Most Ridiculus HU session EVER

Ok so I pwned the bubble. I pwned my opponent. I know I didnt do much wrong. How have I not won?

I wanted to post this first to check it was ok (although im pretty sure it is aside from maybe missing the 32o shove!!) and secondly as an answer to how I feel about HU in turbos and how I play when the blinds are high. (I believe I responded to a post today on how to play HU and this I guess should prove I wasn't kidding)

PokerStars Game #8406351327: Tournament #42844720, $6.00+$0.50 Hold'em No Limit - Level X (400/800) - 2007/02/12 - 14:28:48 (ET)
Table '42844720 1' 9-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (11365 in chips)
Seat 4: Tesch73 (2135 in chips)
GingerW1zard: posts the ante 50
Tesch73: posts the ante 50
GingerW1zard: posts small blind 400
Tesch73: posts big blind 800
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to GingerW1zard [Kc 5h]
GingerW1zard: raises 10515 to 11315 and is all-in
Tesch73: calls 1285 and is all-in
*** FLOP *** [Jh 9s Qs]
*** TURN *** [Jh 9s Qs] [6c]
*** RIVER *** [Jh 9s Qs 6c] [9h]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Tesch73: shows [8h Td] (a straight, Eight to Queen)
GingerW1zard: shows [Kc 5h] (a pair of Nines)
Tesch73 collected 4270 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 4270 | Rake 0
Board [Jh 9s Qs 6c 9h]
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (button) (small blind) showed [Kc 5h] and lost with a pair of Nines
Seat 4: Tesch73 (big blind) showed [8h Td] and won (4270) with a straight, Eight to Queen

PokerStars Game #8406356138: Tournament #42844720, $6.00+$0.50 Hold'em No Limit - Level X (400/800) - 2007/02/12 - 14:29:09 (ET)
Table '42844720 1' 9-max Seat #4 is the button
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (9230 in chips)
Seat 4: Tesch73 (4270 in chips)
GingerW1zard: posts the ante 50
Tesch73: posts the ante 50
Tesch73: posts small blind 400
GingerW1zard: posts big blind 800
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to GingerW1zard [As 3c]
Tesch73: folds
GingerW1zard collected 900 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 900 | Rake 0
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (big blind) collected (900)
Seat 4: Tesch73 (button) (small blind) folded before Flop

PokerStars Game #8406357787: Tournament #42844720, $6.00+$0.50 Hold'em No Limit - Level X (400/800) - 2007/02/12 - 14:29:15 (ET)
Table '42844720 1' 9-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (9680 in chips)
Seat 4: Tesch73 (3820 in chips)
GingerW1zard: posts the ante 50
Tesch73: posts the ante 50
GingerW1zard: posts small blind 400
Tesch73: posts big blind 800
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to GingerW1zard [6s 4s]
GingerW1zard: raises 8830 to 9630 and is all-in
Tesch73: folds
GingerW1zard collected 1700 from pot
GingerW1zard: doesn't show hand
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 1700 | Rake 0
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (button) (small blind) collected (1700)
Seat 4: Tesch73 (big blind) folded before Flop

PokerStars Game #8406360657: Tournament #42844720, $6.00+$0.50 Hold'em No Limit - Level X (400/800) - 2007/02/12 - 14:29:28 (ET)
Table '42844720 1' 9-max Seat #4 is the button
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (10530 in chips)
Seat 4: Tesch73 (2970 in chips)
GingerW1zard: posts the ante 50
Tesch73: posts the ante 50
Tesch73: posts small blind 400
GingerW1zard: posts big blind 800
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to GingerW1zard [9d 5d]
Tesch73: folds
GingerW1zard collected 900 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 900 | Rake 0
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (big blind) collected (900)
Seat 4: Tesch73 (button) (small blind) folded before Flop

