make your money on the bubble

[gabe]

theses are 5 consecutive hands:

thoughts? good/bad?

***** Hand History for Game 2972695976 *****
300/600 Tourney Texas Hold'em Game Table (NL) (Tournament 17095588) - Thu Nov 03 01:48:23 EST 2005
Table Table 68031 (Real Money) -- Seat 4 is the button
Total number of players : 4
Seat 1: Deceptikon (3495)
Seat 3: grizabe (3890)
Seat 4: empireny (747)
Seat 10: accentprpl5 (1868)
accentprpl5 posts small blind (150)
Deceptikon posts big blind (300)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to grizabe [ Ts, 9s ]
grizabe raises (3890) to 3890
grizabe is all-In.
empireny folds.
accentprpl5 folds.
Deceptikon folds.
Creating Main Pot with $4340 with grizabe
** Summary **
Main Pot: 4340
Deceptikon balance 3195, lost 300 (folded)
grizabe balance 4340, bet 3890, collected 4340, net +450
empireny balance 747, didn't bet (folded)
accentprpl5 balance 1718, lost 150 (folded)


***** Hand History for Game 2972697070 *****
300/600 Tourney Texas Hold'em Game Table (NL) (Tournament 17095588) - Thu Nov 03 01:48:40 EST 2005
Table Table 68031 (Real Money) -- Seat 10 is the button
Total number of players : 4
Seat 1: Deceptikon (3195)
Seat 3: grizabe (4340)
Seat 4: empireny (747)
Seat 10: accentprpl5 (1718)
Deceptikon posts small blind (150)
grizabe posts big blind (300)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to grizabe [ 8d, 3h ]
empireny folds.
accentprpl5 folds.
Deceptikon folds.
** Summary **
Main Pot: 450
Deceptikon balance 3045, lost 150 (folded)
grizabe balance 4490, bet 300, collected 450, net +150
empireny balance 747, didn't bet (folded)
accentprpl5 balance 1718, didn't bet (folded)

fold to keep the shorty alive. i would actually fold AA here.

***** Hand History for Game 2972697794 *****
300/600 Tourney Texas Hold'em Game Table (NL) (Tournament 17095588) - Thu Nov 03 01:48:51 EST 2005
Table Table 68031 (Real Money) -- Seat 1 is the button
Total number of players : 4
Seat 1: Deceptikon (3045)
Seat 3: grizabe (4490)
Seat 4: empireny (747)
Seat 10: accentprpl5 (1718)
grizabe posts small blind (150)
empireny posts big blind (300)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to grizabe [ Kh, 9s ]
accentprpl5 folds.
Deceptikon folds.
grizabe folds.
** Summary **
Main Pot: 450
Deceptikon balance 3045, didn't bet (folded)
grizabe balance 4340, lost 150 (folded)
empireny balance 897, bet 300, collected 450, net +150
accentprpl5 balance 1718, didn't bet (folded)

***** Hand History for Game 2972698445 *****
300/600 Tourney Texas Hold'em Game Table (NL) (Tournament 17095588) - Thu Nov 03 01:49:02 EST 2005
Table Table 68031 (Real Money) -- Seat 3 is the button
Total number of players : 4
Seat 1: Deceptikon (3045)
Seat 3: grizabe (4340)
Seat 4: empireny (897)
Seat 10: accentprpl5 (1718)
empireny posts small blind (150)
accentprpl5 posts big blind (300)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to grizabe [ 3c, 8h ]
Deceptikon folds.
grizabe raises (4340) to 4340
grizabe is all-In.
empireny folds.
accentprpl5 folds.
Creating Main Pot with $4790 with grizabe
** Summary **
Main Pot: 4790
Deceptikon balance 3045, didn't bet (folded)
grizabe balance 4790, bet 4340, collected 4790, net +450
empireny balance 747, lost 150 (folded)
accentprpl5 balance 1418, lost 300 (folded)

***** Hand History for Game 2972699650 *****
300/600 Tourney Texas Hold'em Game Table (NL) (Tournament 17095588) - Thu Nov 03 01:49:20 EST 2005
Table Table 68031 (Real Money) -- Seat 4 is the button
Total number of players : 4
Seat 1: Deceptikon (3045)
Seat 3: grizabe (4790)
Seat 4: empireny (747)
Seat 10: accentprpl5 (1418)
accentprpl5 posts small blind (150)
Deceptikon posts big blind (300)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to grizabe [ 2h, 4c ]
grizabe raises (4790) to 4790
grizabe is all-In.
empireny folds.
accentprpl5 folds.
Deceptikon folds.
Creating Main Pot with $5240 with grizabe
** Summary **
Main Pot: 5240
Deceptikon balance 2745, lost 300 (folded)
grizabe balance 5240, bet 4790, collected 5240, net +450
empireny balance 747, didn't bet (folded)
accentprpl5 balance 1268, lost 150 (folded)

[salsa4ever]

Hand 1: a bit ballsy... only with a read on the big stack. 10-9s isn't the worst hand to push. I'd do it if I was feeling good. If it comes off you're substantially the large stack

Hand 3: I agree. He's pretty pot committed and he'll call with anything. K9 is above average... lets call it 60/40 to win but if you lose you double up the shortie and people aren't so worred about busting any more. Of course, you could run into AA or something and bust out yourself. I'd fold anything except 10.10-AA

Hand 4 and 5: I agree.

What stakes is this? I was gonna ask if it was Stars, but i added up the chips and there's only 10,000.

[Gareth]

You obviously have a good read on the other players - so good play.

So many players tighten right up when down to 4 (when only 3 pay) that you can steal loads of blinds with any two cards and get yourself into a commanding position to win.

[LeFou]

Hand 4 and 5: I agree.

