Super Turbo - Pot Odds vs % of stack

    • nibbana
      nibbana
      Bronze
      Joined: 04.12.2009 Posts: 1,186
      6 Max Super Turbo / 300 Starting Stacks / 65%-35% payout

      Blinds 25/50

      CO - 625
      BU - 175
      SB - 600
      BB - 400 (Hero)

      CO Folds, BU Shoves, SB Folds, Hero ??

      If we "know" that the BU is pushing an almost infeasible - 66+,A5s+,K9s+,Q9s+,JTs,ATo+,KTo+,QJo

      The pot offers us 2/1 (175+25+50/125)

      At what point in terms of our stack size, is it prudent to make this call based on Pot Odds alone.

      43s Equity = 33.641%
      Q5s Equity = 33.576%
      K7o Equity = 33.392%

      I feel I'm more prone to calling with the latter 2 hands despite their decreasing equity as some times I can expect to be ahead, is this leaky behaviour or are there other things I need to consider.

      Thanks in advance
  • 9 replies
    • FWKanobi
      FWKanobi
      Bronze
      Joined: 13.02.2009 Posts: 740
      Question is.. why did SB fold ? :D
      if you lose (which is 2 out of 3 times) won't the match be harder for you having the SB abusing you with X2 stack (and button who doubled up)
    • nibbana
      nibbana
      Bronze
      Joined: 04.12.2009 Posts: 1,186
      Originally posted by FWKanobi
      Question is.. why did SB fold ? :D
      if you lose (which is 2 out of 3 times) won't the match be harder for you having the SB abusing you with X2 stack (and button who doubled up)
      This is the essence of the question - with a stack of 400 this leans you towards folding hands with only 33.3% equity, so the question really is - What % of your stack are we willing to go in as a 2/1 dog ?

      For me 175 of 350 seems a fair amount to call off for 33% equity at this point in the game and this is perhaps a leak and I should be more risk averse when I have a medium stack.


      How is your decision effected if the dynamic changes so that:
      :spade: CO 875 BU 175 SB 350 Hero 400
      :spade: CO 500 BU 175 SB 350 Hero 775
    • FWKanobi
      FWKanobi
      Bronze
      Joined: 13.02.2009 Posts: 740
      Nib ,
      Is this Hand good example to what you are trying to ask ?

      Full Tilt Poker $5 + $0.30 Sit&Go (Sup Turbo) No Limit Hold'em Tournament - t25/t50 Blinds - 4 players - View hand 907397
      The Official DeucesCracked.com Hand History Converter

      Hero (BB): t280 5.60 BBs
      CO: t700 14 BBs
      BTN: t210 4.20 BBs
      SB: t610 12.20 BBs

      Pre Flop: (t75) Hero is BB with 6 :club: 8 :club:
      1 fold, BTN raises to t210 all in, SB Fold
      Hero.... ?!
    • nibbana
      nibbana
      Bronze
      Joined: 04.12.2009 Posts: 1,186
      Yea this looks nice and closer to the examples we have disussed on Skype.

      295 pot / 160 to call = 1.84/1

      sngWiz reckons we should be calling if his range is 22.5% or wider
      22+,A2s+,A3o+,KTs+,KJo+,QJs

      Which makes it look like a really easy call vs most opponents but more importantly tells us that sngWiz likes a call for 160/230=69.6% of our stack knowing that we go in as a 3/2 dog vs his range. (Actually worse - 38.2% Equity) Because we are getting better than 3/2 (1.5/1) from the pot, but also because this stack dynamic is telling us we need to catch up.
    • lennonac
      lennonac
      Global
      Joined: 02.05.2009 Posts: 1,421
      In the first example I like a call, mainly because if you lose you still have 4.5bbs which is ample in a sup
    • lessthanthreee
      lessthanthreee
      Bronze
      Joined: 30.06.2009 Posts: 16,300
      his range and pot odds should be your first concern.

      remember that when getting 2:1 a good rule is you can 'call his range' so if he is pushing 50%, you can call 50% regardless of how it will affect your stack.

      in my experience, whether a call will affect the FE of my stack comes more into play during the mid stages because on the bubble there are often enormous equity advantages that come from calling short stacks when you are a mid stack or the other short stack.

      note: i dont play supers, but i think the concept is universally applied and an interesting point for discussion.

