would have been in a better position than me and even though there would have been roughly a 1k difference between us in chips. I would have made him a favourite over me in that case. Ok, you could have blown some of your stack, as you do, but then so could anyone else.

I know it was a marginal call but I felt you were weak and I had to take the chance. After all if you are playing to win then making that decision isn't as bad as you make out.

In other news, you would have liked the way I spiked a 2nd 2 to knock oscar out when it got heads-up

BigDragon

Does anyone know where I can download PokerTranslator 1.14

Thanks

Imposter

BigDragon wrote:

Does anyone know where I can download PokerTranslator 1.14

Sorry but PokerTranslator v1.09 might be of help

BigDragon

Hector

How do you translate all this into a decision that has to be made within a specific, short, time allocation. Is this not where gut instinct, table image, previous play etc comes into play.

Serious question.

Shortstack

What hand did you have Hector ?

It is not in the interests of the chip leaders to play a big pot, so why did you reraise All In ?

Using Imposter's read on the situation he thinks you have a small pair so maybe that should be used when calculating EV, also as it is you that is re-raising then your image suggests any hand, so maybe a special calling HJ calculation using all 169 hands is in order.

BTW do you calculate all these EV's before makng a decision or do you just guesstimate and check back to see if you were nearly right?

Instinct is the true poker players gift. Personally I would have seen the flop here as you limping on the button is out of the ordinary. Still you can't fault his call if he thinks you have a small pair.

Imposter

And don't forget I raised as well which i'd very rarely do on a bluff against 2 players such as yourself and Oscar! What did you put me on?

careca

BigDragon wrote:

Hector

How do you translate all this into a decision that has to be made within a specific, short, time allocation. Is this not where gut instinct, table image, previous play etc comes into play.

Serious question.

My thoughts exactly. There isn't a hope in hell I would be able to work out those odds in that short space of time (and I commend anyone who can).

I can see it now.

'Careca has ten seconds to respond'.
Fcuk, whats .43* 2.348 /7.8893 * 1.2348

'Honey, what time is that film starting ?'
'Five minutes'
Perfect, I Call.

Hectorjelly

Imposter wrote:

Now to my thinking. You called from the button. For you that is unusual with noone having bet so far in the hand. Usually you try and steal blinds where possible. Going all-in to my raise made me think you were using my stupid call in the last tourny against me and trying to get me to fold. If you had a decent hand you'd probably have called.

If I have AK or AQ the two hands that you fear the most I would almost never call your raise. Calling would be horrible play with those stacks because if we both miss I would be forced to fold the possible best hand in a big pot. I think what really swings the decision is the fact that you will never have me dominated. I will never have a worse Ace. Sure you might run into a 9Ts but you are more likely to face 88 or AK.

Imposter wrote:

I know it was a marginal call but I felt you were weak and I had to take the chance. After all if you are playing to win then making that decision isn't as bad as you make out.

Its not a big deal I just thought it was interesting hand

Hectorjelly

BigDragon wrote:

Hector

How do you translate all this into a decision that has to be made within a specific, short, time allocation. Is this not where gut instinct, table image, previous play etc comes into play.

Serious question.

Gut Instinct: As soon as I saw the AJ I had a gut instinct that it was an unprofitable call, I did the calulations afterwards but I would of been very surprised to be wrong. If you work these things out several times you start to get a feel for the numbers, you dont have to work things out exactly at the table but if you cant get a ballpark idea of where you stand you will tend to make the wrong decision, rather than tending to make the right one.

Table image: Im well aware of the loose image that imposter has of me, and he knows that I know that. That for me would make me more likely to fold in this instance as I have to know that Im getting called a huge percentage of the time. Certainly Imposter isnt going to fold AK.

Hectorjelly

Imposter wrote:

And don't forget I raised as well which i'd very rarely do on a bluff against 2 players such as yourself and Oscar! What did you put me on?

I put you on AK, AQ, AJ, AT - maybe a small pair. I thought that you would call with AK AQ and fold AJ AT. I think you would of played a big pair slower.

Raising AJ in that position is a bluff.