Why?

More to the point, how?

These are some of the worst hands in poker, why are we open pushing them? I can't "agree". That doesn't mean gabe's play was wrong. With the right read it might be great. But I don't have a read... so I can't agree.

Hand 3 is interesting; that's the sort of thing i push for an extra few hundred. I'm already CL and can get back there pretty quickly if i double this guy up... in fact, by my count i see you remaining CL if that happens...

Still, odds are very slim that you're real far ahead of empireny there, so i can see the pass too.

[WildBobAA]

I like it

[Aces]

Hand 1 - understand what you're doing, would worry about overdoing. Eventually other biggie will wake up w/ a hand or not believe you and fight w mid pair or Ax. Another line would be raise to 1200, shows the shorties you're pot commited but gives you a way out if other biggie reraises(and how likely is he to do that if he's weak/tight though(which I am assuming))

Hand 4 - I know they're both trying to squeek ITM, but I'd rather have a better hand then 83 for this move. -1718 can still hurt you.

Hand 5 - Even more dangerous then Hand 1 with only 42.

Many weak/tights will fold for 2x or 3x(especially on the button) until they have something, so sometimes I'll just do that until I meet resistance. I just hate playing a good game until the end, have a nice chip stack and raise with something inferior and run up against a monster and then be fighting to survivie(which I've done too many times to count )

[stranglin]

I think some of you missed Gabe's point. Or maybe I did. But it seems to me in hand 3, he's not concerned at all about taking the short stack's money. He wants to keep shorty alive as long as possible. That way, he can grind the other two guys until they also become shorties. This is something I read recently on 2+2. I like it, but I don't think I'm going to add it to my arsenal yet.

[gabe]

Hand 1: a bit ballsy... only with a read on the big stack. 10-9s isn't the worst hand to push. I'd do it if I was feeling good. If it comes off you're substantially the large stack

my only 'read' was that the non short stacks had to play super tight. they can't risk going out before the shorty.

Hand 3: I agree. He's pretty pot committed and he'll call with anything. K9 is above average... lets call it 60/40 to win but if you lose you double up the shortie and people aren't so worred about busting any more. Of course, you could run into AA or something and bust out yourself. I'd fold anything except 10.10-AA

i dont want to 60/40 for some chips because i know i can make more chips from him staying alive.

What stakes is this? I was gonna ask if it was Stars, but i added up the chips and there's only 10,000.

$55s on party

These are some of the worst hands in poker, why are we open pushing them? I can't "agree". That doesn't mean gabe's play was wrong. With the right read it might be great. But I don't have a read... so I can't agree.

Hand 3 is interesting; that's the sort of thing i push for an extra few hundred. I'm already CL and can get back there pretty quickly if i double this guy up... in fact, by my count i see you remaining CL if that happens...

Still, odds are very slim that you're real far ahead of empireny there, so i can see the pass too.

i can win every blind until the shorty busts, because of this i dont want the shorty to bust. even loose players with a 3k stack will tighen up if it means they are guaranteed to make money, so i guess i had a tight read on them, but only because they didn't have a choice.

Many weak/tights will fold for 2x or 3x(especially on the button) until they have something, so sometimes I'll just do that until I meet resistance. I just hate playing a good game until the end, have a nice chip stack and raise with something inferior and run up against a monster and then be fighting to survivie(which I've done too many times to count )

pushing guarantees no one will try to resteal. if i raise 3x and the other big stack comes over me, i can't call with very much, and then i wouldn't be chipleader anymore.

I think some of you missed Gabe's point. Or maybe I did. But it seems to me in hand 3, he's not concerned at all about taking the short stack's money. He wants to keep shorty alive as long as possible. That way, he can grind the other two guys until they also become shorties. This is something I read recently on 2+2. I like it, but I don't think I'm going to add it to my arsenal yet.

bingo

[LeFou]

I think some of you missed Gabe's point. Or maybe I did. But it seems to me in hand 3, he's not concerned at all about taking the short stack's money. He wants to keep shorty alive as long as possible. That way, he can grind the other two guys until they also become shorties. This is something I read recently on 2+2. I like it, but I don't think I'm going to add it to my arsenal yet.

neato. learn something new every day. I'm trying this as soon as the chance arises. i love it.

[NEtwocards]

Great tactic!

I've actually had this happpen to me several times in the past few days where I was a middle stack and the big guy folded to shorty a few times in a row. I got frustrated that he was being "so timid" against the shorty, but then hammering me. Can't believe I didn't see why. Thanks for the post - I'll remember when the chance comes my way.

[ProZachNation]

Thats a great strat Ill be sure to use it next time I am the monster.

[Rondavu]

The strategy is legitimate. The way you played doesn't seem so much. Open raising all-in with bad hands is very bad poker. There's a such thing as taking advantage of the table texture, and then there's reckless abandonment of reason for the sake of such.

Even with a good read on timid players, you could still be recklessly raising into a high pocket in the name of gorging yourself on a paradigm.

I like the strategy. I just feel you got a little carried away with it.

[gabe]

Open raising all-in with bad hands is very bad poker.

wrong.

Even with a good read on timid players, you could still be recklessly raising into a high pocket in the name of gorging yourself on a paradigm.

on average, i will make enough chips from the blinds that i'm not worried about running into big pairs.

[mcatdog]

Thats a great strat Ill be sure to use it next time I am the monster.

I would not recommend using this strategy at any stakes below $20+2, unless you have a read that tells you the stacks you're pushing into, are solid players. At tiny stakes, you're just too likely to get called by a terrible hand that has your four-high beat, and that's the last thing you want.