PokerStars Game #8406362335: Tournament #42844720, $6.00+$0.50 Hold'em No Limit - Level X (400/800) - 2007/02/12 - 14:29:35 (ET)
Table '42844720 1' 9-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (10980 in chips)
Seat 4: Tesch73 (2520 in chips)
GingerW1zard: posts the ante 50
Tesch73: posts the ante 50
GingerW1zard: posts small blind 400
Tesch73: posts big blind 800
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to GingerW1zard [7d 2s]
GingerW1zard: raises 10130 to 10930 and is all-in
Tesch73: calls 1670 and is all-in
*** FLOP *** [4c 7h 3c]
*** TURN *** [4c 7h 3c] [4h]
*** RIVER *** [4c 7h 3c 4h] [9h]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Tesch73: shows [4s 7s] (a full house, Fours full of Sevens)
GingerW1zard: shows [7d 2s] (two pair, Sevens and Fours)
GingerW1zard said, "LOL"
Tesch73 collected 5040 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 5040 | Rake 0
Board [4c 7h 3c 4h 9h]
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (button) (small blind) showed [7d 2s] and lost with two pair, Sevens and Fours
Seat 4: Tesch73 (big blind) showed [4s 7s] and won (5040) with a full house, Fours full of Sevens

PokerStars Game #8406367345: Tournament #42844720, $6.00+$0.50 Hold'em No Limit - Level X (400/800) - 2007/02/12 - 14:29:56 (ET)
Table '42844720 1' 9-max Seat #4 is the button
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (8460 in chips)
Seat 4: Tesch73 (5040 in chips)
GingerW1zard: posts the ante 50
Tesch73: posts the ante 50
Tesch73: posts small blind 400
GingerW1zard: posts big blind 800
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to GingerW1zard [2c 6d]
Tesch73: folds
GingerW1zard collected 900 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 900 | Rake 0
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (big blind) collected (900)
Seat 4: Tesch73 (button) (small blind) folded before Flop

PokerStars Game #8406369064: Tournament #42844720, $6.00+$0.50 Hold'em No Limit - Level X (400/800) - 2007/02/12 - 14:30:03 (ET)
Table '42844720 1' 9-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (8910 in chips)
Seat 4: Tesch73 (4590 in chips)
GingerW1zard: posts the ante 50
Tesch73: posts the ante 50
GingerW1zard: posts small blind 400
Tesch73: posts big blind 800
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to GingerW1zard [9h 4c]
GingerW1zard: raises 8060 to 8860 and is all-in
Tesch73: calls 3740 and is all-in
*** FLOP *** [3h 5s 9c]
*** TURN *** [3h 5s 9c] [8d]
*** RIVER *** [3h 5s 9c 8d] [3s]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Tesch73: shows [Ad Ac] (two pair, Aces and Threes)
GingerW1zard: shows [9h 4c] (two pair, Nines and Threes)
Tesch73 collected 9180 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 9180 | Rake 0
Board [3h 5s 9c 8d 3s]
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (button) (small blind) showed [9h 4c] and lost with two pair, Nines and Threes
Seat 4: Tesch73 (big blind) showed [Ad Ac] and won (9180) with two pair, Aces and Threes

PokerStars Game #8406374756: Tournament #42844720, $6.00+$0.50 Hold'em No Limit - Level X (400/800) - 2007/02/12 - 14:30:28 (ET)
Table '42844720 1' 9-max Seat #4 is the button
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (4320 in chips)
Seat 4: Tesch73 (9180 in chips)
GingerW1zard: posts the ante 50
Tesch73: posts the ante 50
Tesch73: posts small blind 400
GingerW1zard: posts big blind 800
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to GingerW1zard [9s Ks]
Tesch73: folds
GingerW1zard collected 900 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 900 | Rake 0
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (big blind) collected (900)
Seat 4: Tesch73 (button) (small blind) folded before Flop

