At this point, we want to look at how the chip utility theorist should potentially play with a bubble factor of 0.8, and how the theorist that opportunity cost is more valuable than the ICM suggests should play by looking at a bubble factor of 2 on the bubble.
We also will eventually look at how we should play with 1.2 bubble factor so between all of these factors you can get a good "feel" for where a bubble factor of everything between would be as well as try to project what bubble factors of 0.6 and 2.5 would look like so you have a better "feel" for correct play than your opponent.
Another thing that I would like to do if I find the time is look at based upon how opponents are "supposed" to play to a 3bet, just how wide of a range can we 3bet shove profitably. Then we can examine what happens to our 3bet shove range if we look at the overall chips we gain as worth 1.6 times less than the chips we lose or 1.2 or 1 or 0.8?
A player need not memorize every single scenario. If he is good at estimation, ball park figures and has an imagination, just a general concept of how to adjust is fine. A player can probably develop a far better "feel" for the game by working several mathematical scenarios and looking at a few general concepts and tables and playing a few hundred hours than someone who plays thousands of hours and can still easily be fooled by randomness, particularly in a tournament where conditions change constantly.
Pot odds and win odds to call an all in chart:
You need 1.2 better pot odds with a 1.2 bubble factor if you are 50% to win. Normally if you are getting 2 to 1 you need to win 1/3. If you are getting 4:1 you need to win 1/5. However, if you include bubble factors you may need a greater probability of winning because you cannot accumulate 100% of the prize pool in a tournament. This chart is to train you to understand how to adjust as a utility theorist you should adjust.
Pot odds divided by bubble factor is tournament odds.
The ICM bubble factors near most SNG bubbles is around 2.0. In supersattelites it can skyrocket from 3 with 30 players left if it pays 20 and shoot to 12 and then 20 at the stone cold bubble, since you only are playing "not to lose" to get a seat. In MTTs it usually doesn't rise much past 1.6 unless it's one of those top heavy payouts where the final table bubble AND the money bubble are the same time. In those instances is may rise to around 2 by the stone cold bubble. In the main event the money bubble is only around 1.4 but as it approaches the final table bubble the bubble actually has a higher bubble factor than the money bubble and rises beyond 1.4 in day 5 and by the end of day 7 it rises close to 1.8. If you are the shortest stack left, you no longer can wait for people to bust each other so your bubble factor is less than some of your opponents. In fact, in reality there should be an interest the larger stacks should have in keeping the smaller stacks alive so that they can steal from each other. You'll be able to get a much better feel for bubble factors if you either use an ICM simulator or trainer or two or check out the charts on the poker book titled "Kill Everyone".
As with any "chart", practice implementing one thing at a time consciously until you get a good feel for it and then move onto the next part of your game you want to develop a good "feel" for it. You want to not have to think about so many different factors and have a really good feel for the odds in certain spots, the ranges of opponents, the odds you need to justify the decision so that you can objectively determine how strong your hand needs to be BEFORE an event happens that you are put in a tough spot. Instead, anticipate several actions before a hand gets dealt and try to assess your minimum threshold for any spot.
0.80 bubble factor.
There are only 2 ways I know of that a bubble factor could be less than 1. Either there is a huge overlay due to guaranteed prize pool that doesn't attract the expected number of buy ins in a winner take all spot WITH bounties, or if you are a "Utility Theorist" under the right conditions.
If you believe in Utility Theory you are betting that you have a much greater edge with more chips than without and can parlay a double up into a much higher probability of winning than the ICM suggests. That is much more true when facing the one of toughest, aggressive opponents seated to your left that prevent you from stealing your way to victory at a weak table and you have a chance to knock that player out, particularly in a faster blind structure where if you don't take action now you won't get a better shot.
The strength of utility theory depends upon how much better you are with a deep stack and how fearful opponents are of their tournament life.
