$100 6-Max SNG Reviews - Examining Player Reads

  • Sit and Go
  • SNG
  • $105 - $200
  • Shorthanded
(5 Votes) 9919


Free membership

Join now


Faarcyde looks at in game reads again whilst reviewing 2 $100 6max sngs.


hand history review Session Review

Comments (14)

newest first
  • fitzinator18


    The latest from Faarcyde, enjoy!

    As always please leave suggestions and feedback below!
  • tomasa82


    So good
  • ghaleon


    16:45 33: Shoving would be best imo.

    29:20 KTo: What range would you induce versus him? How about versus spewy kind of reg who can be shoving lot of hands?
  • Wombat


    As always great video ;)

    11:11 limping 78s is really cool in tearms of what you said about this big stack but for me its really hard to understand this call. In my opinion this hand doesn't hit really well (versus an aggresive player we will fold a lot on flop) and there is an ICM involved in this spot as well. For me its call to a bet not bigger than ~180. Can you tell what biggest bet size would you call there and why ?
  • faarcyde


    @Ghaleon: 55+, A8o+, KQo+ as a standard..
  • faarcyde


    @Wombat: I think we can call against that caliber of player up to about 250. Yes, he will be cont. betting a lot but that also works in our favor in an odd way with the stack sizes because he commits himself so much as a 2:1 dog.
  • faarcyde


    @tomasa82: Thank you sir!
  • ByronJacobs


    Hi faarcyde, Nice video. I'm totally puzzled by the hand at 11:40 (87s). The stack size ratio is effectively 4:1:1 at this point and in the 65:35 payout you are MASSIVELY risk averse against the big stack. If you run the ICM it shows you go from about 23% (of prize pool) to about 35% if you win an all-in versus the big stack. So, you need odds of 66% in an all-in versus the big stack just to make a break-even play.

    Even when you hit the perfect flop (as you do) you are still only break-even (in ICM terms) when you get the money all-in against a villain range of about 17% (roughly 66+, A8+ most broadways).
  • Tim64


    Thanks faarcyde - very nice to see myself "up in lights"!

    Some comments on the first half of the hand history, where I was involved. I think it's a very interesting h/h b/c we both -correctly - realised ingame that our value was comming from Bowler1974. That informed most of our respective strategies.

    For example, it made you decide to limp/call 78s on BU for 1/5 of your stack and made me decide to open T8o for 1/8 of my stack on the BU. I think both decisions are close, but probably we can't say one is good and the other bad (I think you said you disliked the raise b/c the hand "doesn't play well enough 20bb" as a less that 50th percentile hand. In both cases, taking these "thin" spots allowed us to double up vs the fish.

    16:00 KTo vs K9o, bvb. As above, my feeling is that there is marginal value playing a big pot oop vs you with a non-nut hand. Clearly I missed value vs your actual hand, but I think the turn check is not too bad. Esp. considering gameflow where I previously checked K high bvb and you didn't bet, I expected you to bet this turn often with most of your flop floating range (since you won't want to repeat the previous 'mistake). Since I didn't barrel K high, barreling now looks pretty strong imo, and I expect to get too many folds (and to be up against KQ/KJ if the turn gets bet/called). Once you ch/b turn, river is almost always a vbet but when the flop draw completes it's harder to do so. Again, I think playing a medium sized pot oop vs a good reg is ok, since I expect my value to come from the fish.

    19:00 88 vs A7o. Agreed; overall I don't like my reshove. Once more, though, I put you on a wider range b/c I felt you would still try to enter pots with the fish, having position. So, having an Ace blocker as backup, I felt you had a r/f range pre (albeit somewhat small).

    Nice review and looking forward to the second half!
  • faarcyde


    @Byron: Thinking about it a lot more I believe you to be right. My assumption of the villain's skill level (or lackthereof) was accurate but still not enough to compensate for the ICM hit.
  • faarcyde


    @Tim64: Thanks for the comments as always. Good analysis all around.
  • faarcyde


    @Tim64: Good commentary as always.
  • Tim64


    21:00 22 vs se7enth Seal, ip. I was thinking about your assessment of the profitaility of the set mine. Strikes me that his barreling off A high is both good and bad for our implieds. On the one hand, we can get "paid off" by both a value range and a bluff range. On the other, we'll never get to showdown without hitting our set. When justifying the call pre you mentioned that he might be the kind of guy who checks down worse hands (which definitely makes calling more attractive). I honestly don't know how to evaluate this spot objectively. I suspect I'd fold pre with the really low pairs but it's surely close.
  • faarcyde


    @Tim: I think it is one or the other - either he is going to be barreling a lot which is good for our implied odds or he will let us check down sometimes. I'm sure I don't need to explain that is the power of position in this case...controlling the pot size to our advantage. When we have to call 100 and he has 1,190 left that gives us 12:1 implied odds which I believe is good enough given ICM considerations, strength of the opponent, etc.