      I think the main point is his range combined with the odds and consider any benefits to bubble equities.
    • lennonac
      lennonac
      Global
      Joined: 02.05.2009 Posts: 1,421
      Originally posted by lessthanthreee

      remember that when getting 2:1 a good rule is you can 'call his range' so if he is pushing 50%, you can call 50% regardless of how it will affect your stack.
      .
      100% then yeah :f_biggrin:
    • pzhon
      pzhon
      Bronze
      Joined: 17.06.2010 Posts: 1,151
      Originally posted by lessthanthreee
      remember that when getting 2:1 a good rule is you can 'call his range' so if he is pushing 50%, you can call 50% regardless of how it will affect your stack.
      I have heard this theory before, but I do not agree with it. I think that heuristic is overly general, and even though it is sometimes ok, it fails badly at times. If you are getting 2:1, and cover your opponent, it matters how much you cover your opponent. If you are getting 2:1, and your opponent covers you, then it matters by how much you are covered. The stacks of the players who folded matter, too.


      I think the main point is his range combined with the odds and consider any benefits to bubble equities.
      The method I suggested in my video "Calling All-In" is similar.

      First, estimate the equity you need to break even in chips. Here, you are getting 2:1, so you need 33% to break even in chips.

      Second, estimate your risk-premium. This is something you can practice estimating with ICM Explorer. It mainly depends on the stack sizes and not the blinds. When you cover your opponent by a lot, the risk premium is often low, even on the bubble. My guess was 5%, but ICM Explorer said the risk premium here is 4%.

      The sum of the equity you need to break even in chip (33%) with the risk premium (4%) is the equity you need against your opponent's range to have a profitable call (37%). The following is from ICM Explorer:

      Equity needed: 37.3%
      Chip odds: 33.33%
      Risk premium: 3.97%

      Third, estimate how your hand does against your opponent's range. Equilator is a good tool for asking which hands have 37% equity against the range you suggest for the button: 22+ Ax K9s+ KTo+ QTs+.

      You can try this method again, assuming that you have the big stack of 1275 in the big blind against three stacks of 175. Then you get the same pot odds of 2:1, but you are less risk averse with a risk premium of 0.84%, and so you only need 34.17% equity to call. That lets you call with 22+ Ax K2s K9o Q8s QTo J8s T8s 97s 86s 75s 65s 54s.

      In general, you should prefer the hands with higher equity, even if there is no chance that you are ahead. There is no extra money you get for being ahead. If 87s does 1% better against your opponent's range than K7o (3% better here), then you should tend to call with 87s before you call with K7o even though you will almost never be ahead with 8 high and you will sometimes catch your opponent with hands like Q9s.

      A minor exception when you are very risk averse, unlike here, comes from the fact that K7o or A2o may tie more often, and equity calculators like Equilator or PokerStove undervalue these ties for a risk-averse situation. Here, the ties are unimportant, but there are times when 32% wins plus 6% ties may be as good as 36% wins with no ties instead of only 35% equity computed by PokerStove or Equilator.
    • lennonac
      lennonac
      Global
      Joined: 02.05.2009 Posts: 1,421
      Originally posted by pzhon
      A minor exception when you are very risk averse, unlike here, comes from the fact that K7o or A2o may tie more often, and equity calculators like Equilator or PokerStove undervalue these ties for a risk-averse situation. Here, the ties are unimportant, but there are times when 32% wins plus 6% ties may be as good as 36% wins with no ties instead of only 35% equity computed by PokerStove or Equilator.
      This is a good point that I have never really considered