Strategy discussion experiment 1.0

that deep and with that hero edge, depending of what hand villain has imo

if he has PP snap all PP> then his PP
if he has Ax snap all Ax>then his Ax
if he has Kx snap all Kx>then his Kx also snap all Ay where y=x

if he has AA easy fold 100% range (except AA of course)
if he has KK call only AA
if he has AK call AA/KK i'll make nitty fold with your skill edge over feild TT-QQ (and not tell anybody what i have)

they main thing here is that u r very deep (asuming that this MTT has great slow strusture) and u can use your stack betetr later the fliping in first level to get 2xavg whne all players r very deep and u cant do very much more with 500bb vs 250bb stack that u can do with 250bb vs 250bb

It`s actually an interesting topic that is very relevant for me when I play MTTs in the early stage, because I have those decisions all the time.

I tend to go for a 51% flip here most of the time, mainly for the following reasons:

1) I usually multi-table MTTs and if I can add another one that fits into my schedule I am fine with it. Don't really mind if the tournment has a unique structure. For me it's all about ROI% and samplesize.

2) In my opinion, having an edge over the field is a not so important reason to look for a better spot. In MTTs you need a lot of luck anyway to survive and build a good stack. I'd rather go for the flip early and either bust or have a bigger stack that helps me to put pressure on everyone and thus increase my chance to go deep in this MTT. This is the main point for me.

I also understand other thoughts, especially the "postflop edge during the early stage"-point Asaban raised. Also a valid point, but this one really depends on the structure. The shorter the blind levels are the more likely it is for me to take the flip.

It's tricky... On one hand you consider yourself to be very good so you can take down your opponents easily, which means there's no need to risk much here. If you play a hand let's say 60 % favourite you might only give them better chances to knock you out than if you had folded and continued to play your game.
On the other hand it would be really good to take control of the table from the very beginning so I guess 70-75 % it's what you need

Originally posted by TheRebuz
that deep and with that hero edge, depending of what hand villain has imo

if he has PP snap all PP> then his PP
if he has Ax snap all Ax>then his Ax
if he has Kx snap all Kx>then his Kx also snap all Ay where y=x

if he has AA easy fold 100% range (except AA of course)
if he has KK call only AA
if he has AK call AA/KK i'll make nitty fold with your skill edge over feild TT-QQ (and not tell anybody what i have)

they main thing here is that u r very deep (asuming that this MTT has great slow strusture) and u can use your stack betetr later the fliping in first level to get 2xavg whne all players r very deep and u cant do very much more with 500bb vs 250bb stack that u can do with 250bb vs 250bb

I agree with TheRebuz. If I know the hole cards of the villian then my guess is that this is the best aproach. I would even go one step further and call with cards where the X in both hands are the same to split the pot (save us a blind). This might be tricky if the villian has suited cards.
On a whole I am not to fond of flipping early tourney.

Originally posted by Salivanth
It's an interesting question. One thing people might say is "Well, I can't take an X% edge, because that won't cover the rake." This is irrelevant: The rake is a sunk cost. You don't have X dollars worth of chips, you have X chips, and have to make your decision in that context.

I think that is a flawed argument,

Say it's a $10+$1 tournament and assume this situation comes up in every tournament, then 50% of the time you have $20 worth of chips and 50% of the time you are out, you paid $22 for $20 worth of chips so you're losing money longterm.

so I say you need 55% equity

By your logic playing a sng where everybody gets put all in every hand is a good idea even if there is rake

Since he exposed his cards I would assume its a live tourney and since we 250bb deep I think its safe to assume its a $1K+. Since the CGs are always pretty juicy when these tournies are going on, I would take >50% equity and gamble. These tournaments are usually pretty top-heavy anyways so I dont think the ICM effect would be that high anyways. I am not a tournament player.

i think the post therebuz made is the one i agree with the most

It's about equity though, not specific hands. Obviously you'd only call KK with AA, but what equity would you call with?

Let's take a different scenario. The opponent shoves and reveals 76s. Which of the following hands do you call with?

55 (50.5% equity)
84o (51.6% equity)
A5o (53% equity)
A5s (56% equity)
K8o (58.8% equity)
66 (60% equity)
A6o (65.5% equity)
A7s (67% equity)
AA (77% equity)

Personally, I'd be calling here with every hand mentioned except for 55.