As utility theorist, you should usually have a slightly lower bubble factor than ICM suggests. As such, early in a tournament when ICM suggests 1.0-1.2 bubble factor you may adjust it to as low as 0.80. But as it rises to 1.6 you might adjust it to 1.2 or 1.4 so you are still gunning for the win, without trying to accumulate 100% of the chips as if it's worth 100% of the prize pool. I could never endorse a strategy much more aggressively than 0.80 bubble factor, even if you are a much better deep stack player and it is a very long tournament.
ICM and bubble factors prove players SHOULD respect stacks that can knock them out and that actually creates a greater expectancy for those with more chips that should result in a greater advantage while the ICM assumes equally skilled players. Also, skilled deep stack players should have a greater BB/100 win rate than skilled short stack players for the most part because their all in value bets earn more. Having a chiplead has an inherent advantage that should result in future edges that can more than make up for the equity you gave up by calling or pushing too liberally earlier, but it also needs to make up for the future opportunity you give up to potentially see more profitable spots and survive.
Your survival and ability to survive to more lucrative stages of the tournament such as surviving the antes a larger percentage of the time can easily result in more chips and eventually getting the chip lead anyways so the "utility" advantage probably isn't quite as great as some might otherwise think.
Nevertheless, I don't mind mapping out a strategy to see what a utility theorist strategy would look like and there are conditions where I believe it may apply. Also, I can't disprove that Utility Theory might not allow for greater profitability overall in tournaments if executed correctly because of the complexity of tournaments and suboptimal play that exists in reality, but not in "theory".
My hope is someday to someday develop the ability to simulate a massive amount of poker tournaments with players with certain basic simplified playing styles and some with edges and some without and adjust a player's bubble factors to see which gives the highest expected return on risk at a given payout in certain conditions.
With a 0.80 bubble factor and 6BB shove you are getting 1.375 to 1 assuming the blinds fold.
1.375 to 1 with antes in a cash game you need to be 42.1% or better to break even or profit in the very long run. But if you factor in utility theory that says more chips yields greater ability to steal pots and leads to even more chips and an even greater ability to accumulate chips says that you cannot
6 big blinds calling all in vs 6BB equilibrium shoves with 0.80 bubble factor
You only need to be 36.8% to win if the chips you win are worth 25% more than you lose. This is possible IF doubling up brings you the ability to play more hands and prevents people from stealing in the future resulting in more walks and more frequently earning position and gives opponents lower bubble factors in the future. I wouldn't normally think that 14 big blinds is enough to have any additional utility other than opponents will be much less willing to try to steal so doubling up from this short may not have all that much unless you can parlay it into another all in later. Intuitively this feels really wrong to me, as you are giving up on future opportunities but when other people make this loose of call it's annoying and it certainly hurts those that get involved with you as well. Those at your table certainly will be forced to play tighter which makes them more predictable in the future if/when you do get chips. So it may be okay and I won't rule it out until there's a way to prove otherwise such as through a massive amount of simulations in an all in or fold game abbreviated poker simulation of those who play the optimal ICM with a field of those that don't.