Hectorjelly

Shortstack wrote:

What hand did you have Hector ?

It is not in the interests of the chip leaders to play a big pot, so why did you reraise All In ?

Well thats a debateable play by me as well, but If Imposter only needs to fold a small percentage of the time to make it profitable.

Shortstack wrote:

Using Imposter's read on the situation he thinks you have a small pair so maybe that should be used when calculating EV, also as it is you that is re-raising then your image suggests any hand, so maybe a special calling HJ calculation using all 169 hands is in order.

If you put me on a small pair then its still a fold, the $equity of calling with a 45% equity is $21 rather than the $22 of folding.

Shortstack wrote:

BTW do you calculate all these EV's before makng a decision or do you just guesstimate and check back to see if you were nearly right?

Instinct is the true poker players gift. Personally I would have seen the flop here as you limping on the button is out of the ordinary. Still you can't fault his call if he thinks you have a small pair.

I would make rough guesstimates in my head yes. I dont fault the call at all, but I enjoyed taking the opposite position to normal and saying that the fact that this is a tournament turns a clear call into a marginal fold.

NickyOD

I'm still trying to find the part of the thread that says what Hector's hand was.

Hectorjelly

NickyOD wrote:

I'm still trying to find the part of the thread that says what Hector's hand was.

77!

NickyOD

I think you played it badly. Just how often is the BB gona fold here? Why not make a button raise and try and take the blinds there or atleast take advantage of your position since you're a favourite on the initial flop. and It's such an easy hand to get away from. Why push after the the solid player in the BB makes it 4BBs to go? There's a stronig possibilty you are goosed against and overpair. It's atleast a coiflip that he is unlikely to turn down and you gave him a better chance to take the hand by letting him see 5 cards. This was a really weak play in my veiw. Imposter got the read right and made a good call.

Hectorjelly

NickyOD wrote:

Imposter got the read right and made a good call.

Did you skip the orginal post? Calling here with AJ costs you about $2 in tournament equity. Considering the buy in was $10 thats a sizeable error. If you think theres an error in the calulations or you have some other reservations then post them, but otherwise this statement is nonsensical.

NickyOD wrote:

I think you played it badly. Just how often is the BB gona fold here? Why not make a button raise and try and take the blinds there or atleast take advantage of your position since you're a favourite on the initial flop.

I raise here most of the time but this time I limped. One of the reasons I limped is that both of the stacks are slightly too big for me to call a reraise with. I think Id raised the last time I was the button as well which makes me more likely to limp.

NickyOD wrote:

and It's such an easy hand to get away from. Why push after the the solid player in the BB makes it 4BBs to go? There's a stronig possibilty you are goosed against and overpair. It's atleast a coiflip that he is unlikely to turn down and you gave him a better chance to take the hand by letting him see 5 cards.

Cold calling raises for a large proportion of your chips with the intention of check folding a lot of flops is bad play, your chips are far better off being used as ammunition . So I pushed because I was fairly sure that I was up against overcards, and I thought he would fold the weaker of his possible holdings. He only needs to fold 25/30% of the time to make this a very profitable play, even allowing for the times he has 99.

Imposter had loudly complained that he wasnt getting action with his big pairs so i thought the largeish raise screamed of a hand that didnt want action. If you actually think about the hand, pushing is the only way that imposter might not get to see 5 cards. Once the flop comes up a pot bet will commit him to the hand. I have to assume hes not going to check fold a missed flop. Also whilst I think he has overcards Im not sure which ones, I would have to assume a J hi flop is safe for me.

If you think about the dynamics of the hand, we both managed to commit all of our chips (or most of them) in a 50 50 situation, but I did it in such a way so that I also had a good amount of folding equity, this is a huge tactical advantage.

Imposter

Hectorjelly wrote:

Did you skip the orginal post? Calling here with AJ costs you about $2 in tournament equity. Considering the buy in was $10 thats a sizeable error. If you think theres an error in the calulations or you have some other reservations then post them, but otherwise this statement is nonsensical.

