SNGPT says these pushes are good but... ($6.50 turbo)

[taipan168]

SNGPT says that both of these are good pushes, but are there other considerations? With a healthy stack do I need to take a risk that somebody wakes up with a big hand or should I wait and try to outplay these guys elsewhere? Are my calling ranges out?

Hand 1 - SB had a somewhat loose calling range (a 35/4 - had called all-ins with A-rag before) but the BB was a tight aggressive (13/10). With blinds this big is raising to 2.5-3x BB an option rather than pushing?

If I set SB's calling range to 22+,A2s+,A3o+,KTs+,KJo+,QJs and BB's to 44+,A7s+,A9o+,KJs+, this is +0.6% EV. Do you take this edge?

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t600 (3 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)

BB (t4365)
Hero (t5380)
SB (t3755)

Preflop: Hero is Button with 7, K.
Hero raises to t5330

Hand 2 - SB is a TAgg (21/11) and BB was a TAgg that had been LAgging it up once blinds got big.

If I set both calling ranges to 44+,A7s+,A9o+,KJs+, it is +0.7%. Push?

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t400 (4 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)

SB (t2075)
BB (t3310)
UTG (t4275)
Hero (t3840)

Preflop: Hero is Button with A, 3.
1 fold, Hero raises to t3815

[JeffreyGB]

Bah! Crazy math.

Call me reckless but I'll just keep beating the $55's and $109's with 20% ROI and not paying attention to numbers like these...

Yes, I like both of these pushes at the right table. Assuming players aren't looking for a reason to play back at you (aka your ranges are correct), both seem just this side of questionable. Given that you outstack each time, I like.

[vqc]

0.6% $EV is a pretty large sum of money... its 5.40 for everytime u make this push if ur at the 109s
i know ur a really good winning player JGB, but if ur pwing so hard already im sure u could eeg out even more ROI if u did pay attention to "numbers like these"

[vqc]

just to add on
im sure u tend to make these pushes quite naturally, just a innate tendency
for the rest of us its nice to see a number quantification

[JeffreyGB]

The thing about, VQC, is that the numbers are so specific. Mess the calling ranges around a little bit and they change completely. In a vacuum then, we can assign calling ranges to get whatever result we want. In actual play, we need to know something about the actual people we're playing. Their actual calling ranges make the difference here, and scholastic estimation is just a tad better than mental masturbation on that front if you don't have the rest of the tournament fresh in your mind.