MTT FT - Standard or not?

rancid

oppp been passive
Other two oppo's have at least double my stack

Is this a standard him or me situation
Is oppo calling with only 30-40% of range or is oppo calling with any 2
Should I have realised oppo will call with any 2 and fold ?
I am doing the right thing here ?
Do I have any FE ?

Player	Action	Cards	Amount	Pot	Balance
rancid	Small blind		8000.00	8000.00	84606.00
notaclue2	Big blind		16000.00	24000.00	27709.26
	Your hole cards	6 9
Paulzie	Fold
CTC	Fold
rancid	All-in		84606.00	108606.00	0.00
notaclue2	All-in		27709.26	136315.26	0.00
rancid	Unmatched bet		48896.74	87418.52	48896.74
rancid	Show	6 9
notaclue2	Show	3 10
Flop
		8 K A
Turn
		7
River
		A
notaclue2	Win	Pair of Aces	87418.52		87418.52

Dudeskin8

I probz just fold it as they have to surely call with anything sat <2bbs deep and that anything has a decent chance of beating 9 high or being 40%.

rancid

In Response to Re: MTT FT - Standard or not?:

I probz just fold it as they have to surely call with anything sat <2bbs deep and that anything has a decent chance of beating 9 high or being 40%.
Posted by Dudeskin8

emmmm i thought this after, felt a bit narked at myself )

BigBluster

The other 2 oppos messed up, not you. You had to shove and 69 was easily good enough. No way you can fold and give the small stack a walk: that is criminal on a FT when you're laddering.
One of the bigger stacks should have done a weird co-operation play and moved at it on your behalf (you fold of course, but also there's a fair chance the other guy will fold because YOU did). They're probably not used to playing FTs where the whole game is completely different.

rancid

In Response to Re: MTT FT - Standard or not?:

The other 2 oppos messed up, not you. You had to shove and 69 was easily good enough. No way you can fold and give the small stack a walk: that is criminal on a FT when you're laddering. One of the bigger stacks should have done a weird co-operation play and moved at it on your behalf (you fold of course, but also there's a fair chance the other guy will fold because YOU did). They're probably not used to playing FTs where the whole game is completely different.
Posted by BigBluster

I hear ya, it was a passive FT to say the least – two big stacks applied no pressure

grantorino

prob close, but I would think shove is ok

BigBluster

In Response to Re: MTT FT - Standard or not?:

prob close, but I would think shove is ok
Posted by grantorino

No way mate, more than OK. Shove is mandatory. As stated above, giving the small stack a walk is absolutely criminal and 69 is easily good enough. 23o is good enough!

grantorino

In Response to Re: MTT FT - Standard or not?:

In Response to Re: MTT FT - Standard or not? : No way mate, more than OK. Shove is mandatory. As stated above, giving the small stack a walk is absolutely criminal and 69 is easily good enough. 23o is good enough!
Posted by BigBluster

Please explain why its so mandatory, when we are playing a ~6bb stack. You may well be correct, I think it prob is a shove, but looks pretty close to me

Poker_Fail

Unless the oppo is an idiot, you have no FE at all.

I would fold this, you are about 37% against any random hand, if you fold he's only gained 8k chips.

@Bigbluster how is this a call?

grantorino

According to pokerstove we have 44.5% equity, we need about 41% to make a shove neutral chip EV if he always calls. 
 
The real question is if laddering one place is worth the chance that we often end up crippled 

rancid

In Response to Re: MTT FT - Standard or not?:

Unless the oppo is an idiot, you have no FE at all. I would fold this, you are about 37% against any random hand, if you fold he's only gained 8k chips. @Bigbluster how is this a call?
Posted by Poker_Fail

No oppo would gain 24000, once posted blinds there not your chips
The FE wasn't the issue for me, but shoving for me feels very standard
The situation on the table was very passive and it felt like it was me or oppo as the big stacks were just sitting around

fold or shove

gotta shove any 2 here because your not going to be less than 60/40
In hindsight it looks like a fold but every orbit I would have to shove into oppo, so therefore do or die )
Would you rarther oppo calls with any 2 now or let oppo have another orbit to pick up a hand or have the option to pass

rancid

In Response to Re: MTT FT - Standard or not?:

According to pokerstove we have 44.5% equity, we need about 41% to make a shove neutral chip EV if he always calls.    The real question is if laddering one place is worth the chance that we often end up crippled 
Posted by grantorino

Not even thinking laddering here, just want more chips to win it and I'll take oppo calling with any 2 here

Poker_Fail

In Response to Re: MTT FT - Standard or not?:

According to pokerstove we have 44.5% equity, we need about 41% to make a shove neutral chip EV if he always calls.    The real question is if laddering one place is worth the chance that we often end up crippled 
Posted by grantorino

Is that suggesting that 9 3offsuit is winning this pot 44.5% of the time??? cos there is no way that is true

EDIT: I must be failing at the definition of equity, please explain it to me : )

grantorino

In Response to Re: MTT FT - Standard or not?:

In Response to Re: MTT FT - Standard or not? : Is that suggesting that 9 3offsuit is winning this pot 44.5% of the time??? cos there is no way that is true EDIT: I must be failing at the definition of equity, please explain it to me : )
Posted by Poker_Fail

According to my version of pokerstove 96o wins pot about 44.5% of time v a completely random hand(it surprised me too fwiw, 93o drops to under 41%). Maybe pokerstove is wrong

Not sure what definition of equity you want to know, its the share of the pot you should win over time.. To calculate equity required its (amount to call)/(amount of call+money already in pot)*100. In this case Im assuming villain is all in when calculating it. Did those figures above v quickly, so they may be wrong

grantorino

In Response to Re: MTT FT - Standard or not?:

In Response to Re: MTT FT - Standard or not? : Not even thinking laddering here, just want more chips to win it and I'll take oppo calling with any 2 here
Posted by rancid

Not really about the laddering, more about which move gives you a higher £EV. You basically c ripple yourself doing this more than half the time, and still have a lot to do even if you win the pot to jump another place. I would think shoving is correct, you should run an icm calc though, with the prize jumps put in, to get a definitive answer

The_Don90

i probably just fold. If its a passive table. Although im shoving about every other hand lol

rancid

In Response to Re: MTT FT - Standard or not?:

In Response to Re: MTT FT - Standard or not? : Not really about the laddering, more about which move gives you a higher £EV. You basically c ripple yourself doing this more than half the time, and still have a lot to do even if you win the pot to jump another place. I would think shoving is correct, you should run an icm calc though, with the prize jumps put in, to get a definitive answer
Posted by grantorino

ICM calculations are not my thing tbh, ain't got my head round em yet !!!