When opponent shoves this often:
8 22+ A3s+ A9o+ K9s+ KJo+ Q9s+ QJo J9s+ T9s 98s
7 22+ A2s+ A8o+ K8s+ KTo+ Q9s+ QJo J9s+ T8s+ 98s
6 22+ A2s+ A7o+ A5o K7s+ KTo+ Q9s+ QJo J8s+ T8s+ 98s 87s
5 22+ A2s+ A3o+ K6s+ KTo+ Q8s+ QTo+ J8s+ JTo T8s+ 98s 87s
4 22+ Ax+ K5s+ K9o+ Q8s+ QTo+ J8s+ JTo T8s+ 97s+ 87s 76s
3 22+ Ax+ K2s+ K7o+ Q6s+ Q9o+ J8s+ JTo T7s+ 97s+ 87s 76s
2 22+ Kx+ Q2s+ Q8o+ J6s+ J8o+ T7s+ T9o 97s+ 86s+ 76s
sb 22+ Tx+ 92s+ 94o+ 82s+ 85o+ 73s+ 75o+ 62s+ 65o 52s+ 54o 43s
Call this often with bubble factor of 0.80
8 22+,A2o+,K7o+,K2s+,QTo+,Q8s+,JT,J8s+,T7s+,97s+,78s,76s
7 22+,A2+,K9o+,K2s+,QTo+,Q6s+,J7s,T7s+,97s+,87s,76s
6 22+,A2+,K8o+,K2s+,Q9o+,Q4s+,J9o+,J7s+T9o+,T7s+,96s+,86s+,76s,65s
5 22+,A2+,K4o+,K2s+,Q8o+,Q3s+,J9o+,J7s+,T9o,T7s+,96s+,86s+,75s+,65s,54s
4 22+,A2+,K3+,K2s+,Q8o+,Q2s+,J9o+,J5s+,T8o+,T6s+,96s+,85s+,75s+,65s
3 22+,A2+,K3+,K2s+Q8o+,Q2s+,J8o+,J4s,T8o+,T6s+,98o+,96s+,85s+,75s+,64s+,54s
2 22+,A2+,K2+,K2s+Q5o+,Q2s+,J7o+,J3s,T8o+,T5s+,98o+,95s+,85s+,74s+,64s+,53s+
1 22+,A2+,K2+,Q2+,J2+,T2+,95o+,92s+,85o+,82s+,75o+,73s+,76o,63s+53s+,43s
10 big blinds calling open shove all in with 0.80 bubble factor
With between 10 and 20 big blinds, I could really start to see an argument for utility come into play a lot more. Particularly if there is a situation at the table. One example might be if you observe one player who you know opens far too many hands and folds to 3bets often you gotta get enough chips to be able to 3bet shove and get some uncontested chips. So taking a gamble short term to extract an edge in the future may be worth it. You ideally want to call someone else's shove so you can get the stack to 3bet shove the loose player. You are getting 12.25 to 10 or 1.225 to 1. In cash game you'd need to be 44.94% to win. If you believe utility outweighs opportunity cost and payout structure such that you have 0.80 bubble factor you have to be 39.5% to win to call.
vs opponents who shove this often with X players left.
8 33+ A8s+ A5s AJo+ K9s+ KQo QTs+ JTs T9s
7 22+ A8s+ A5s ATo+ K9s+ KQo Q9s+ J9s+ T9s
6 22+ A8s+ A5s-A4s ATo+ K9s+ KJo+ Q9s+ QJo J9s+ T9s
5 22+ A2s+ A9o+ K8s+ KJo+ Q9s+ QJo J8s+ JTo T8s+ 98s
4 22+ A2s+ A5o+ K7s+ KTo+ Q8s+ QTo+ J8s+ JTo T8s+ 98s 87s
3 22+ Ax+ K6s+ KTo+ Q8s+ QTo+ J8s+ JTo T7s+ 97s+ 87s 76s
2 22+ Ax+ K2s+ K8o+ Q6s+ Q9o+ J7s+ J9o+ T7s+ T9o 96s+ 86s+ 75s+ 65s
sb 22+ Qx+ J2s+ J6o+ T2s+ T7o+ 94s+ 97o+ 84s+ 86o+ 74s+ 76o 63s+ 53s+ 43s
(when opponent shoves with this many players left) Call off with:
8 44+,A9o+,A4s+,KQ,KTs+,QTs+,JTs
7 (not calculated yet)
6 22+,A4o+,A2s+,KTo+,K9s+,QTs+,JTs
5 (not calculated yet)
4 22+,A2+,K9o+,K3s+,QTo+,Q8s+,JTo,J9s+,T9s,
3 (not calculated yet)
2 22+,A2+,K4o+,K2s+,Q8o+,Q4s+,J9o,J7s+,T7s+,97s+,87s
1 22+,A2+,K2+,Q2+,J5o+,J2s+,T7o+,T3s+,97o+,95s+,85s+,75s+,65s
20 big blinds calling off facing a re-shove with 0.80 bubble factor
There isn't really an "optimal" open shoving spot with 20 big blinds. There are optimal 3bet all in spots but that is contingent upon the opener's range. We could certainly look at optimal 3betting frequencies in normal spots assuming optimal opener's range and then determine our opening range based upon being unexploitable to resteals given our bubble factors. But with a bubble factor of 0.8 you are not really going to be exploitable unless you raise very liberally because you are calling off your chips more liberally. I can really get behind the idea that with 20BBs calling looser than ICM when ICM bubble factors initially are close to 1 may be worth it. If you call off liberally on 3bet shoves, opponents aren't going to 3bet you nearly as often and are going to be more exploitable if they are the "raise or fold" type of player, and they also will be beatable if they are overly passive.
