# Article questions

• Bronze
Joined: 18.07.2008

And two parts of it puzzled me a little.

"We are in the beginning of a 22\$ sit and go. Unfortunately we were too lazy to do any table selection, which is why we've ended-up with some decent players at our table"

Now from what I understand from playing poker in bricks and mortar, table selection is done by first observing a table first before deciding whether or not to sit at it.

How does this apply to SnGs where you cannot take the seat during the game and so cannot observe the table in action first?

Also this puzzled me:

"However, because fish also make very bad calls, a push has little value because some fish might think "he has nothing" and that "he only wants to represent the flush so I'll go ahead and call him with my top or middle pair"."

The scenario is with a top pair and top kicker. If the fish is going to call anyway why would a push here not be the right move? The quote seems to suggest that the fish might call with a weak hand, isn't that a good thing?
• 3 replies
• Bronze
Joined: 06.03.2008
Hi douglasjastewart,

Refering to your table selection question, when you play a site like titan, the SnG's take so long to fill up, therefore if we see alot of regulars we may think about withdrawing from that specific SnG. If you play stars, at the lower limits you wont have played with alot of the players before, and the tables fill up so quick, so table selection is much harder.

Refering to the hand you also mentioned (2.3), I think the article is assuming that villain will bluff bet at the pot, and there is more value playing this way. I personally dont mind betting out on the river, depending on what buyin it is. We need to think, if we bet out what hands will call us and what hands will fold. IMO we cant make a better hand fold, but we may get a worse hand to call, and extract abit of value. If you are still unsure maybe you could post a similar hand of your own in the sample Hands section.

Greetings,
Stiev
• Bronze
Joined: 02.03.2008
I have a question from the same article. In assignment 2.1 it sais:

"So far we have invested 160 chips and have gotten a lot of action. We don't know whether UTG is holding AA or KK or whether a guy in a later position is trying to be tricky while holding these kinds of hands as well. We don't want to get in big trouble here, which is why we have an easy fold. It would be a lot different if we had QQ in this position."

I don't understand why would it be a lot different if we had QQ. If we put one of the players on AA or KK our equity doesn't change very much if we have QQ (it's even a bit worse).

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 81.526% 80.99% 00.54% 99843456 666846.00 { KK+ }
Hand 1: 18.474% 17.93% 00.54% 22108740 666846.00 { AKo }

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 81.741% 81.52% 00.22% 100497852 277182.00 { KK+ }
Hand 1: 18.259% 18.03% 00.22% 22233672 277182.00 { QQ }
• Bronze
Joined: 06.03.2008

It really depends on what buyin the SnG is imo. You are working the equity out against one villain, wheras there is still another 2 villians to act after you in the hand. This will change our equity alot if we have more callers. Also to make an even more accurate evaluation, we need to put them guys on a range, and we cant really do that as we dont have stats.

Those hands are there to discuss.

IMO a limp/raise from UTG is often a big pair. If he has a little pair, we are flipping. If he has a weaker ace, I think he'd fold. If he has KK,AA he dominates us. So at best we are in a flip.

If we hold QQ in the same position. We dominate pocket pairs. We flip againt AK, and we are domminated by KK and AA.

So QQ is a way better hand in this spot. I have made my statements based on being HU with the UTG, but with 2 people still to act, AK is even more risky.

Hope this kinda helps,
Stiev