Bonus question to those of you who say 70%+ is needed: Do you fold KK to a 4-bet early vs. a tight player? Assuming 100bb stacks and a 3-bet sizing of 12bb, when you get 4-bet with a range of QQ+, AK, you have 57% equity. Considering 12bb has already been invested, you need 44% equity to call with neutral EV, which is significantly less of an advantage than what you claim to require. With QQ+, AK, the player is never folding to a 5-bet shove, so you have no FE.

Also, if someone open-shoved 100bb against you with a known range of TT+, AQ+, you only have 67.6% equity there, too, so you must fold KK, even though only 6 out of 57 combos have you beat. Is your edge really that massive?

Originally posted by Salivanth
It's about equity though, not specific hands. Obviously you'd only call KK with AA, but what equity would you call with?

Let's take a different scenario. The opponent shoves and reveals 76s. Which of the following hands do you call with?

55 (50.5% equity)
84o (51.6% equity)
A5o (53% equity)
A5s (56% equity)
K8o (58.8% equity)
66 (60% equity)
A6o (65.5% equity)
A7s (67% equity)
AA (77% equity)

Personally, I'd be calling here with every hand mentioned except for 55.

Bonus question to those of you who say 70%+ is needed: Do you fold KK to a 4-bet early vs. a tight player? Assuming 100bb stacks and a 3-bet sizing of 12bb, when you get 4-bet with a range of QQ+, AK, you have 57% equity. Considering 12bb has already been invested, you need 44% equity to call with neutral EV, which is significantly less of an advantage than what you claim to require. With QQ+, AK, the player is never folding to a 5-bet shove, so you have no FE.

Also, if someone open-shoved 100bb against you with a known range of TT+, AQ+, you only have 67.6% equity there, too, so you must fold KK, even though only 6 out of 57 combos have you beat. Is your edge really that massive?

250 BB dep u can realy abuse/rape people post flop if they r weak players and u have edge in skills => u can bild masive stack without showdown=riskfree

and btw when that said is lol retarded to get it in preflop 250bb deep with KK in MTT

and if oponenet has 76 i'll call 78+/68+/66+ (and fold AQ/AK and stuff)

so imo i neet to have at least 70% EQ to get it in preflop 250bb in MTT

I haven`t read the whole thread, but i would like to make a counter argument:

If your skill-advantage is at 10% you should have 10% more equity then he does when going allin (--> 55% vs 45%). Otherwise you will renounce your advantage and by doing so you will donate him chips that you would be able to generate longterm if you fold. The spot stays +EV but isn't maxEV since you give up the opportunity to create a better spot in the future.

I don`t think this is entirely true. If you pass a 55/45 spot, and you have 1k chips, that`s 100 chips you lose. If this situation happens again next hand, you`re not gonna lose 100 chips, it will be 110. There is a lot of leverage in tournaments. If you have an edge, and your edge with 1k chips is the same with 2k, with 2k chips you have more edge in terms of chips, even if your equity % stays the same. For tournaments, all that matters is equity in terms of chips. Remember, the winner has to win all chips from every stack.

I hope I`ve made myself clear. I'm not saying you`re wrong, and I'm right. While I am absolute sure that this leverage thing is a real thing, I don't really know how big this can influence, to balance the argument of waiting for a better spot.

Originally posted by TheRebuz
so imo i neet to have at least 70% EQ to get it in preflop 250bb in MTT

Why not 80% or even 100%?

Originally posted by savage1981

Originally posted by TheRebuz
so imo i neet to have at least 70% EQ to get it in preflop 250bb in MTT

Why not 80% or even 100%?

I think I only call if I have AA, he shows KK and another guy calls and also shows KK, otherwise you're just gambling with these 80% coinflips

as the old saying goes "poker is a game of big edges"

Originally posted by savage1981

Originally posted by TheRebuz
so imo i neet to have at least 70% EQ to get it in preflop 250bb in MTT

Why not 80% or even 100%?

hmmm... cos we r not nits

I tried not to read too much of this topic yet, just to try and make sure my thoughts wouldn't get affected by other posts

Either way, it obviously depends on a couple of things.