Regardless, rather than like we've done before where we had decisions based upon our opening range, we will just look at various % ranges so you can attempt to assess the situation.
With 2.5 preflop raise, and 20BB shove we normally have to be over 41% to win since we call 17.5 to win 25 at that stage. But with bubble factor of 0.80 we take pot odds of 1.4286 to 1 1.4286/.80=1.78575+1... 1/2.78575=~.359 and we need to be only 35.9% to win.
3bet range of KK+ it still requires AA
3bet range of JJ+ requires QQ+
JJ+,AK 3bet requires JJ+,AK
TT+,AK,AQs requires JJ+,AK as well but TT and AQs are very close.
88+,AQ+,AJs,KQs requires 88+,AQ+,AJs+
77+,ATs+,AJo+ requires 22+,AQ+,AJs+,KTs+
77+,A9s+,KTs+,QTs+,ATo+,KQo requires 22+,A9o+,A2s+,KQo,KTs+
22+,A9s+,KTs+,QTs+,ATo+,KQo requires 22+,A5o,A7o+,A2s+,KTo+,K6s+QJo,Q8s+,J8s+,T8s+,97s+,86s+,76s
About 25% of hands or
66+,A2s+,K7s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T8s+,97s+,87s,76s,65s,A8o+,KTo+,QTo+,JTo
Requires 22+,A2+,K2+,Q9o+,Q2s+,J9o+,J7s+,T9o,T7s+,96s+,86s+,75s+,65s,54s
About 50% of hands requires 22+,A2+,K2+,Q2+,J5o+,J2s+,T7o+,T2s+,97o+,95s+,87o,84s+,
74s+,64s,53s+,43s
Any two and you can call pretty much any two suited cards and all but 72o,62o,52o,42o,43o,23o.
We will attempt to construct a general guideline of how often you should ship it preflop with an open shove. We will do this by looking at opponents who call such that they have cash game equity. In other words, if it were a cashgame, they would only call such that they make money over our shoving range. Once we solve what that range is we can approximate the probability that our opponents all fold and determine the equity gained from folds, equity gained from calls, and equity lost from calls and adjust it according to the bubble factors. I really don't like overbet shoving but when you consider that it isn't a cash game and opponents will make mistakes and either accidentally give you more value by calling too loosely or folding too tightly, and it will keep you above 20BBs with the opportunity to get a big stack and dominate your opponents from there even as the blinds rise a few levels, it's not terrible to try to start shoving earlier than everyone else. I wouldn't do it, but Arnold Snyder in his book Poker Tournament Formula 2 advocates this and has posted good results.
20BB shoving
I don't know exactly how to calculate optimal open shoving frequencies. I have an idea that requires exhaustive calculation. Basically you would determine given a particular shove range what a single opponent should call off with. Then you determine the probability remaining number of opponents do NOT have a hand in that range to tell you the probability that a shove succeeds. Then you determine your equity when called with that range. And you adjust the chips you win when it works to the bubble factors. The problem is then you have to adjust your shoving range and repeat the process until you can no longer improve the results.
