Party, $2.70 Buy-in (300/600 blinds) No Limit Hold'em Tournament, 5 Players
CO: 4,240 (7.1 bb)
Hero (MP): 4,540 (7.6 bb)
SB: 3,680 (6.1 bb)
BTN: 3,425 (5.7 bb)
BB: 4,115 (6.9 bb)
Preflop: Hero is MP with A
T
Hero raises to 4,540 and is all-in, 2 folds, SB calls 3,380 and is all-in, BB folds
Flop: (7,960) 6 5
6 (2 players, 2 are all-in)
Turn: (7,960) 3 (2 players, 2 are all-in)
River: (7,960) K (2 players, 2 are all-in)
Is this a shove in this spot?
thank you
weird cause sng wiz says I should fold here and only shove 88+, AJs+, AQ+
ICM tax is massive here. QJs,ATo,66 is about the bottom but I'm stretching further than ICM dictates with suited stuff like T9s etc and probably 44 or so. Very sensitive spot though, adjust calling ranges 1% tighter and we can be shoving 10% more hands.
Nash here seems ok
25.2%, 22+ A2s+ A9o+ A5o K4s+ KTo+ Q8s+ QTo+ J9s+ JTo T9s
(i might fold some mid suited kings)
Originally posted by M1rCea
thank youweird cause sng wiz says I should fold here and only shove 88+, AJs+, AQ+
Sng wiz doesn't really say anything on it's own.
Default ranges set by programmers aren't correct in most cases, you should adjust calling and overcalling ranges for villains to get your correct shoving range
Originally posted by Gerovit
Nash here seems ok25.2%, 22+ A2s+ A9o+ A5o K4s+ KTo+ Q8s+ QTo+ J9s+ JTo T9s
(i might fold some mid suited kings)
That range is a leak imo. Highest suited King should be KTs, A5o would be monumentally catastrophic as would QTo.
That range (Nash range) is based on assumption that villains call following ranges (what should be unexploitative, aka Nash ranges):
CO: TT+ AQs+ AQo+
BU: 99+ AJs+ AQo+
SB: 88+ ATs+ AJo+
BB: 77+ ATs+ ATo+
Which seems realistic, given high risk aversion of every villain left to act, or as you mentioned high icm tax.
Even if we give villains on blinds following ranges:
SB: 66+, ATo+, A9s+
BB: 55+, A8o+, A7s+
which look wide and would be a mistake in this stack setup QTo is -0,1%
and A5o -0,13%
and that either doesn't look that terrible
I always like good discussion and don't presume that my opinions are optimal, but using adjectives such as "monumentally catastrophic" without any assumptions from which one derives his opinions, doesn't make arguments stronger at all.
This forum is way, way too nash orientated. Nash schmash in almost every example possible. A5o is way more crushed vs calling ranges than T9s, goes without saying really. And you can add at the very LEAST one more pair to every one of those ranges in a $3 game, probably 4 or 5 extra hands to the blinds aswell.
I agree that Nash is a bit too wide here but still think it's a good baseline to start with.
I believe villains on the $3s on Party aren't folding AJ, 77/66 type hands most of the time. In fact I see many fishy regs on the 22s who still call these hands in this spot.
With that said I'm probably ditching maybe the bottom 5% or so of that pushing 24% range and going in favour of keeping the suited or connected hands as opposed to the lowest aces.
I didn't go into so much details of Nash range, (i just said i would fold mid suited kings) it's not even that important it's only one hand.
For less experienced player it is important to get an idea what range can he shove in similar spots and that its not that tight as he may assume.
Now that we discuss i can say that i agree with folding A5o, mid suited kings and Q8s in favor of connectors.
If you are to start adjusting the ranges you should consider what hands outside of Nash villains are calling with. Most are certainly NOT going to be calling KQo type hands so the low suited kings are actually very strong. Assuming they are calling more low pps and AJo type hands the order of hands I would drop would be: A5o, KTo, QTo, 22, and only then k4-k6s.
If we add more pp's and AJ combos lets say
Co 77+, AJs, AQo
BU 66+, AJs, AJo
SB 55+, ATs, AJo
BB 44+, ATs, ATo
Than K4s to K6s are -0,46% - 0,58%
and KTo is -0,31% and QTo -0,35%
So broadways play better than mid suited kings against that ranges
Interesting discussion u guys got going on here, nice to see so many experienced players exchanging opinions
You are absolutely right about 22, even 33 and 44 we should fold before KTo and QTo
22 - -0,63%
33 - -0,61%
44 - 0,5%
Which is obvious results of adding so much pocket pairs to calling ranges
So order of folding would be
22, A50, K4s, K5s, 33, K6s, 44, Q8s, JTo ...
Makes more sense, thanks. I thought adding AJ would mean we should fold more of the broadway hands but obviously not seeing as that doesn't dominate any of the comboes we want to remove anyway, heh