First of all I think the fact that it's a very unique tournament is completely irrelevant. It's unfortunate if you bust out early, but that's all part of the game, whether it's a unique tournament of a daily $2 tournament. Of course, a unique tournament like the Sunday Million gives you the opportunity to really earn a lot of money quickly, but I play such a unique tournament the same way I would play a small-size $2 tournament - namely in such a way that I can win it.

Continuing on that, I think that is by far the best approach to tackling tournaments - playing to win it. Doing that requires me to be aggressive. The more chips I have, the more aggressive I can be, the more I can pound on the shorter stacks, especially in the later stages. As such, I think I would need just a bit more than a coinflip, really. Looking purely from an equity perspecitve, you need to win about 50% of the time to break even (actually a bit less, considering a 3x raise size pre-flop), so it would be a profitable play from the moment I have 51% equity. The early stages of a tournament are more like a cash game than a tournament really. You just don't have to worry about the payout structure yet. Later on in the tournament, you want to pass up some +$EV spots just to be able to look for better +$EV spots (winning 1.5BB is better than winning 0.5BB, for example). This partly comes from the payout structure. When we are 250BB deep in the early stages, I'll take pretty much any edge, even if it's just 1%. It's going to be a profitable play in the long run, so I'll take it.

So for me, I just need 51% equity in the hand.

As I said, there's no need to take the payout structure into account at all, so we're look purely at cEV. Again, I'll take any edge in equity I have, even if it's just 1%. It's quite a lot like a cash game, really. In a cash game, you would try to get all your money in with 51% equity in the hand if you were getting even money. The same applies here.

Again, in my view a tournament being unique is irrelevant, so if you bust you can just fire up another tournament and try again and be very happy with it.

Time to read the other replies now

Well - unfortunately you are not able to rebuy like you can in cashgames. You already payed the rake (10%) as well. 51% is fine in cashgames for sure - in tournaments you have to be a bit more aware of your edge and what it means for tough decisions imo. Sure, if you double up with 51% equity it's fine - but the double stack won't help you immediatly. Your future edge is not affected (at least not crucial) and your stack isn't worth twice as much afterwards.
At the same time a bust out has a big impact for sure - it kicks you out of the tournament leaving you with a future edge of 0 and a stack worth 0$. As you can see: a double up doesn't add as much value as you will lose when being thrown out of the tournament. Why should you do the coinflip nevertheless?

Furthermore you have to think about where your edge lies. Personally I don't think that I am trying to get it in against players, that are much worse then I am, with just 51% equity. I should be able to create way better spots in the future - so why should I gamble without the necessarity?

Regards,
Asaban

What you say is true. Chips gained are worth less than those you lose (especially if you are unfortunate enough to lose all of them). Doubling up early on also doesn't really give you any additional tournament equity. I do not disagree - 51% is probably a bit exaggerated and way too close to a coin flip. However, with just a tad more equity, let's say 55%, I would certainly call.

Though doubling your stack doesn't add to your tournament equity directly, it does help you add to your tournament equity over time. Sure you can build up a stack using your 'edge'. However, this edge is different for everyone. If you are an amazing cash game player and therefore great at playing deep stacked, definitely lay down your hand if you don't have a ridiculous amount of equity in the hand. However, if you are a better late-game player, and have more of an edge when the stacks get relatively short, I don't think you should pass up on opportunities to stack off when you have great equity in the hand (so 55%).

Say villain showed down his 76s for example, which was used in an earlier post. I'd definitely fold stuff like 84o, but K8o is an easy call for me, if my edge is in the later stages. If my edge is in the early stages, I would snap fold it because I'll still have plenty of room to abuse my edge anyway.

Like you said, the edge you have is probably the most determining factor. However, I think it's even more so important to think about what the edge is, and that's completely different for everyone.

Originally posted by TinoLaan
Say villain showed down his 76s for example, which was used in an earlier post. I'd definitely fold stuff like 84o, but K8o is an easy call for me, if my edge is in the later stages. If my edge is in the early stages, I would snap fold it because I'll still have plenty of room to abuse my edge anyway.

Like you said, the edge you have is probably the most determining factor. However, I think it's even more so important to think about what the edge is, and that's completely different for everyone.