PokerStars Game #8406376334: Tournament #42844720, $6.00+$0.50 Hold'em No Limit - Level X (400/800) - 2007/02/12 - 14:30:35 (ET)
Table '42844720 1' 9-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (4770 in chips)
Seat 4: Tesch73 (8730 in chips)
GingerW1zard: posts the ante 50
Tesch73: posts the ante 50
GingerW1zard: posts small blind 400
Tesch73: posts big blind 800
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to GingerW1zard [3h 2c]
GingerW1zard: folds
Tesch73 collected 900 from pot
Tesch73: doesn't show hand
GingerW1zard said, "**** man"
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 900 | Rake 0
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (button) (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 4: Tesch73 (big blind) collected (900)

PokerStars Game #8406378602: Tournament #42844720, $6.00+$0.50 Hold'em No Limit - Level X (400/800) - 2007/02/12 - 14:30:45 (ET)
Table '42844720 1' 9-max Seat #4 is the button
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (4320 in chips)
Seat 4: Tesch73 (9180 in chips)
GingerW1zard: posts the ante 50
Tesch73: posts the ante 50
Tesch73: posts small blind 400
GingerW1zard: posts big blind 800
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to GingerW1zard [Kc 5h]
Tesch73: folds
GingerW1zard said, "3 big wins"
GingerW1zard collected 900 from pot
GingerW1zard: doesn't show hand
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 900 | Rake 0
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (big blind) collected (900)
Seat 4: Tesch73 (button) (small blind) folded before Flop

PokerStars Game #8406380365: Tournament #42844720, $6.00+$0.50 Hold'em No Limit - Level X (400/800) - 2007/02/12 - 14:30:52 (ET)
Table '42844720 1' 9-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (4770 in chips)
Seat 4: Tesch73 (8730 in chips)
GingerW1zard: posts the ante 50
Tesch73: posts the ante 50
GingerW1zard: posts small blind 400
Tesch73: posts big blind 800
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to GingerW1zard [Jh 3c]
GingerW1zard: raises 3920 to 4720 and is all-in
Tesch73 said, "thats all it takes"
GingerW1zard said, "aye"
Tesch73: calls 3920
*** FLOP *** [7s 9s 9h]
GingerW1zard said, "wow"
Tesch73 said, "gg"
*** TURN *** [7s 9s 9h] [9c]
GingerW1zard said, "4"
*** RIVER *** [7s 9s 9h 9c] [Tc]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Tesch73: shows [9d 7d] (four of a kind, Nines)
GingerW1zard: shows [Jh 3c] (three of a kind, Nines)
Tesch73 collected 9540 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 9540 | Rake 0
Board [7s 9s 9h 9c Tc]
Seat 3: GingerW1zard (button) (small blind) showed [Jh 3c] and lost with three of a kind, Nines
Seat 4: Tesch73 (big blind) showed [9d 7d] and won (9540) with four of a kind, Nines

And he was right. All it takes to make up for terrible bubble play is a flopped straight, a full house calling with 74, pocket Aces, and quads.

Just make sure you keep folding those SBs dude

Shocked

Did you basically push every hand you had? I'm confused.

Running your game through SAGE...
64s is a wrong push
72o is a wrong push
94o is a wrong push
The final J3o was fine (your ratio was 6 and PI was 25, worst all-in hand with ratio 6 is PI 25).

I can't possibly chalk this one up to being unlucky. If you followed SAGE, I would, but you pushed way too many HORRIBLE hands in too short of a period, leading to the shortest (and relatively unluckiest) HU session I've seen.

It's easy to get carried away when you're that stacked against an opponent, but pushing the hands I mentioned above is basically unacceptable to me.

Ok, this pisses me off a little Xioustic but I'll blame SAGE not yourself.

A normal HU calling range, which is SO much looser than most $6.50 players will adopt gives the following

64s is +0.8%$EV
In fact he would have to call more than 70% for it to be a bad push

72o is +0.7%$EV at the normal range (which is HUGE) but is break even if he calls with 70%

94o
is +0.3%$EV at my HU range, although you would expect him to call far tighter than that range because he is back in it now.