If you take the range of hands you posted this is true. Widen that out to other hands that you'd be likely to do this with (such as 64s and 72o ) and I reckon it swings back in my favour.

I raise here most of the time but this time I limped. One of the reasons I limped is that both of the stacks are slightly too big for me to call a reraise with. I think Id raised the last time I was the button as well which makes me more likely to limp.

But not too big for you to go all-in after a raise! I really don't understand why you played it the way you did.

Imposter had loudly complained that he wasnt getting action with his big pairs so i thought the largeish raise screamed of a hand that didnt want action.

I complained I wasn't getting action whether I raised or slowplayed. I had done both. I think I had JJ, qq, kk and aa (definitely had 3 of them) in that game and picked up nothing but blinds and of course that 400 river bet you called when I slowplayed qq.

Your raise all-in also screamed of a hand that didn't want action

Your logic makes sense Hector providing you are playing against players that you don't know. Playing the boards game is different as we've played against each other enough to be able to try and second guess players. You are ignoring this in your calculations.

NickyOD

Hectorjelly wrote:

Did you skip the orginal post? Calling here with AJ costs you about $2 in tournament equity. Considering the buy in was $10 thats a sizeable error. If you think theres an error in the calulations or you have some other reservations then post them, but otherwise this statement is nonsensical.

OMG!! There was NOTHING wrong with his call. $2 in EV is nothing if you factor in other things like how the table has been playng up to this point, when the blinds will go up, how does imposter play when he is chip leader, does he normally do better by playing tighter and waiting for a better oprotunity, where is he sitting in relation to the shortstacks and who has he been getting his chips from, all of which cannot be factored into poklerstove. The "feel" factor cannot be represented in any mathematical equation. You and I both know imposter plays to win, and you cannot win tournaments by shying away from coinflips.

henbane

NickyOD wrote:

The "feel" factor cannot be represented in any mathematical equation.

The feel factor is what determines the data you put into any mathematical equation. Based on reads and experience, you can determine fold equity, hand range etc. You can then make a rough mathemagical guesstimate based on your experience of running these kinds of simulations. The more often you think about these kind of things and run the simulations, the more accurate your guesstimate becomes.

I really think the point of this thread has been missed. Proximity to the money can change a clear call into a marginal fold given $EV.* $EV is very often irrelevant but at this stage in a game, it starts to affect decisions.

*using bold is fun!

ionapaul

Is it not also true to say that many factors that influence people's play cannot be quantified or used in mathematical analysis? The game was for very little cash (to some people), which might affect play. Friends want to 'get one up' on each other. If someone was playing for 'glory', how would this be factored into their decision? Doesn't this change the rightness or wrongness of a call?

DapperGent

No it just changes the range of hands you analyse.

[Edit]Of course you could end up estimating your opponents range of hands here to be any two cards which means it's a call.


Personally I think it's a fold, the chances of domination here are virtually nil and the chances of Hector making this (particular) move without AQ,AK,AJ or a pair are also slim. The limp reraise on the button doesn't strike me as a bluff at all, I was surprised to see Hector had 77 which would have been at the lower end of hands I put him on.

Essentially to call here you have to quite strongly put your opponent on a bluff and I don't think you have the information to do so. I wasn't playing though.

We need more threads like this. With numbers and such instead of rosemantic bullshít.[/edit]

DeVore

I hate to say this, and I say it with trepidation, but I think the numbers here are wrong, or at least the logic behind their use is wrong.

I'll try to be clear:

I have AT, you limp for 100, I raise to 400 you go all in for 1000. The pot is 1400 and I'm being asked for 600 more.

I put you on either, AK-J or a pair 77-99. I'm certain of this in fact because we play against each other a lot. It looks to me like Hector added up the odds against one range of hands (roughly 50-50) and multiplied it by the number of such hands in the range, an added that to the odds of the other range (roughly 80:20) having multiplied that by the number of hands in that range too.

However the % suspicsion also has to come into play, no? So if I think he is 90% likely to have an Ak-J, I should fold, if I am 90% sure he has 77-99 I should call. (I havent worked out the maths on this except in my head roughly).