I was using this strategy the other day in a 20+2, and the chip stacks were something like 6500 (me) / 4000 /3500 / 1000. I pushed all-in with 65o, the second biggest stack called me with 22 and he bubbled when a 5 hit the flop.

[thirteen]

I think some of you missed Gabe's point. Or maybe I did. But it seems to me in hand 3, he's not concerned at all about taking the short stack's money. He wants to keep shorty alive as long as possible. That way, he can grind the other two guys until they also become shorties. This is something I read recently on 2+2. I like it, but I don't think I'm going to add it to my arsenal yet.

Wow, this is interesting. So you're basically trying to extend bubble play, so that your opponents continue to play weak/tight poker, and you can grind down their stacks with steals. This is really interesting. I've never heard of this strategy before.

[ProZachNation]

I play the .5+.1 currently(all gotta start somewhere moving up to the 1+.15 at AP next week) but I think it owuld be legit at that level.

People play super tight on the bubble from what I have seen at my level. Well I can always try it and post my results.

[thirteen]

I would not recommend using this strategy at any stakes below $20+2, unless you have a read that tells you the stacks you're pushing into, are solid players. At tiny stakes, you're just too likely to get called by a terrible hand that has your four-high beat, and that's the last thing you want.

I don't agree with this. It depends on the players, but I've played some $5 sng's where the bubble play was extremely weak/tight. In one of them I was stealing pretty much every hand and had one guy tell me repeatedly to "play right" and "stop being an ass". Some times the smaller buy-in's have people who can't afford to not make the money. They're scared money essentially. Hell, I even played an SnG where the guy tripled up on the first hand and then 'post and folded' his way in the money. Some players at these small stakes will just try to blind out and bleed into a money spot if they can't outplay you.

At small stakes I find that for many of the fish getting ITM is more important than playing poker.

[LeFou]

actually i'm inclined to agree partly with mcatdog on this issue. Not because lower stakes, inexperienced players are more scared -- but because many of them don't realize 84s is not a good AI call on the bubble.

i could be wrong. we should all try this and post results/observations later.

[thirteen]

actually i'm inclined to agree partly with mcatdog on this issue. Not because lower stakes, inexperienced players are more scared -- but because many of them don't realize 84s is not a good AI call on the bubble.

i could be wrong. we should all try this and post results/observations later.

Even fish know that only the top 3 get paid.

[Fortune 500]

Excellent point about the short stack, Gabe. Eye opening.

[Rockymv]

if i'm chipleader by a reasonable margin, its four handed and there's a significant short stack directly to my right, i'm pushing every time he folds. you earn plenty of blinds this way to make up for the rare occurrences where you run into a hand.

good post gabe.

[DaNutsInYoEye]

There is a line you have to draw between building your stack and preserving what you already have. That said, I don't like the pushes when the other big stack is yet to act.

[gabe]

I don't like the pushes when the other big stack is yet to act.

he is more scared of you than you are of him.

[Fleece]

interesting, i usually push alot at the bubble but ive never thought of keeping the cripple alive to continue my dominance. i usually just knock him out when i get the chance but interesting concept

[Trikflow77]

with the shortys at the table and your stack....i push every hand (almost) until one fights back......the second biggest stack will not call you with out a huge hand here.....dont worry about him. I do this all the time, but it works best with a short stack. I am more selective when the stacks are equal.

[Scuba Chuck]

I don't like the pushes when the other big stack is yet to act.

he is more scared of you than you are of him.

The other bigstack would have a hard time calling with the following premium hands....

AJ or worse, and TT or worse.

AQ, and JJ are a gray area.

QQ+, and AK are not getting folded (some exception with AK, because I fold AK here).

Once you apply probabilities to this, you'll get the sense of why this is a decent play.

[Scuba Chuck]

Why?

There are two good points in this post. BTW, this is pretty common bigstack bubble strategy.

First, once you begin to understand this concept, and the entire concept of the bubble, you can begin to control the table while keeping the bubble alive. There are some important points to consider. The smaller the blinds, the easier to control the table (although, they need to be big enough to make it worth your while). Anyhow, the real reason to master this scenario is because it's soooo important to your first place finish distribution.

Second, think a lot about the psychology of what's happening. How does keeping a shorty alive affect the other players calling standards? In fact, there's some more even more interesting hand/situations to consider. Perhaps when I come across one again, I'll post it.

[DoGGz]

I don't like the pushes when the other big stack is yet to act.

he is more scared of you than you are of him.

The other bigstack would have a hard time calling with the following premium hands....

AJ or worse, and TT or worse.

AQ, and JJ are a gray area.

QQ+, and AK are not getting folded (some exception with AK, because I fold AK here).

Once you apply probabilities to this, you'll get the sense of why this is a decent play.

If someone is open pushing like Gabe is my calling standards go down. I'm calling him with AJ+. But, I'm not scared money and will recognize this for what it is. If you seriously fold AK to play like this than I believe you are playing to weak/tight.

[vqc]

I don't like the pushes when the other big stack is yet to act.

he is more scared of you than you are of him.

The other bigstack would have a hard time calling with the following premium hands....

AJ or worse, and TT or worse.

AQ, and JJ are a gray area.

QQ+, and AK are not getting folded (some exception with AK, because I fold AK here).

Once you apply probabilities to this, you'll get the sense of why this is a decent play.

If someone is open pushing like Gabe is my calling standards go down. I'm calling him with AJ+. But, I'm not scared money and will recognize this for what it is. If you seriously fold AK to play like this than I believe you are playing to weak/tight.

any numbers to back this up doggz?

[MAX]

Just would like to add that Deceptikon should be playing similarly as Grizabe cannot afford a confrontation with him either. I call gabe here w/AQ and better and have done so as the 2nd big stack many times. You win some and lose some, but if you recognize what is going on it is a +EV call because you win more often than lose and are then in prime position to take first and still have a bubble to abuse.

edit: I don't call here with baby pocket pairs-- need about 88 and up.

