http://www.pokerhandreplays.com/view.php/id/6874977
So I don't remember anything about this hand, and I don't feel like looking through my DB for it again - I don't know the icm details, so this is purely a chipev calculation. No reads on anyone.
- utg raises 2x with 58bb.
- utg+1 3b shoves for 12bb.
Fold, Fold
We have 99 in the hijack, we have 64bb.
--------------
So this is a pretty nasty spot first of all. I think we made a mistake here. If utg wasn't involved and we were just calling utg+1's 12bb shove, I'd have no problem with this play. But if we give utg an 8% range (AJs+, AJo+, 66+) which I think is pretty reasonable, and utg+1 a 10% range (A8s+, ATo+, 55+, KQs), (these are default ranges from icmizer btw), then this is a losing play - we should be calling with TT+, AKs+.
Even if we widen the ranges to 9.5% for utg and 11% for utg+1, it is still a losing play according to icmizer.
---------------
Why is it a bad play?
- because vs. a narrow utg open, we aren't doing so well. We are flipping against ATs+, and AQo+, and we're dominated by any of his pocket pairs except for maybe 88.
- because he can still deny us the opportunity to realize our equity. I imagine we are folding if he shoves preflop, and he can certainly do this with his AXs.
----------------
A friend also pointed out that I can cbet less (30% of pot) here because of the small effective stacks behind, and fold to a shove. I haven't considered this option but it seems good. The second reason is because it is a protected pot (when one player is already all in). So as my friend put it, if he's bluffing with ace high, he probably won't even win the sidepot vs the shortie, so denying me my equity doesn't do much. "it makes it much less interesting to bluff you out of the pot, so you can make it really small"
No comments:
Post a Comment