+1

This is the most by far I'd say in all ways smart, logic and brief answer agree 100%.

Sorry to bump this thread but Asaban posted it in the coaching today and I wanted to share my opinion.

We need to know two things, what is our ROI in the tournament when we fold, and when we call and win. If we do it this way, we don't need to consider a hero edge, and make unreasonably nitty folds with high edge or call off with ~50% equity with 0 edge when we have an edge in the tournament. None of that. Also I can't stress enough how useless equity is here. We MUST consider win% and tie%, otherwise we will be probably be folding AA vs a range of {AA} because we have only 50% equity.

A few assumptions I will make (without loss of generality).
We raise to 3bb and a non-blind shoves, meaning we need to call 247bb to win 501.5bb, suppose further that no-one will overcall.
Suppose that our estimate of ROI in the tournament is that same 1 hand in as it is 0 hands in (so everyone else's stack will be starting stack).
The fact that this is a rare tournament doesn't really matter here, since we actual ROI in this tournament.

Suppose our ROI in this tournament with 247bb is X
Suppose our ROI in this tournament with 501.5bb is Y
Suppose our ROI in this tournament with 250.75bb is Z (when we chop)
Suppose the buyin to this tournament is B (not that it really matters)
Suppose our win% is W
Suppose our tie% is T
Suppose our lose% is L = 1 - W - T

A note on notation, if for example, our ROI is 15% with 247bb then X will be 1.15. Obviously these numbers are going to be hard to estimate, but I'll save that problem for after.

If we look at our end result, how much money we will net, then we should make this call when

$EV of call > $EV of fold
Y*B*W + Z*B*T - 0*L > X*B
Y*W + Z*T > X                  // factor out B (its positive so no sign switches)

So that's really the answer right there, but obviously we would like it as a number, or simple expression with all known variables.

Assume that R is our ROI with 250bb (so just our ROI in the tournament), and assume that R = X = Z, so the small fluctuations in stack size don't really change our ROI. That simplifies the expression to,

Y*W + Z*T > X
Y*W + R*T > R              // change variables to R
Y*W > R - R*T              // move terms
Y*W > R*(1-T)              // factor
Y*W > R*(W+L)              // 1-T is the same as "not tying", which is W+L
Y*W > R*W+R*L              // expand
Y*W - R*W > R*L            // move terms
(Y-R)*W > R*L              // factor
W/L > R/(Y-R)              // assuming Y>R (ie higher chance to win with more chips)
W/L > 1/(Y/R-1)            // equivilent

So what do we get from this equation? A LOT. Iterestingly, this equation works even if our ROI is negative. Some observations:

1. As Y/R approaches 1, required W/L ratio approaches infinity. Meaning the less we have to gain from a double up, the more often we have to win compared to lose. So if doubling up doesn't change your ROI (Y/R = 1), you simply cannot call (even AA vs AA!).
2. As Y/R approaches 2, meaning we gain a bit more than a buyin (specifically buyin+expected profit) by calling (it will probably never be this high, unless you are a losing player) then we need a W/L ratio of at least 1, which means our has to be at least 50% (since chops are added equally this means that 50% equity always means W=L).
3. Say, for example, or ROI is 15% with a normal stack and 25% with a double stack, then Y/R=1.25/1.15=1.09, so we need W/L > 11.5, we don't even have this with AA vs a random hand (except some hands like A9o etc.)!
4. Say we are a huge losing player, with an ROI of -50% (R=0.5), but with a double stack we are a breakeven player (Y=1) then Y/R=2, and we can call with any hand that has 50%+ equity (see first point).
5. Say we are a losing maniac with an ROI of -50%, but if we double up, we become a profitable player with 50% ROI, then Y/R=3 and W/L>0.5, meaning we can make this call as almost a 2:1 underdog!

So, the real question now is what's Y/R? Do we really gain a whole buyin (+our roi) by winning? This is kind of the same question as what is our hero edge, but now we have a way to calculate it. Actually this question is also pretty similar to whether or not you should take the top-up rebuy in the first hand, or whether or not to addon. I actually haven't seen any real math for this subject, you could do an ICM calcuation for a huge field, but I don't think that will help, because your $ICM is not the same as your ROI. So anyway, the best I can do now is just make a chart. The chart will increase in Y/R, but I'll use a default ROI of 10%, but it doesn't really matter, you can just change these numbers if you want. I'll also use equities instead of win/lose ratio (eq ~= (W/L+1)/(W/L)) .