[Rondavu]

Open raising all-in with bad hands is very bad poker.

wrong.

So you think going all in with 72 offsuit as first act preflop is a good play? You're out of your mind. I'd find any ace or mid pair and pork you fast. Then again I'm crazy and I don't give a shit about the bubble. Never have. I put the money in if I feel my hand is ahead. Gap concept be damned. You WILL run into people that think the same way. Not everyone is a scared little lamb.

Even with a good read on timid players, you could still be recklessly raising into a high pocket in the name of gorging yourself on a paradigm.

on average, i will make enough chips from the blinds that i'm not worried about running into big pairs.

If you run into a big pair, or even someone that adjusted their calling requirements on you, then you're done. Blinds mean nothing anymore when your stack gets pwned.

I'm not trying to be harsh. You bring up really good points, but I just can't bring myself to advocate a reckless overextention of the gap concept beyond it's intention. It's not like I've never stolen the blinds all in with Doyle Brunson in hand, but continuous all ins on the bubble throw up GIANT red flags that have "I'm raising weak" written all over them.

[a500lbgorilla]

Open raising all-in with bad hands is very bad poker.

wrong.

So you think going all in with 72 offsuit as first act preflop is a good play? You're out of your mind. I'd find any ace or mid pair and pork you fast. Then again I'm crazy and I don't give a shit about the bubble. Never have. I put the money in if I feel my hand is ahead. Gap concept be damned. You WILL run into people that think the same way. Not everyone is a scared little lamb.

Firstly, no I can only push 720 first to act on the bubble if I feel everyone is tight. If you're calling with Ace x and being damned of the bubble, clearly you would be making the bubble difficult for my push/fold tactics.

Of course not everyone is scared on the bubble. But there are way more people too tight on the bubble than too lose. Everyone wants to secure a little money for their time.

Also, a little food for thought. You're in the big blind, blinds are 200/400, everyone has 2k chips and I'm first to act pushing any two cards. You can only profitable call with 25% of all hands. But in doing so, you're taking a big risk. And if I shorten that range down to even 80%, your profitable range closes to the top 18% of hands. Even if I've been pushing a lot, can you put me on an 80% pushing range? Will you be able to make a call with a hand like 33 or A2s or KTs? Will you believe I might just be on a rush? Hope someone else will call?

Pushing is an EXCELLENT play when the blinds are big becuase you're giving opponents two options. Fold or pick up a big hand a call. And if you're pushing with an appropriate range of hands, they just won't pick up those big hands frequently enough to punish you without punishing themselves.

This is a pure fundemental for beating sngs. Absolutely required.

Even with a good read on timid players, you could still be recklessly raising into a high pocket in the name of gorging yourself on a paradigm.

on average, i will make enough chips from the blinds that i'm not worried about running into big pairs.

If you run into a big pair, or even someone that adjusted their calling requirements on you, then you're done. Blinds mean nothing anymore when your stack gets pwned.

You just won't run into a big pair frequently enough to get pwned in the long run.

http://www.sitngo-analyzer.com/

A link that may help explain this to you.

-'rilla

[gabe]

So you think going all in with 72 offsuit as first act preflop is a good play? You're out of your mind. I'd find any ace or mid pair and pork you fast. Then again I'm crazy and I don't give a shit about the bubble. Never have.

o there are lots of situaitons in SNGs with a fast structure like party's where pushing with any two is correct.
o if you were the 2nd biggest stack, calling with any ace or any pair is a serious mistake. not caring about the bubble is also a very serious mistake.

If you run into a big pair, or even someone that adjusted their calling requirements on you, then you're done. Blinds mean nothing anymore when your stack gets pwned.

how often do i run into a big pair? the fact is i steal enough blinds while everyone is waiting for a hand to play back at me that even if i lose a hand, i have big enough stack to absorb it.

continuous all ins on the bubble throw up GIANT red flags that have "I'm raising weak" written all over them.

this is true, doesnt mean they can call.

[gabe]

rilla explains it better than i.

[LeFou]

I'm first to act pushing any two cards. You can only profitable call with 25% of all hands. But in doing so, you're taking a big risk. And if I shorten that range down to even 80%, your profitable range closes to the top 18% of hands.

Nice post rilla one question:
If you tighten to 80%, aren't you doing what Ronda says? i.e. passing 72/42/83, the true dogs.

[LeFou]

If you run into a big pair, or even someone that adjusted their calling requirements on you, then you're done. Blinds mean nothing anymore when your stack gets pwned.

You just won't run into a big pair frequently enough to get pwned in the long run.

Like I said, I'm convinced this is a great tactic. But keep in mind there are two dangers, not one:
-running into a big pair
-having an opp who's better than you thought, i.e. will call pretty thin.

[gabe]

if the 2nd biggest stack makes thin calls with Ax, he will lose alot of money in the long run. The 3rd biggest will almost always avoid confrontation at all costs. The shortie can call all he wants, doesn't really matter with him.

[a500lbgorilla]

I'm first to act pushing any two cards. You can only profitable call with 25% of all hands. But in doing so, you're taking a big risk. And if I shorten that range down to even 80%, your profitable range closes to the top 18% of hands.

Nice post rilla one question:
If you tighten to 80%, aren't you doing what Ronda says? i.e. passing 72/42/83, the true dogs.

My point was, I can be pushing any two, but can you put me on a range of any two? Can you put me on a range even as big as 80%?

-'rilla

[Rockymv]

If you run into a big pair, or even someone that adjusted their calling requirements on you, then you're done. Blinds mean nothing anymore when your stack gets pwned.