I do know that with a bubble factor of 0.80 we can shove wider than an equilibrium or cash game optimal strategy. I also know that with bubble factor of 0.80 the chips we lose are only worth 80% of the chips we win (or the chips we win are worth 25% more than the chips we lose). Also, with higher bubble factors we should shove tighter than equilibrium assuming opponents will react the same as in a cashgame or far from money as they do on the bubble, but we can shove wider if opponents are overly tight because they adjust to the bubble factors.
But we at least know for sure that widening the range from a cash game is correct when bubble factors are less than one, and probably we shouldn't open shove at all with bubble factors greater than 1 but could 3bet tighter than cash game optimal if opponents don't adjust and wider if they do.
So what is cash game optimal shoving with 20BBs? (trick question, cash game shoving is probably never the "optimal" move but the shove itself is still unexploitable and if opponents are bad enough you may be able to grind out a profit, particularly if you play your small and big blind well.
8 TT+AK
7 99+,AQ+
6 99+,AQo+,ATs+,KQs
5 77+,AQo+,ATs+,KTs+
4 66+,AQo+,ATs+,KTs+,QJs
3 44+,AJo+,A9s+,KTs+,QTs+,JTs
2 33+,AJ+,A9s+,KQo,K9s+,QTs+,J9s+,T9s
1 22+,A9o,K9o+,K4s+,Q9o+,Q5s+,J9o+,J7s+,T9o,T6s+,98o,96s+,86s+,75s+,65s,54s
(This was calculated with no antes so we can probably widen it significantly when antes are involved since we are picking up 50% more when no one calls)
I think in earlier position we cannot widen the hands nearly as much as in late position because the hand range that can call us is going to be much more premium and tend to crush us when we're called, so widening that range much with so many players left to act isn't going to do much, plus simply stealing from early position with a small raise or 3x raise will be enough.
Cash game with antes unexploitable shoving:
8 99+,AQ+,AJs+,KQs+
7 77+,AQ+,ATs+,KJs+
6 66+,AJ+,A9s+,KTs+,QTs+
5 55+,AJo+,A8s+,KQo,K9s+,Q9s+
4 22+,AT+,A7s+,A5s,KJo+,K9s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T9s
3 22+,A8+,A2s+,KJ+,K9s+,QJ,Q9s+,J8s+,T8s+,98s
2 22+,A2+,KT+,K5s+,QT+,Q8s+,JT,J8s+T7s+,97s+,87s+,
1 22+,A2+,K3+,K2s+,Q8o+,Q2s+,J8o+J4s+,T8o+,T5s+,98o,95s+,87o,85s+,75s+,65s+
I think widening that range just by eyeballing it will get us close enough. Afterall, the utility theory is speculative and very uncertain to begin with, and to say your bubble factor is definitely 0.80 and not closer to 0.70 or 0.90 to take account utility theory is impossible to say anyways so it doesn't seem worth the time to be precise here even if we could.
Approximate open shoving strategy with 0.80 bubble factor:
8 88+,AQ+,AJs+,KQs+
7 66+,AQ+,ATs+,KJs+,QJs
6 55+,AT+,A9s+,KQo,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,T9s
5 55+,A9o+,A7s+,KJo,K8s+,Q8s+,J9s+,T8s+,98s
4 22+,A8+,A4s+,KTo+,K8s+,QJ,Q8s+,JT,J8s+,T8s+,97s+,87s
3 22+,A6+,A2s+,KT+,K7s+,Q9+,Q8s+,J7s+,T7s+,97s+,86s+,75s+,65s
2 22+,AT+,K8+,K2s+,Q9+,Q7s+,J8+,J7s+,T6s+,96s+,86s+,75s+,65s
1 22+,A2+,K2+,Q7+,Q2s+,J7+,J2s+,T7+,T5s+,98o,95s+,87o,85s+,75s+,64s+,53s+
The best part about this is if opponents adjust for bubble factors or call far too widely this shoving range may actually be profitable and actually may be more profitable than the unexploitable strategy if opponents call off incorrectly enough or have high bubble factors themselves and pay attention to them. If done early and middle stages the increased number of steals from maximum aggression plus opponent's mistakes plus future utility may make it so it isn't that bad. Consider the alternative is being in a spot where as soon as the blinds rise you are probably at risk of being chronically short stacked and have to survive multiple all ins before you can steal with wider ranges with much lower variance which allows you to avoid being in that reduced profitability spot. If the alternative is having to sit with 10-20BBs and dramatically reduce your opening percentage and profitability depending on how close you are to the money and how fast the structure is, it may be worth it to get out of the chronically short stacked range. I don't know, I can't prove it, but I won't rule it out.
