Todays UKOPS M/E Final Table 3 left, was I right to shove?

StayOrGo

In Response to Re: Todays UKOPS M/E Final Table 3 left, was I right to shove?:

I wouldn't (and dont) have a readless minraising range from the button @11bb eff. 3 handed. We can play wider ranges, induce more mistakes and preserve positional advantage. Wider ranges When we minr we create a pot of 3.5bb.  @ 25bb eff the BB has to risk 24bb to "win" that pot when 3bet shoving as a bluff. @ 11bb eff the reward of 3.5bb is still the same but he now only has to risk 10bb to win it. 3 bet shoving therefore becomes much more attractive. This will obviously hurt us and without a limping range we will be forced to lower our vpip from by far the most profitable position on the table.  When we limp the bb still has to risk 10bb to shove, only now the prize is a 2.5bb pot. Much less attractive. Induce more mistakes People play poorly v limps. In particular the SB will complete too wide. When we minr he gets to fold a lot. And he is correct to do so. He still gets to play the top of his range, only with us minr a wide range that part of his range gains a lot of EV.  Preserve positional advantage The advantage of being IP decreases with shorter eff stacks. In particular shrinking stack to pot ratios (SPR) hurts the IP player. You can't 3 barrel as effectively, can't leverage stacks or deny opponents as much equity share. The SPR of a limped pot @ 11bb eff is around the same as in a minr pot @ 22bb eff. We can 3 barrel, over-bet, use our stack etc etc. Villains can be forced to fold weak flopped pairs by the river etc etc. @ 11bb eff a minr pot is roughly the same SPR as a limped pot @ 5.5bb. Villain if he doesn't 3bet shove can still flat, take his great odds pre knowing that he can often showdown any flopped pair and play 2 streets instead of 3 OOP. Playing v capped ranges is boss. Our range is playable and we have position and a decent SPR. I don't know enough about mtt population tendencies to be sure, but the combination of the above factors would lead me to believe that limping should form part of a solid button strat here. It also reduces variance which can be of benefit when the ev's of actions are close There are other factors to consider. If there are asymmetric stacks, or one player in the blinds is a better player than the other / having reads will change things drastically depending on which blind the shorter stack / reg / reads are in.
Posted by TeddyBloat

Thanks for this Teddy, very interesting reading. Initially my mind set was only looking for a black or white, yes/no response, so your lengthy reply took me back a little.

However, prompted by ChicknMelt's post to re-read it in detail, it has woken me up to the merits of limping as a viable option in more cases than I previously gave credit to. Not something I thought I'd hear myself say :=)

So thank you for your well articulated response and for pointing me towards a deeper way of looking at the scenario.

All the best!

Graham

bearlyther

I understand the merits of a limping strategy and i do it myself i would even limp from the cutoff on occasions if i thought the spot was right with stack sizes behind me.  It would be a balanced limping strategy with premiums, medium strength hands and even some trash such as 84 suited or something if i thought the stacks were right for it and i didnt want to get shoved on but could play the hand profitably and bet 1 big blind on the flop on most occasions and win.

However i think jamming outweighs the merits of limping in this spot from 10 big blinds.  I would like the limp a lot more if we had 15 big blinds.  When we limp here were letting the blinds reliase their equity with any 2 cards for free which is pretty bad when we had a +ev shove.  I think the difference of 5 big blinds more means a lot here.