You just won't run into a big pair frequently enough to get pwned in the long run.

Like I said, I'm convinced this is a great tactic. But keep in mind there are two dangers, not one:
-running into a big pair
-having an opp who's better than you thought, i.e. will call pretty thin.

This second point isn't even really a danger. If BB realizes you're pushing any two cards, it's still way -EV for him to call off his whole stack on Ax. What you'd be worried about is a player who isn't afraid of the bubble and wants to catch a bluff, even if its a -EV call.

[dsaxton]

I think if your opponents would fold to your all-in raise, then they woud likely fold to a raise to 900. I think you're taking on an unnecessary amount of risk when making these plays. If you raise to 900 and your opponents do wake up with real hands, you can just fold and lose 900 rather than your full stack or a good portion of it.

The second hand I think you should just raise all-in. Just put him in with a hand that is likely ahead the two random hole cards he's going to call you with and expect to make it in the money. I don't understand voluntarily choosing to stay out of the money just in the hopes of being able to build your stack through risky all-ins. You will still be able to use aggression to build your stack after you've entered the money, but perhaps with a slightly lesser degree of success (but I don't think that really matters enough to possibly forgo a money finish).

[a500lbgorilla]

I think if your opponents would fold to your all-in raise, then they woud likely fold to a raise to 900.

A good point. But if you raise instead of pushing, you open yourself up for a resteal. This is bad. If you open so large as a 900 chips what do you do if BB just calls! On a pure steal, the answer is easy. Fold if you miss. But what if you have a hand with some value?

I think the hit you take to your folding equity (since some BB might attempt a resteal even though you really are probably priced into calling (another bad scenario) and some others might just try to stop and go you) + the hit you take to resteals makes it a worse choice vrs pushing as a steal.

Usually any time you look for survival value in your bets, it's an exploitable bet.

-'rilla

[dsaxton]

I think if your opponents would fold to your all-in raise, then they woud likely fold to a raise to 900.

A good point. But if you raise instead of pushing, you open yourself up for a resteal. This is bad. If you open so large as a 900 chips what do you do if BB just calls?! On a pure steal, the answer is easy. Fold if you miss. But what if you have a hand with some value?

I think the hit you take to your folding equity + the hit you take to resteals makes it a worse choice vrs pushing as a steal.

Usually any time you look for survival value in your bets, it's an exploitable bet.

-'rilla

It's possible, but how likely are his opponents to make resteals on the bubble? I think the assumption has to be that your opponents are playing tight for this strategy to be warranted, and therefore you would also be assuming that they won't be reraising without real hands.

I think it's fundamentally a question of how aggressive and how tight the opposition is. Against random opponents, I would prefer to make a smaller raise since most opponents would simply fold weak hands on the bubble when faced with standard preflop aggression.

[a500lbgorilla]

I think if your opponents would fold to your all-in raise, then they woud likely fold to a raise to 900.

A good point. But if you raise instead of pushing, you open yourself up for a resteal. This is bad. If you open so large as a 900 chips what do you do if BB just calls?! On a pure steal, the answer is easy. Fold if you miss. But what if you have a hand with some value?

I think the hit you take to your folding equity + the hit you take to resteals makes it a worse choice vrs pushing as a steal.

Usually any time you look for survival value in your bets, it's an exploitable bet.

-'rilla

It's possible, but how likely are his opponents to make resteals on the bubble? I think the assumption has to be that your opponents are playing tight for this strategy to be warranted, and therefore you would also be assuming that they won't be reraising without real hands.

Even if they do it 1% of the time, I think that makes it a worse idea then push stealing. You really need to push everything behind your folding equity. Also, people will fold a9s when you push but they may push over a 750 raise if they think you might be stealing. Even if they're tight and not at all tricky. The times they just call, resteal and stop and go make in my opinion.

-'rilla

[dalecooper]

The appropriate counter for this, as 2nd or 3rd largest stack, is not to make thin calls, but to push yourself whenever you can be first into the pot. This would of course mean that you knew this was the strategy the other player was employing (not that he's just crazy-loose and aggressive), and also that you had enough chips to hurt or eliminate anyone who might call you.

Just saying "damn the bubble" is not the right answer, because as (let's say) 2nd largest stack you have a good shot at 2nd place money or better, and with a true short stack playing a 90% shot at making it into the money. Calling thin with ace high might make you a 60 or 65% favorite to double up, but also forces you take a 35 to 40% risk of busting out of the money.

With four players all about evenly stacked I think it's reasonable to play somewhat recklessly and call thin if you believe your hand is best. But with a short stack on the brink of elimination, you have to factor that into your EV decisions. If a guy will be eliminated by the next round of blinds, and you have three times as many chips as him currently, you should be looking to encounter as little risk as possible. You can still play aggressively when acting first, but calling with anything other than a big pair is lowering your value.

[vqc]

I think if your opponents would fold to your all-in raise, then they woud likely fold to a raise to 900.

A good point. But if you raise instead of pushing, you open yourself up for a resteal. This is bad. If you open so large as a 900 chips what do you do if BB just calls?! On a pure steal, the answer is easy. Fold if you miss. But what if you have a hand with some value?

I think the hit you take to your folding equity + the hit you take to resteals makes it a worse choice vrs pushing as a steal.

Usually any time you look for survival value in your bets, it's an exploitable bet.

-'rilla

It's possible, but how likely are his opponents to make resteals on the bubble? I think the assumption has to be that your opponents are playing tight for this strategy to be warranted, and therefore you would also be assuming that they won't be reraising without real hands.

I think it's fundamentally a question of how aggressive and how tight the opposition is. Against random opponents, I would prefer to make a smaller raise since most opponents would simply fold weak hands on the bubble when faced with standard preflop aggression.