+-----+------------+-------+--------+
| Y/R | ROI if win |   W/L | Min Eq |
+-----+------------+-------+--------+
| 1.0 |        10% |   inf |   100% |
| 1.1 |        21% | 10.00 |    91% |
| 1.2 |        32% |  5.00 |    83% |
| 1.3 |        43% |  3.33 |    78% |
| 1.4 |        54% |  2.50 |    71% |
| 1.5 |        65% |  2.00 |    67% |
| 1.6 |        76% |  1.67 |    63% |
| 1.7 |        87% |  1.42 |    57% |
| 1.8 |        98% |  1.25 |    56% |
| 1.9 |       109% |  1.11 |    53% |
| 2.0 |       120% |  1.00 |    50% |
+-----+------------+-------+--------+

I'm not going to give a conclusion, I think the chart really says what you should do, it just depends on your ROI and ROI if you win, but I've given a formula, so if you want to figure it out for yourself, you can just use it. The only outstanding question is what is your ROI with a doubled stack.

Hope this helps, and makes sense to you guys! Sorry for the long post, with probably too much math. Hope you enjoyed this as much as I did thinking about it. Thanks Asaban, looking forward to debating this!

PS let me know if I made mistakes, I'm sure there's a ton

Optroot

Thanks for your posting. Very interesting as far as I could see. Unfortunately I didn't have the time to get into detail since I will have some exams this week (and the weeks after ). I will for sure find the time to have a look at your posting again though.

I will obviously provide my thoughts on it as well.

I would like to add, that the thread was brought up by me, because we had a very similar discussion in the coaching (considering edge as part of our decision making process). Since the topic itself is kinda timeless I don't think it should be a big problem anyways

Please feel free to continue the discussion that we once started. The more oppinions we have the more interesting it gets.

Regards,
Asaban

Originally posted by Asaban
Hey folks,

Since the traffic is kinda low currently (which makes me sad ), I will try to initiate some discussion. It's just an experiment and I don't know if it works at all or if you are interested in it. If it is successful I will start some more discussions in the future.
Since I don't want the general feedback itself in this thread (it would interrupt the discussion) I will open up some feedback thread as well (Click: Feedbackthread).

The origins

There is a question which led to a lengthy discussion in the german forums. The discussion hasn't ended yet and I am not sure about the outcomes. It was originally initiated by pokerstrategy-member Palmero92 and I will try to transfer some of the ideas to the english forums. Hopefully we will have some interesting new perspectives and maybe the discussion will take a very different path with differing results. I am very interested in your opinions and looking forward for a good strategy discussion.

No mather if you are beginner or expert - everybody can take part and post his assumptions and ideas. The more, the better. Please note that you should always try to give us some reasons for your answer (even if it is as easy as "I guessed").

Since I don't want an exact copy of the german thread, I will vary some points and try to create a more practical and easier to understand szenario, while adding some details here and there at the same time.

The szenario

You are sitting in a tournament which suits your bankroll management (you are not scared of money). The tournament has a big field size (>1k players). You consider yourself being a very good player having an edge over most of your opponents. You are amongst the top 10% players in the event.

All players have their starting stack. If you bust you would be able to start another tournament immediatly. Unfortunately the tournament you are currently playing is very unique and won't be available for quite some time if you bust out. You won't be able to re-entry.

The tournament is starting at the very moment (no bubble factors).

The first hand is dealt. You open raise your very good hand and all players fold to the big blind. The big blind pushes allin for 250BB. Due to a misinterpretation of your action he reveals his hand (just for the story - it shouldn't mather for the discussion if we are playing live or online). Now you know exactly how much equity you have against his hand and are able to decide if you want to call.

The questions

How much equity would you want to have in this situation and why?

Take the important factors into account! (they are marked)

Which factors do you consider being most important for your decision and why?

The ultimate goal

You may ask yourself: Why does this german guy ask silly questions like this?

Good question!

