I've been thinking about that AK bubble hand that got people so animated and wondered if it was possible to get closer to the mathematical assessment of how good or bad calling it off is.
Here is the hand again:
Grabbed by Holdem Manager
NL Holdem $100(BB) Replayer
SB ($616)
BB ($4,720)
Hero ($3,664)
Dealt to Hero A♣ K♦
Hero raises to $200, fold, BB raises to $4,720 (AI), Hero calls $3,464 (AI)
Using ICM Explorer, we can find that we need 74.76% equity vs marginal resteals in order to induce action given the ICM tax. We won't have that equity against any reasteal range (only individual hands such as K2o), therefore we should not be inducing here. (i.e. we should be raise/folding or limping). Note that open folding is probably just bad (even if we think BB reasteals loosely) because we don't give ourselves a chance to pick up SB's remaining chips when gets it in with AJ or w/e.
Now let's flesh that out with some other calculations. Let's make the assumption villain is restealing ATC here. That is the equivalent of our open shoving and getting called by the BB with ATC. SnG Wizard tells us this is bad for us to the tune of -4.80 diff (i.e. we lose 4.8% of a buyin, or $4.80).
However, let's look what happens when we adjust his range so that it's closer to a likely resteal range. Given the hand villain shows up with I think it's reasonable to assume he's not actually re-stealing ATC here. The hand he shows up with (JKs) is one that 'looks nice' and has a decent amount of equity against many hands I might open and blockers to some big hands. So let's give him 20.3%. (Note that reducing this to 13% or so doesn't change the outcome much). Now, the open shove it still bad but it's much less so: -0.47 ($0.47).
Finally, let's change his range yet again, to make it even more realistic by taking out a few of the monster hands we assume aren't in his 35bb+ resteal shove range, i.e. QQ/KK/AA (because we assume he will 3b them normally, for value and to induce).
Then what we see is that the shove is still bad but now it's only -0.14. Now it becomes easier to justify calling it off because we can argue (strongly, imo) that we will recover that $0.14-$0.47 in future game equity vs this opponent, due to our image and his recalled experience of this hand.
Incidentally, from villain's point of view - again in a vacuum - his reasteal is fine if I'm opening 30% here and only calling 2.1% (AKs+). However, if he understands that I should realise I need to tighten up my opening range significantly in this spot in order not to get abused - let's say to something like 10% - then his shove is bad (-0.64).
I think that's enough for now. Tldr: the call off is indeed (immediately) bad but it's not that bad and is probably justifiable from a dynamic/future game equity pov.
@grindtolive, What can I say but... thanks!
I'm hoping my first video will be out this week, so keep your eyes peeled. I hope you understand that I don't necessarily want to publish my screen name here. However I don't mind individuals asking me. You can always PM me and see if I'm feeling talkative...
I honestly can't give you an hourly for $15s on Stars. I play them as part of sets with many other different buyins at varying speeds and I only have a tiny sample of 285 games. However, for that small sample of normal speed games, I'm running at 13.1% EV ROI.
). You reminded him it is a game with a luck element. You took him out of his comfort zone as you didn't behave as you were supposed to. I doubt he will feel totally in control next time he plays you. But again, I microthink so this might change as I grow up 
AMaA: The Good Life
(even if it is not exactly the same position, I think the ideas behind are very close to these ones)