Like in another thread, raising here is an exploitable strategy while pushing is not.

[dsaxton]

I think if your opponents would fold to your all-in raise, then they woud likely fold to a raise to 900.

A good point. But if you raise instead of pushing, you open yourself up for a resteal. This is bad. If you open so large as a 900 chips what do you do if BB just calls?! On a pure steal, the answer is easy. Fold if you miss. But what if you have a hand with some value?

I think the hit you take to your folding equity + the hit you take to resteals makes it a worse choice vrs pushing as a steal.

Usually any time you look for survival value in your bets, it's an exploitable bet.

-'rilla

It's possible, but how likely are his opponents to make resteals on the bubble? I think the assumption has to be that your opponents are playing tight for this strategy to be warranted, and therefore you would also be assuming that they won't be reraising without real hands.

Even if they do it 1% of the time, I think that makes it a worse idea then push stealing. You really need to push everything behind your folding equity. Also, people will fold a9s when you push but they may push over a 750 raise if they think you might be stealing. Even if they're tight and not at all tricky. The times they just call, resteal and stop and go make in my opinion.

-'rilla

Obviously there is a very slight risk of resteals, but you also have to consider the risk of your 10 high running into a real hand and then possibly bubbling yourself.

[vqc]

I think if your opponents would fold to your all-in raise, then they woud likely fold to a raise to 900.

A good point. But if you raise instead of pushing, you open yourself up for a resteal. This is bad. If you open so large as a 900 chips what do you do if BB just calls?! On a pure steal, the answer is easy. Fold if you miss. But what if you have a hand with some value?

I think the hit you take to your folding equity + the hit you take to resteals makes it a worse choice vrs pushing as a steal.

Usually any time you look for survival value in your bets, it's an exploitable bet.

-'rilla

It's possible, but how likely are his opponents to make resteals on the bubble? I think the assumption has to be that your opponents are playing tight for this strategy to be warranted, and therefore you would also be assuming that they won't be reraising without real hands.

Even if they do it 1% of the time, I think that makes it a worse idea then push stealing. You really need to push everything behind your folding equity. Also, people will fold a9s when you push but they may push over a 750 raise if they think you might be stealing. Even if they're tight and not at all tricky. The times they just call, resteal and stop and go make in my opinion.

-'rilla

Obviously there is a very slight risk of resteals, but you also have to consider the risk of your 10 high running into a real hand and then possibly bubbling yourself.

I think you are overestimating the number of times u will run into a "big hand"

[LeFou]

But this is a play for first place, not ITM. You're essentially ITM already -- barring something extremely funky. Like all plays for first, it involves risk of finishing w/no money. So yeah, you have to consider the risk. And take it.

[dsaxton]

I think if your opponents would fold to your all-in raise, then they woud likely fold to a raise to 900.

A good point. But if you raise instead of pushing, you open yourself up for a resteal. This is bad. If you open so large as a 900 chips what do you do if BB just calls?! On a pure steal, the answer is easy. Fold if you miss. But what if you have a hand with some value?

I think the hit you take to your folding equity + the hit you take to resteals makes it a worse choice vrs pushing as a steal.

Usually any time you look for survival value in your bets, it's an exploitable bet.

-'rilla

It's possible, but how likely are his opponents to make resteals on the bubble? I think the assumption has to be that your opponents are playing tight for this strategy to be warranted, and therefore you would also be assuming that they won't be reraising without real hands.

Even if they do it 1% of the time, I think that makes it a worse idea then push stealing. You really need to push everything behind your folding equity. Also, people will fold a9s when you push but they may push over a 750 raise if they think you might be stealing. Even if they're tight and not at all tricky. The times they just call, resteal and stop and go make in my opinion.

-'rilla

Obviously there is a very slight risk of resteals, but you also have to consider the risk of your 10 high running into a real hand and then possibly bubbling yourself.

I think you are overestimating the number of times u will run into a "big hand"

No, I'm just considering the fact that when you do, you lose most of your stack when you could've lost only 900 chips.

[_KO_]

A great thread, guys. This is exactly why FTR rawks. Thanks for improving my bubble play.

[gabe]

no, because you will have won 5 blinds in a row, so there stack will dwindle down and not affect your big stack much

[Rockymv]

I think if your opponents would fold to your all-in raise, then they woud likely fold to a raise to 900.

A good point. But if you raise instead of pushing, you open yourself up for a resteal. This is bad. If you open so large as a 900 chips what do you do if BB just calls?! On a pure steal, the answer is easy. Fold if you miss. But what if you have a hand with some value?

I think the hit you take to your folding equity + the hit you take to resteals makes it a worse choice vrs pushing as a steal.

Usually any time you look for survival value in your bets, it's an exploitable bet.

-'rilla

It's possible, but how likely are his opponents to make resteals on the bubble? I think the assumption has to be that your opponents are playing tight for this strategy to be warranted, and therefore you would also be assuming that they won't be reraising without real hands.

Even if they do it 1% of the time, I think that makes it a worse idea then push stealing. You really need to push everything behind your folding equity. Also, people will fold a9s when you push but they may push over a 750 raise if they think you might be stealing. Even if they're tight and not at all tricky. The times they just call, resteal and stop and go make in my opinion.

-'rilla

Obviously there is a very slight risk of resteals, but you also have to consider the risk of your 10 high running into a real hand and then possibly bubbling yourself.

I think you are overestimating the number of times u will run into a "big hand"

No, I'm just considering the fact that when you do, you lose most of your stack when you could've lost only 900 chips.

I'm with rilla that the difference between a "big hand" that calls a push and a "big hand" that pushes over a raise of 900 is significant enough to make pushing preferable.