My point is that assigning each possibility in the range an EQUAL likelihood seems very dodgy.... I cant see where you allowed for a strong inclination to a range, one way or another in your maths...

In general, maths is not open to correction, *my* maths on the other hand, is a very different story!

DeV.

Hectorjelly

DeVore wrote:

It looks to me like Hector added up the odds against one range of hands (roughly 50-50) and multiplied it by the number of such hands in the range, an added that to the odds of the other range (roughly 80:20) having multiplied that by the number of hands in that range too.

I did no such thing! First of all I showed the Equity needed to make the call chip EV neutral, and thats 36%. So clearly under normal circumstances this would be a call, because even against a quite tight range of hands AJs equity would be higher than 36%.

But because its a tournament and we are close to the money you cant assume all chips are equal, so you have to work out the $EV of the situations that will occurr at the end of the hand. There are three possibles situations:

Fold
Call and Win
Call and Lose

Then I worked out the $EV of each of these. Bear in mind that the $EV of calling is (%win of calling and winning + % lose of calling and losing).

Depending on the exact hand range that you put me on calling has an equity of somwhere between $20 - $22, whereas folding has an equity of $22.

Hectorjelly

Imposter wrote:

If you take the range of hands you posted this is true. Widen that out to other hands that you'd be likely to do this with (such as 64s and 72o ) and I reckon it swings back in my favour.

Your logic makes sense Hector providing you are playing against players that you don't know. Playing the boards game is different as we've played against each other enough to be able to try and second guess players. You are ignoring this in your calculations.

Why does the logic change because we know each other? I know that you have raised, so that means you have a better than average hand, I also know that if I go all in you are likely to call; this means that there is almost 0 chance I have a hand like 72, unless I have suffered a temporary brain seizure.

Hectorjelly

NickyOD wrote:

OMG!! There was NOTHING wrong with his call. $2 in EV is nothing if you factor in other things like how the table has been playng up to this point, when the blinds will go up, how does imposter play when he is chip leader, does he normally do better by playing tighter and waiting for a better oprotunity, where is he sitting in relation to the shortstacks and who has he been getting his chips from, all of which cannot be factored into poklerstove.

All that could be factored in, but $2 of EV is quite a lot, its 1/5 of your starting equity. If you were to make 1 -2$ EV decision every tournament it would be nearly impossible to beat the rake. Its equivalent to starting out with a ROI of - 20%.

NickyOD wrote:

cannot win tournaments by shying away from coinflips.

You know that this is misleading to the point of being incorrect, there are times to take coinflips and times not to, whether you are playing a tournament to win it or not.

Imposter

Hectorjelly wrote:

Why does the logic change because we know each other? I know that you have raised, so that means you have a better than average hand, I also know that if I go all in you are likely to call; this means that there is almost 0 chance I have a hand like 72, unless I have suffered a temporary brain seizure.

The logic changes because the hand range widens or at least removes some of the hands that I really don't want to see you with.

If you know that if you go all-in that i'm likely to call, how can you justify your play?

I like your use of almost above

Hectorjelly

Imposter wrote:

If you know that if you go all-in that i'm likely to call, how can you justify your play?

Because if you fold I get a nearly 1k chips for free and if you call then most of the time I have a 55% equity in the pot anyway.

Imposter

Hectorjelly wrote:

Because if you fold I get a nearly 1k chips for free and if you call then most of the time I have a 55% equity in the pot anyway.

How does tournament survival fit into that calculation?

Lafortezza

mmmm boobies...

DeVore

LOL @ LaFortezza

Hector, my main question was "where is his read on you factored into your numbers".
Ie:

However the % suspicsion also has to come into play, no? So if I think he is 90% likely to have an Ak-J, I should fold, if I am 90% sure he has 77-99 I should call. (I havent worked out the maths on this except in my head roughly).

Honest question, I just cant see where you are weighting the maths according to the players belief in what you have. If I consider a range of hands *possible* for you to hold, I certainly dont place an equal % probability on you holding them. Where is that reflected?

DeV.