The interesting thing about our objective is, that you will have to think about factors that influence your own play and if you take them into account appropriatly. Which factors do have an influence on your playstyle without being mathematically quantifiable?
How important are these factors?
In the end you will learn something about yourself, your self-assesment and your ability to take factors into account that aren't quantifiable. At least that is what i am hoping for ♦

Hopefully all paragraphs are understandable - my english isn't as perfect as I wish it was. If you have further questions please feel free to ask.

I will obviously state my own assumtions later on. For the beginning I just want to guide the discussion.

Regards,
Asaban

Hi everybody,

I would like to say my thought on this.
But it will be tricky due to my bad English, I'm sorry about that.

I believe there isn't a solution that apply to every one, bc plays varies depending on the players that does the play not just on the opponents, so here I will just try to give my personal opinion.

In this situation I would need to make a distinction between live tournament and on-line ones. Even if you said that this doesn't matter for the discussion, to decide about this hand, I need to know what unique stands for you.
If it means a unique live tournament as it could be a WSOP/WPT/EPT or if it means a Sunday Million on Pokerstars.

The main differences imo are:
1) We have a SM every week on pokerstars, and in a year we can make 52 of them, and we are not considering the other big MTTs on pokerstars and other pokerrooms. So if you consider unique the SM you actually should do that as well for other MTTs with similar price pool and structure. Anyway, my point is how long would take you to arrive to those number of live main events? If you just consider only one of them-as the main of WSOP- you probably never reach that number. This, imo, lowers the importance of math, in the very early stage, bc it wont be such a repeated situation as in a on-line MTT where we gonna play the same hand over and over.

2)I guess for every player in the poker community it's pretty different to became SM winner or WPT champion. even if this is just an assumption that I make bc of what I feel, but it's pretty reasonable, imo. And you could even take into account the TV final table that would expose you to great visibility and it could give you the possibility of getting a great deal with a sponsor!

3)In a live tournament your edge should be more important, as you have more information to read your opponents, and mainly the bad players (since there are physical tells). So if you really can quantify your edge over the field, a 10% edge over 1000 players would be a nice advantage, statistically sitting 0,9 very good player at each table, even if is not sure you will be able to use your edge later on in the tournament (due to coolers or an unfortunate table selection with more good players for example). In an on-line tournament this would be also true, but bc of the live effect that most of bad players feel, imo you will find more spots to use your edge, especially post flop, during the early stage. This change a little in on-line MTTs having the possibility to kill the variance with the volume, so this could be working in favor of strategies were a pure mathematical approach it would never be -ev on a large samples(even if this doesn't mean is the best play available, but at least it would be profitable).

That said, I need an equity higher then 75% in a live main event. This sounds pretty nitty, but I would say even more: I wouldn't be happy anyway to risk all my 250BB so early with a 25% of loosing, but imo is too big of an edge to throw away.

In an on-line MTT I think I would happily go in with 70%, probably even with a 65% (in this case with the same feeling I had about the 75% in the live-not happy!)

I don't believe that doubling up gives you a huge advantage, but that change depending on your strategy.
-If you are a solid player early and opening up on late stage and bubble, I don't think having 500BB is gonna change much in your strategy, if not in coolers were you have the nuts at the river vs an opponent with double stack as well having a second nuts and willing to go broke (but I guess this doesn't happen often enough ♠_cry: ).
-If you are very aggressive early on and always fighting for every hand you think is slightly +ev, then to have 500BB could make things easier, but even then it wont give you a huge advantage cause 250BB still a great number, and if you are good with this strategy you actually can build a big stack just with you aggressive strategy mixed with your 10% edge over the field.
So I wouldn't care to much to double up in an on-line or live tournament (even if live could be cool to have a big stack in front of you and more important threatening for other players).

This would be a very interesting spot to find yourself in, especially if the big blind has exposed his hole cards.. ♦

I had fun thinking about this, was a nice exercise!

I hope anyone feels free to comment and correct my thought process.

I will read the other replies and commenting them in the next days, if there is something to comment!

P.s. It would be interesting to analyse the same situation but assuming your 10% edge is not over the field but just over the table (imo easier to assume then a 10% over a 1000 players)! I believe it would change a little bit, making more profitable to risk less to stay as long as possible on that table.

Marce