[dsaxton]

But this is a play for first place, not ITM. You're essentially ITM already -- barring something extremely funky. Like all plays for first, it involves risk of finishing w/no money. So yeah, you have to consider the risk. And take it.

Why take the risk when you can get the same benefit with less risk?

[dsaxton]

With what hands do you expect random "tight" opponents on the bubble to resteal with facing a standard preflop raise, and how frequently with these hands? I'm of the opinion that this will not happen often enough to make pushing all-in the better play given the added risk involved in the latter.

Another thought worth considering is, what hands do you expect them to raise all-in with facing a standard preflop raise that they wouldn't call your all-in with?

[a500lbgorilla]

But this is a play for first place, not ITM. You're essentially ITM already -- barring something extremely funky. Like all plays for first, it involves risk of finishing w/no money. So yeah, you have to consider the risk. And take it.

Why take the risk when you can get the same benefit with less risk?

You don't get the same benefit. You can pick up a shit load of chips on the bubble. Chips that will improve your ITM position distribution. More 1sts = more money. If you fold too many hands here and make it in the middle of the pack, you wont finish first as much. And also, once you steal a few blinds on the bubble. You become the big stack and can't bust if you do run into AA.

-'rilla

[dsaxton]

You don't get the same benefit.

Yes you do. You win the blinds.

[vqc]

I think if your opponents would fold to your all-in raise, then they woud likely fold to a raise to 900.

A good point. But if you raise instead of pushing, you open yourself up for a resteal. This is bad. If you open so large as a 900 chips what do you do if BB just calls?! On a pure steal, the answer is easy. Fold if you miss. But what if you have a hand with some value?

I think the hit you take to your folding equity + the hit you take to resteals makes it a worse choice vrs pushing as a steal.

Usually any time you look for survival value in your bets, it's an exploitable bet.

-'rilla

It's possible, but how likely are his opponents to make resteals on the bubble? I think the assumption has to be that your opponents are playing tight for this strategy to be warranted, and therefore you would also be assuming that they won't be reraising without real hands.

Even if they do it 1% of the time, I think that makes it a worse idea then push stealing. You really need to push everything behind your folding equity. Also, people will fold a9s when you push but they may push over a 750 raise if they think you might be stealing. Even if they're tight and not at all tricky. The times they just call, resteal and stop and go make in my opinion.

-'rilla

Obviously there is a very slight risk of resteals, but you also have to consider the risk of your 10 high running into a real hand and then possibly bubbling yourself.

I think you are overestimating the number of times u will run into a "big hand"

No, I'm just considering the fact that when you do, you lose most of your stack when you could've lost only 900 chips.

yes but more often than not wat ends up happening is their stacks shrink so much that by the time they catch a big hand, their stack wont hurt you anymore. That is the whole point of playing this way.

[Rondavu]

It's not a good tactic to lower calling requirements if you notice OBVIOUS stealing? It's -EV? What ever happened to trusting your reads? If you're right 2 out of 3 times you call someone trying to douche the bubble, you race with the best of it and put yourself in position to WIN the whole thing. How is that -EV? You then go on the CRUSH with a huge stack. I'm obviously fighting the masses here, but in my mind it can NEVER be -EV to be handed probable spots to race with the best of it at crucial moments. These spots aren't easy to find. Someone bubble stealing only makes it easier for you cut off a piece of easy.

Remember that it's long term we're talking about. If in three consecutive tournaments someone starts stealing on the bubble, and you find A8s, 88, and KQs suitable to race against an obvious lowered raising requirement bubble stealing douche, then you'll have the best of it 2/3 of the time. Isn't that the point? I mean you gotta stop reading home and garden, and realize when someone hands you domination in your favor on a silver platter MOST times you make a decision to MAN up and call.

All you are really doing at the end of a SnG is trying to race with a better hand. Don't forget that. You need to find any and all opportunities to do so.

[vqc]

You don't get the same benefit.

Yes you do. You win the blinds.

rilla is referring to other intrinsic values of pushing.
ones like:
he cant push over

[vqc]

Another thought worth considering is, what hands do you expect them to raise all-in with facing a standard preflop raise that they wouldn't call your all-in with?

Im probably way off here. (IM almost certain I am for that matter)
But depending on the way you have been playing.
My answer is A9.

[gabe]

It's not a good tactic to lower calling requirements if you notice OBVIOUS stealing? It's -EV? What ever happened to trusting your reads?

because ace high isn't that much of a favorite
because if you lose you miss the money while the big stack still has a chance.

[Rondavu]

It's not a good tactic to lower calling requirements if you notice OBVIOUS stealing? It's -EV? What ever happened to trusting your reads?

because ace high isn't that much of a favorite
because if you lose you miss the money while the big stack still has a chance.

I agree with you that this a legitimate tactic as long as MOST people are sheep who won't race you with the better hand. As soon as it's overly common to see people all-in stealing on the bubble EVERYTIME it gets to that point, people will catch on and start hammering the plan with better hands. I'm already doing so. My last 4 Sng's are 1, 2, 2, 2.

[dsaxton]

For what it's worth, I do this routinely on the bubble when I play sit and go's and very rarely encounter all-in reraises. I usually just keep picking up blinds and building my stack. The reason is pretty simple, and it is that random opponents play tight on the bubble. They don't want to gamble on me not having a hand. If you're concerned that your opponents will try resteals, then clearly they aren't afraid of gambling, and so this strategy doesn't seem warranted. Therefore, if you've decided this strategy is sound, you shouldn't be very concerned about resteals.

Also, do you think players on the bubble are folding hands facing an all-in raise preflop that they would've called with under other circumstances? The reason that this approach is successful is because the game is now short-handed and it's less likely you'll run into a hand capable of calling, not because you're on the bubble.

