PS 18-man sng wizard help needed

13.05.2012, 21:23 0

Hello there.

I have some problems analyzing 18-man turbo sngs (particularly on the first table) on PS
Here is the situation that confuses me and does not represent the reality (I have loads of similar examples):

Even though it is not a final table sng wizard treats this as it is, because it suggests calling me the villain with super tight range JJ+ ( which would be correct if it was a final table bubble where 5 players are left, however this is not the case )

Here are the Nash Eq-m ranges (in line with the above mentioned because doesn't represent reality and suggests super tight calling ranges) :

http://www.holdemresources.net/hr/sngs/icmcalculator.html?action=calculate&bb=200&sb=100&ante=0&structure=0.4%2C0.3%2C0.2%2C0.1&s1=1180&s2=1100&s3=1195&s4=6204&s5=2351&s6=&s7=&s8=&s9=

So, my question is - how do I analyze this situation?? Consequently, I think that because sng wizard treats this as a final table bubble, then the analysis of 6/7/8/9 handed push/fold in the first table of the 18-man sng is also incorrect, based on the same assumption.

What should I do ??

Would appreciate your advices.

Reply

Quote

4 replies

gavinonymous

Joined: 18.12.2008

Posts: 1,143

13.05.2012, 21:34 0

Chip EV mode alone was too loose for me, so I tried creating tourney custom tourney structures that more reflected getting closer to the bubble.. I blogged about it a while ago. the results are somewhere in between chip EV and $EV mode, and I adjust the structure depending on how many players at the table - basically it assumes one player doesn't get paid while the rest get the same, except one winner.. it's a bit better, but not perfect IMO.

'The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made.'

Reply

Quote

_Anonymous_

14.05.2012, 02:30 0

Thanks for the response!

Yeah, it is definitely too loose and would fit maybe a 180-man or an mtt format.

That's an interesting thing about custom structure, could i have a link on that if you have it ?:)

Reply

Quote

dangermowse

Joined: 24.10.2010

Posts: 1,188

14.05.2012, 06:20 0

First off, it's latenthreat shoving. Call with KQo let alone KQs.

I really don't think there's any difference in what level of cev-ness we use in this spot compared to any stage at all of a 45, 180 or 54634563456456 man MTT. You're still a mile off the bubble and need to double up and them some to be getting there. That's not to say playing to cev is correct, or optimal, at any stage of any tourney either. All in all it's best to err on the tighter side, despite many medicore regs trying to preach to shove insanely wide.

Reply

Quote

_Anonymous_

25.05.2012, 04:44 0

First table = only chipEV(+edge)

Reply

Quote