This of course conflicts with the concept that the chips you win are worth less than the chips you lose because payouts are not winner take all, but there is probably certain spots where utility may outweigh ICM and opportunity cost just as there may be some spots where the opportunity cost of survival plus finding better spots, plus preserving your survival, plus opponents earning you money by busting themselves through being overly reckless-- or conversely being overly tight on the bubble and allowing you with so much future profitability that you not only will gain more chips by guaranteeing you survive to see another hand but also because you may have enough skill to win the tournament without having to be all in without being a crushing favorite.
1.0 bubble factors or cash games:
calling off 6BBs 1.375 to 1 not in blinds*
Need to be 42.1% to win
8 44+,AT+,A8s+,KQs
7 33+,A9+,A7s+,KQ,KJs+
6 22+,A8+,A5s+,KQ,KTs+,QJs
5 22+,A7+,A2s+,KJ+,KTs+,QJs
4 22+,A4+,A2s+,KT+,K9s+,QTs+
3 22+,A2+,KT+,K8s+,QJ,QTs+,JTs
from blinds*
SB button push:22+,A2+,K5+,K2s+,Q9+,Q6s+,JT,J8s+,T8s+,98s
BB button push:22+,A2+,K2+,K2s+,Q7+,Q2s+,J8,J4s+,T8+,T6s+,98,96s+,85s+,75s+,64s+,54s
BB w SB push 22+,A2+,K2+,Q2+,J4+,J2s+,t6+,T2s+,97o+,95s+,87o,85s+,75s+,65s,54s
Calling off 10BB shoves
With 1.225 to 1 Odds, Need to be 44.94% to win
8 77+,AJ+,ATs+
7 66+,AJ+,ATs
6 55+,AT+,A9s+,KQ,KJs+
5 33+,A9+,A5s+,KQ,KTs+
4 22+,A7+,A2s+,KQ+,KJs+
3 22+,A4+,A2s+,KJ+,KTs+,QJs
from blinds*
SB button push: 22+,A2+,K7+,K5s+,QT+,Q9s+,J9s
BB button push: 22+,A2+,K8+,K2s+,Q9+,Q8s+,J9s+,
BB w SB push: 22+,A2+,K2+,Q6+,Q2s+,J8+,J4s+,T9+,T7s+,97s+,87s
Calling off open 20BB shove
1.1125 to 1
Need to be 47.34% to win
Calling off 20BBs when 3bet
1.38 to 1
Need to be 42% to win
1.2 bubble factors:
calling off 6BBs 1.375 to 1
Need to be 46.6% to win
Calling off 10BB shoves
1.225 to 1
Need to be 49.48% to win
Calling off open 20BB shove
1.1125 to 1
Need to be 51.98% to win
Calling off 20BBs when 3bet
1.38 to 1
Need to be 46.51% to win
1.4 bubble factors:
calling off 6BBs 1.375 to 1
Need to be 50.45% to win
Calling off 10BB shoves
1.225 to 1
Need to be 53.33% to win
Calling off open 20BB shove
1.1125 to 1
Need to be 55.72% to win
Calling off 20BBs when 3bet
1.38 to 1
Need to be 50.36% to win
Bubble Factor 1.6:
Facing 6BB cash game optimal shoves when we have 6BBs left.
need to be 53.78% to call off 6BB shove vs these ranges on bubble.