My HU CALLING range on SNGPT is 22+,A2+,K2s+,K5o+,Q6+,J7+,T8+98+ and most opps won't call that wide, especially when you consider he is tight enough to keep folding SB.

Now if SAGE disagrees with good old ICM and SNGPT then SAGE can kiss my arse.

FUCK SAGE

also to extend on my earlier reply.

ginger its fine, when blinds are this high mixing it up dont wont and push/fold is the norm. 32s meh thats in hindsight to results. opp called with some loose hands so maybe its a good fold. 32s normally shouldnt be shoved tho you should check HU section in SNGPT, you do have it right??

*Last edited by Xioustic on Mon, 12 Feb 2007, 4:08pm; edited 2 times in total*

I think this is fine, with the possible exception of the 94o hand which I might have folded since opp is showing a propensity to call very wide. Weird though because it seems that opp would call a push wider than they would push themselves given how often they folded their SB ?!?!??!

The problem with SAGE, Nash Equilibrium etc. is that they assume that your opps play perfectly as the BB according to those systems which in the overwhelming majority of cases they do NOT. Let's take an extreme example where opp will only call in the BB with AA or KK and fold everything else. In this case I shove 100% because I know that 99% of the time they will fold. Conversely if I know the BB will call a push with 100% of hands I have to tighten my range to above-average hands that will win at showdown.

By the time it gets to HU, you should have a good read on your opp so your play should be tailored to that opp. Whilst SAGE and NE are useful theories to show that you actually need to shove/call wider than most do, I don't think that adopting such a formulaic approach is the most +EV way to play HU.

we see what your saying X.

HOH doesnt suit SNGs so much. examples he has (in memory) arent of shortstack situations like above.

SNGPT is gospel here but less so in other situation. it basically depends on various factors

What you don't understand sir, is that fact that we are trying to make +$EV plays according to ICM. If a shove is +.8%$EV that means that you are giving away money by folding.

Shoving 64 (which was not even a tough decision) is good because we make most of our money when he folds. We are not thinking I must have the best hand for showdown. We want him to fold a large portion of his range, which he should anyway since calling a push means you do have to show down the best.

He called with some terrible cards but was a mega nit till then so I couldn't know his calling range would be so stupid. Plus the folding SB led me to think he was tight.

It's not about having balls, it's about making decisions that make you money. You may scoff at me only being at the $6.50s, but my roll is $570 now from $150 and i'm playing $6.50s because i'm learning to multitable where it is cheap and where I have huge ROI.

The $16s are full of 16-20 tablers from 2+2 who know ICM theory inside out. Some of them have made $16k+ (e.g. spacegravy, loonatwok) just this year and just on the $16s. The real money in SNGs is there IMO and it is most definately in having a solid knowledge of ICM.

I don't need balls when it comes to shove fold. I need to analyse if mathematically I am choosing the right play and then I need to make it. Results are irrelevant (although often pretty funny as in this case), the correctness of the decision mathematically based on some judgement of opps calling range is what is relevant. I think 94o was a fold with this guy. Against a normal HU opponent, I shove the 32 with these stacks and so do many of the best turbo players on this forum I think.

if blinds were smaller then i would say yeah to losing marginal +EV for better EV situations but only if these factors exist;

blinds to stacks isnt crippling
im better than opp, which i always am Wink

we CAN wait for a better hand (or limp marginal instead at lower cost Wink

)

but once blinds get so high that folding an orbit loses the chip lead for example any bit of +EV MUST be taken, it does not make sense to wait. for example we see ginger still didnt get any good cards so if he was to wait it would of been very poor idea since obv the cards he got sucked.

Poker Forum

Poker Forum Index

Heads-Up Hold'em

Most Ridiculus HU session EVER