definitely. the ranges i posted were for anteless poker, its even wider with antes. I only fairly recently learned how wide you should shove and I was shocked. I use it as more of a guideline, no point jamming the bottom of your range in a bh if the big blinds calling super wide for your head! If you push or fold correctly this range though it will make you money, no matter how weird it feels jamming J3s, T4s and 53s for 10 blinds.
TBH, I'm really starting to struggle with poker concepts. I know it's a recognised idea that you have to 'win the flips', but the more information I take on board, the more I think of tournament play as having ten coins lined up. If you flip them, and they all hit heads, you win. If one is a tails, you lose. No matter how good you are.
This is further ratified by players being advised that 'no matter what they did in a particular spot, they couldn't win'.
Naturally, you have to be a good player to get those coins down just to ten.
In Response to Re: So many 'shove-monkeys'...? : High variance is fine is you have a HUGE bank to play with, but awful if not. Posted by swanstu
There's your issue right there then.
If you are playing games that you don't have a big enough bankroll for then yes, the high variance line is a lot more dangerous/frustrating as there is a much greater chance that you go busto due to bad beats before things even out (and you win your 2/3... which you always will over the long term with AK vs two random low cards).
Be comfortable putting more money aside specifically for poker, or play lower buy-in games until you have built a bit of a cushion up to protect against bad luck.
Aggressive play is crucial in tournaments, if you play too risk averse you'll mincash more often but won't win much and all the value is at the top!
Benchmark, not all of the tournament is played with shallow stacks. The better players have more of an edge when deeper stacked and its possible to keep chipping up without even getting into flips, just by making good bluffs, reads and value bets. When stacks are shorter there is less of a skill edge and a lot more variance but a good aggressive player might only need to win one or two flips to go deep whereas a tighter one might need to win 5+, so the good aggro players goes deep more often.
In poker so often you're gonna go broke to a better hand and do nothing wrong, if someone has kings preflop its not gonna be a mistake going to go all in, its just bad luck when the guy flips over AA. This is why there's a lot of variance and why some of the top players on this site have gone through 500 game streaks losing money.
In the hyper sng's where its a lot of push or fold I believe a ROI of 3% is considered good which goes to show how much variance there is in shorter stacked play.
In Response to Re: So many 'shove-monkeys'...? : There's your issue right there then. If you are playing games that you don't have a big enough bankroll for then yes, the high variance line is a lot more dangerous/frustrating as there is a much greater chance that you go busto due to bad beats before things even out (and you win your 2/3... which you always will over the long term with AK vs two random low cards). Be comfortable putting more money aside specifically for poker, or play lower buy-in games until you have built a bit of a cushion up to protect against bad luck. Posted by shakinaces
I see what you're saying, but I'm not talking about playing a long way out of my bankroll - I play fairly low stakes sngs/hu games. I could afford a fair amount of buy ins at the level I play.
What I mean about variance is that it disrupts your results even over the longer term - true effects of that can take 10's of K's of games.
It is all about individual circumstances and playing styles. I wouldn't call early in a tournament, unless I have a solid read on the player/ detailed notes. Middle; it depends on the action around the table, but late, unless they are Nitty McNit, I'm calling.
From my experience, a 'panicked' or aggressive over shove 9/10 is AK, as people don't know what to do with the hand.
Its says somewhere in the mental game of poker that If there was no variance the better players would always win and the bad players would stop playing till only the most elite played so poker would turn into chess. variance is a good thing. Izzy I don't know what stack size your talking about but I find it highly unlikely 9/10 times shoves are AK unless you've barely played :P Unless your talking about 60bb open shoves at low limits!
In Response to Re: So many 'shove-monkeys'...? : I see what you're saying, but I'm not talking about playing a long way out of my bankroll - I play fairly low stakes sngs/hu games. I could afford a fair amount of buy ins at the level I play. What I mean about variance is that it disrupts your results even over the longer term - true effects of that can take 10's of K's of games. Posted by swanstu
You play HU hyper poker and you are surprised there is lots of shoving? Surely that's a fundamental part of the game?
I can't see anywhere where the OP has said he plays "hypers". It was feelgroggy who first brought Hypers into the thread. Posted by FCHD
Maybe I am wrong on that but he plays HU and SNG games then complains about lots of all ins. Your not playing down the streets very often in these games. Even more so at lower stakes.
Its like playing deepstacks and moaning that they go on for ages.
I should perhaps clarify a bit, I don't play many 'hypers' for exactly this reason - though at times. There's no need to shove all in every hand even in those though, at earlier levels for sure!
Also, I am referring not to players who sometimes use a 'shove all in', after all we all do sometimes. Rather those players who seem to barely use anything else, and I do see these.
As I admitted earlier, you are right that moving away from some formats reduces this issue, I know. Funny thing is I think I do ok at HU play, despite hating this aspect of it! I don't agree with some comments that shoving is so essential to playing especially when not a 'hyper' format, there's plenty of space in most of the games to move beyond shove/call.
But my initial question/observation was that more players on this site seemed to fall into this category. May be wrong of course, but seemed that way to me.
Comments
This is further ratified by players being advised that 'no matter what they did in a particular spot, they couldn't win'.
Naturally, you have to be a good player to get those coins down just to ten.
Or am I missing something ?
I hope so.
If you are playing games that you don't have a big enough bankroll for then yes, the high variance line is a lot more dangerous/frustrating as there is a much greater chance that you go busto due to bad beats before things even out (and you win your 2/3... which you always will over the long term with AK vs two random low cards).
Be comfortable putting more money aside specifically for poker, or play lower buy-in games until you have built a bit of a cushion up to protect against bad luck.
Maybe the OP should consider playing some PLO or PLO8 - "shove monkeying" (as he rather unkindly calls it) is not possible in Pot Limit.
Izzy I don't know what stack size your talking about but I find it highly unlikely 9/10 times shoves are AK unless you've barely played :P Unless your talking about 60bb open shoves at low limits!
And my comment has now taken it to a 3rd page