8 88+,AQo+,AJs+
7 88+,AJ+
6 88+,AJo+, ATs+
5 77+,AT+
4 77+,AT+,A9s+
(did not adjust pot odds for being in the blinds)
3 66+,A9+,A8s+,KQs
2 55+,A8+,A7s,KQ,KTs+
1 44+,A3+,A2s+K8+,K5s+,QT+,Q9s+,JTs
Facing 10xBB shove vs cash game optimal shoves with 1.6 bubble factor:
We need to win 56.64% to call vs these ranges
8 TT+,AK
7 99+,AK+
6 99+,AQs+
5 99+,AQ+,AJs
4 99+,AQ+,AJs
(did not adjust the pot odds for being in the blinds)
3 88+,AJ+,ATs+
2 88+,AT+,A9s+
BB 66+, A8o+,A7s+,KJo+,KTs+
Facing 10x open shove with 1.6 bubble factor:
Call off with KK+ vs TT+,AK pushing range
Call off with QQ+ vs 99+,AQ
Call off with QQ+ vs 8% range
Call off with JJ+ vs 10% range
Call off with TT+,AK vs 15% range.
Call off with 99+,AK,AQs+ vs top 20% range.
Call off with 99+,AQ,AJs+ vs top 25% range.
Call off with 77+,AJ+,ATs+ vs vs top 50% range.
Call off with 55+,A7+,A2s+,KJ+,K9s+,QTs+ vs any two shover.
note: We should be slightly tighter if we still have people left to act.
20BBs call off facing 3bet that puts you all in or commits more than 25% of your stack:
Call off with KK+ vs TT+,AK pushing range.
Call off with QQ+ vs 99+,AQ.
Call off with JJ+,AKs vs 8%+10% range.
Call off with TT+,AK,AQs+ vs 15% range.
Call off with 99+,AQ+,AJs+ vs top 20% range.
Call off with 88+,AJ+ vs top 25% range.
Call off with 55+,A8+,A7s+,KQo,KTs+ vs top 50% range.
Call off with 44+,A4+,A2s+,KT+,K7s+,QJ, Q9s+,J9s+ vs any two card shover.
Never raise more than 65% of the time with 20BBs and 1.6 bubble factors or you are very exploitable to a reshove in any and all situations.
Unexploitable opening 2.25x hand range with 1.6 bubble factors (hands before the | signifies hands that you can call off a "cash game optimal" shove with.)
8 JJ+ | 99+,AQ+ATs+,KQs,QJs
7 JJ+,AK,Aqs| 66+,AJ+,Ats+,KTs+,QTs+,JTs
6 TT+,AK+,AQs| 55+,AJ+,A9s+,KQo,KTs+,QTs+,JTs
5 99+,AQ+,AJs+,KQs| 22+,AT+,A5s+,KJo+,K9s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T9s,
4 99+,AT+,ATs+,KQs| 22+,A8+,KT+,QJ,JT,A2s+K9s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T8s+,98s
3 99+,AJ+,ATs+,KQs| 22+,A8+,KT+,QJ,JT,A2s+K9s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T8s+,98s
2 77+,AT+,A9s+,KQ,KTs+| 22+,A5+,KT+,QJ,JT,A2s+K9s+,Q9s+,J8s+,T8s+,98s
Note:If opponents respect bubble factors and don't think you do (won't 3bet liberally) you can exploitatively raise wider than this. If opponents do not respect bubble factors OR are utility theorists OR assume you do and thus 3bet liberally, there is less need to raise with hands that you will not call off vs shoves which thus effectively are in some ways "bluffs" or at least semibluffs.
2.0 bubble factors
calling off 6BBs 1.375 to 1
Need to be 59.26% to win
Calling off 10BB shoves
1.225 to 1
Need to be 62% to win.
Calling off open 20BB shove
1.1125 to 1
Need to be 64.25% to win.
Calling off 20BBs when 3bet
1.38 to 1
Need to be 59.17% to win.
A lot of the situations and actual hand ranges still need to be filled in.
It's been good to see your blog when I always look for such type of blogs. It’s great to discover the post here.poker online
ReplyDelete