[a500lbgorilla]

It's not a good tactic to lower calling requirements if you notice OBVIOUS stealing

It is the appropriate tactic. But it really takes EV away from the pusher and distributes it to everyone else. It would be a better tactic to avoid the push/stealer and being to steal yourself when you get a shot.

Remember that it's long term we're talking about. If in three consecutive tournaments someone starts stealing on the bubble, and you find A8s, 88, and KQs suitable

These are OBVIOUS calls against a steal. The hands you need to intrest yourself with is KTs, A2s and 33. The very limits of +EV calls.

If you folded 88 to a CO steal becuase of equal stacks. we'd call you weak tight. But if you call with A2s, you'll hear about folding and looking for your own place to steal.

Calling with more hands is the ONLY thing you can do to a guy who is push stealing. But it's hard to do becuase you risk everything and only give yourself one chance to win. Players will more quickly do something like "Dude! gonna steal every time?!" "It works every time but one, buddy" instead of ever calling

All you are really doing at the end of a SnG is trying to race with a better hand. Don't forget that. You need to find any and all opportunities to do so.

EVERYONE better forget this. What I'm trying to do late in a sng is steal enough blinds to become the big stack while exploiting the bubble. Then hoping to exploit the miniITM bubble similarly then getting to HU with a big chiplead where I'll will finally be looking for a place to race.

In SNGs, it's much more important to fold your opponent out then get called and turn out to have the best hand preflop.

-'rilla

[Scuba Chuck]

Just would like to add that Deceptikon should be playing similarly as Grizabe cannot afford a confrontation with him either. I call gabe here w/AQ and better and have done so as the 2nd big stack many times. You win some and lose some, but if you recognize what is going on it is a +EV call because you win more often than lose and are then in prime position to take first and still have a bubble to abuse.

edit: I don't call here with baby pocket pairs-- need about 88 and up.

I'm going to address this post, because you use a widely held statement to backup your reasoning, but it's clearly obvious that you have not done the homework.

Calling Gabe with AQ is either -EV or barely (emphasazing barely) +EV. Go and do the work. As the 2nd stack, any confrontation with the big stack only transfers EV to the other small stacks. It is neither +EV for either of you two.

We can examine this logically. Let's assume you win 65% of the time, and lose 35%. (AQo vs 85o for example) Furthermore, when you win, you place first place 60% of the time, and second 30% of the time, and third only 10% of the time (These probabilities are a farse, because winning this hand doesn't guarantee you a money finish). Thus your expected value for calling here is:
Assumed buyin is $11:
EV = (.65)(.6)(50) + (.65)(.3)(30) + (.65)(.1)(20) + (.35)(zero)
EV = $26.65

Now let's assume you fold. Let's assume you finish with the following probabilities. 90% of the time you finish ITM (I think we should expect this minimally). Furthermore, let's assume you place first 20% of the time, and you finish 2nd 40% of the time, and third the other 40% of the time. Thus you're expected value for folding here is now:
Assumed buyin is $11
EV = (.9)(.2)(50)+(.9)(.4)(30)+(.9)(.4)(20)+(.1)(zero)
EV = $27

The above probabilities are all assumptions, but I think I've taken a pretty reasonable analysis of the outcomes.

In the end, what I'm trying to say is that by calling with a hand like AQ (and AK for that matter) all you're doing is transferring EV to the two smaller stacks. This is why at the higher stakes, you're able to control the bubble like this. Because they understand this analysis. At the lower stakes, I doubt players fold a hand like AQ (because someone has to make a stand, right?). Regardless, most hand ranges are still correct to push on lower levels.

At the same time, recognize that bigstack has a very low threshhold for calling 2nd stacks allins without a very strong hand because he knows he can steal your blind, and the 3rd stacks blinds with little fight. At the same time, NEVER, as the 2nd stack, raise anything less than allin in these situations.

[ekillian]

Open raising all-in with bad hands is very bad poker.

Dude... Weak... You can't make that as a universal statement.

[MAX]

Scuba - good points and i really only disagree with one thing. If you call and win, you are taking 1st more than 60% of the time because you now have the table outstacked 2 to 1 on the bubble. Thus overall EV is +. The point about transferring EV to the small stacks is a good one and we all hope that this would happen if we were one of them. Also agree that the EV diff between calling and folding is small.

edit: Although this may be a little defensive on my part, doesn't the fact that the hands I chose to call with work out to be almost even EV with folding (by your own math) indicate I did do my homework?

[Scuba Chuck]

Scuba - good points and i really only disagree with one thing. If you call and win, you are taking 1st more than 60% of the time because you now have the table outstacked 2 to 1 on the bubble. Thus overall EV is +. The point about transferring EV to the small stacks is a good one and we all hope that this would happen if we were one of them. Also agree that the EV diff between calling and folding is small.

edit: Although this may be a little defensive on my part, doesn't the fact that the hands I chose to call with work out to be almost even EV with folding (by your own math) indicate I did do my homework?

See my new post:
When to fold AK on the bubble

I think you are slightly flawed on the percentages of first places. I don't know the answer to this, but I wonder what the percentage of first place is when you are HU, and have :
a) 60% of the chips
b) 70% of the chips
c) 80% of the chips

Regarding your edit: The only hands that are worth considering calling with is AA, KK, QQ, JJ (BTW, I'm being picky now, but I think you just made assumptions, and did no homework)

Here's why( card equity of any two cards vs):
AA (85%)
KK (82%)
QQ (80%)
JJ (77%)
AK (66%)

From my other post, you'll see why you need to be at least a 3:1 favorite for this call to be breakeven $EV.