Shorthanded DONs - Theory

  • Sit and Go
  • SNG
  • Shorthanded
(20 Votes) 7689


Free membership

Join now


In the first part of a Double or Nothing series from Jaroz007, we are initially brought into the DoN mindset with some theory, followed up by some practical examples of ICM calculations.


don ICM series thematic video Theory Video

Comments (20)

newest first
  • EuanM


    Enjoy the Double or Nothing video from Jaroz007!

    Stay tuned for more DoN videos and leave any feedback or questions about the gametype, below, for the coach.
  • osmium


    Hi whats your sample and ROI on these?
    What do you do against Regs that keep calling way too loose?
  • Spinosa


    SH Don + Ongame
  • GrooveSolo


    Nice video!
  • erkyl


    at 7:30 you did not give the name and adress of the ICM calculator you used. I think this is something that must be done each time as:
    1) it allows viewers to use it
    2) this is a free service
  • DannyJQ


    Thank you very much for this video. Im trying to beat the 6max DoNs on Everest and this video helped me a lot. Especially the part when you mentioned the fact that some players dont understand the game and are willing to gamble which i believe is very important to keep in mind. Looking forward to your next videos.
  • Jaroz007


    #5: Yes you are right, I probably just thought most people know how & where to use it.
    The adress for the ICM tool is:

    and the Nash calculator is:
  • Jaroz007


    #2 I have played a couple k (5-6k) 11$ buyins with positive roi. the 22+33s I have a 0% roi over 2k games

    I just push tighter vs. loose regs, thats pretty much it. Not much you can do if they call -EV other than leave out some often dominated hands (small Ax type hands) and trap them with good raise/calling hands.
  • Jaroz007


    # Thank you for the feedback DannyJQ
  • smokinnurse


    maths around the BF
    i think ur not right with 75% equity necessary at the bubble
    it is right, that we need 25% more for $EV as for chipEV
    but we dont need 75% - just if the odds are 1 : 1 - if this is the case, the 75% equity for be $EV ist correct
    but normally this should never be the case and we need less then 75%

    even stacks with 4bb
    the BB has to pay 1bb and the SB 1/2
    CO pushes with 4bb
    so BB has 3 bb left, the pot ist 4 + 0.5 + 1 bb (+ maybe antes, but let's say no antes)
    BB is getting odds ~1,8 : 1 and needs for chipEV ~36% equity
    in my opinion we have to take these 36% and have to add the 25% more for $EV
    result: 61% for be $EV
  • smokinnurse


    *if BF = 3
  • HariRadovan


    I liked the video but also want to point out 3 things:

    1.) 10% Rake for a DON is obscene because is almost impossible to achieve a reasonable winrate playing with such a high rake. You have to get into the money 55% just to brake even.

    2.) Min. 12: The needed Equity for a profitable allin in a 10-man DON is actually 64,3%, not 67%, so there is a difference between 10 and 6-max-DONs, but the difference is relatively small.

    3.) Min. 25: This is a classic example where you should deviate from Nash. As the big blind in this example you should call 100% of your hands, whereas Nash suggests calling "only" 65%. The problem is that by folding your BB to a push you loose all of your foldequity (a concept that ICM-based-programs don't take into account). As a result of that the SB should push a lot tighter than nash suggests and also the other 2 players should push a little tighter.
  • Rolo23


    Good content, maybe work a little bit on your english to make it even better!
  • Jeniman


    Dons are fun to play but the rake will get you 10% is to much.
    However fish dont care about the rake so it should be fishy.
  • LongAgo


    Very good part one and looking forward for the next ones. I have also tried to find a 6max hyper satellite(2seats) video as the high blind effect is remarkable factor at those. Does anybody know is there any available?
  • Jaroz007


    #10 You are of course right that 75% Equity is only correct for deep stack allins with >10bb where odds don't matter much.
    But it is definitely not true that you should add 25% to your needed Equity after calculating odds. With 4bb Stacks if the CO shoves 100% we can only call 6,6% from Nash (77+, ATs+, AQo+) which has a total EQ of 71% vs an any2 range.
    Now this is the mathematical solution, of course you can call a little wider considering what was mentioned in comment #12 - that we loose Foldequity when giving up our BB. So with 4bb stacks you have to move away from Nash/ICM to a certain degree.
    Nut still you should never consider calling a range that has 61% EQ vs any2 in this situation that would be terribly -EV.
  • smokinnurse


    @"But it is definitely not true that you should add 25% to your needed Equity after calculating odds ..."

    depends on the BF
    if BF = 3 then +25%
    if BF > 3 then >+25%

    it was just an example for BF = 3
    i think nomally the BF on the bubble is much higher than 3
    and of course the nash range for calling much tighter
  • Jaroz007


    #12 I do appreciate the comment and agree with all your points but just want to answer:

    1) On Pokerstrategy there are some sites with pretty good Rakeback deals available, which is esssential for these games.
    2) You are right of course the Equity is 64,3% for FR DoNs. I don't know why I used the wrong number.
    3) I do agree that you have to deviate from Nash. But I disagree that calling 100% in the BB is correct, especially because the CO, BU and SB are usually tighter than Nash. I think there are better EV spots with the bottom 20-25% of or range.

    And thx @ all for the positive feedback
  • strannikspb


    # 13, no, no! Maybe the author's English is not very good for an Englishman, but for others it's very very understandable!
  • QuadzNoGood


    Thanks !! :)