Equilibrium plays with M<8

    • Murn90
      Murn90
      Bronze
      Joined: 23.09.2010 Posts: 71
      Hey all.
      In the book "Kill Everyone" there is a chapter with equilibrium plays, and on page 97 in revised version there is a chart for pushing with M<8 from all positions.
      My question, is it enough to push this, or do we deviate from equilibrium plays?

      It's all far from money and with antes in play.
      M BU CO MP3 MP2 MP1 UTG+2 UTG+1 UTG
      8 32% 23% 16% 13% 11% 8% 8% 8%
      7 32% 24% 18% 15% 12% 10% 8% 8%
      6 33% 27% 21% 17% 14% 12% 10% 8%
      5 35% 29% 23% 20% 16% 14% 12% 11%
      4 39% 31% 27% 22% 19% 15% 14% 13%
      3 43% 34% 30% 26% 23% 19% 16% 15%

      I really would like some opinions on this, is it to tight or to loose?
  • 5 replies
    • Tiltberger
      Tiltberger
      Bronze
      Joined: 23.06.2005 Posts: 28,151
      in the end its def. to tight. If i give the equilator a 15% range its 55+
      and with an m of 3 i def. push 22+ from utg
    • Murn90
      Murn90
      Bronze
      Joined: 23.09.2010 Posts: 71
      Okay, noted. But what would your ranges be?
      I mean in 180 man turbos people know you are pushing kind of light, and even fish give you little respect, so we need to somewhat tight.
    • pzhon
      pzhon
      Bronze
      Joined: 17.06.2010 Posts: 1,151
      Originally posted by seeberger
      in the end its def. to tight. If i give the equilator a 15% range its 55+
      and with an m of 3 i def. push 22+ from utg
      I think that touches on a separate issue, -EV pushes. When you are about to hit the blinds, folding is not worth as much as it appears because your stack is effectively reduced by the chance of having your blinds stolen. This means you can make some profitable pushes which lose chips on average (or which lose ICM equity when you get to the final table). These pushes are not anticipated by the Nash equilibrium calculations.

      If you steal the blinds or double up or only get called by someone you cover, you still have to post the big blind. You only save posting the big blind if you get called and bust out. Further, posting the big blind is not as bad as many players fear. You can get a walk. You can find AA in the big blind. You can find a hand which gives you a good odds call. You can see a free flop and hit it or find a good bluffing opportunity. In theory, if players are pushing with the Nash ranges on you, then with a full 9-handed table with M=4 you lose about 2/3 of the big blind. However, in practice you may lose less as players push less often than they should, and once you have paid the blinds, you get many cheap hands where you expect to gain chips. Having 5.34 big blinds on average in the small blind is worth more than having 5.34 big blinds in middle position.

      If you think that hitting the blinds costs about 1/2 of a big blind, and you think you will bust out about 25% of the time when you push, then you might want to make pushes UTG which lose up to 1/8 of a big blind. I think many of the -EV pushes people recommend lose much more than that.
    • pzhon
      pzhon
      Bronze
      Joined: 17.06.2010 Posts: 1,151
      In many levels, players tend to push and call tighter than the Nash equilibriums. The right response to this is to push wider than the Nash equilibrium, adding more semibluffing hands, and to call tighter. However, you should check that your opponents really seem to be calling tighter on average. You can do this with some database programs.

      Definitely try to watch your image. If you have pushed the last 3 hands, then players who ordinarily fold a lot because they put you on a tight range will call quite loosely. Then you have to drop some of the weaker semibluffs from your range.
    • Tiltberger
      Tiltberger
      Bronze
      Joined: 23.06.2005 Posts: 28,151
      yeah i totally agree with you that with short Ms like 2 or 3 any2pushing is def. -ev.
      Thank you pzhon for your very good explanation.