Mid-late stage play in HU SNG?

[fahl]

Hi,

Ive been playing some HU SNG lately and found it to be very profitable and interesting. I have one problem though and this is when we come to the later stage of the sng. In the beginning I pretty much crush the opponents pre and post flop and I know some basic push/fold strategy (this could be improved ofc). But the hardest part is the part between these to stages. That stage is when the stacks are between 12-18 (or something in that area).

How should I be playing at this stage? I play a very aggressive style and almost raising every button but when at this stage I tighten up and get unsure of what to do.

Anyone whos got a good article or some knowledge to share?



/fahl

[urbansprawler]

[X] in before Nostalgia

Play a lot more aggro, to be blunt.

[given1982]

By that time, you have a lot of info on the opponent. If he folds too much in the BB, keep raising every button. If he calls every raise, tighten up.

[Nostalgica]

First thing, do you adjust raise sizing? This is very important. It will make it play much more easierly. Some hands/situations also calls for shoving at 12-18bbs, even if it's not optimal. You can also work in limps into your game, but 3xing at these stacks are a huge leak against any competent player.

I have an article that's about done on preflop, but it does not focus specifically on late game. That said it should help a little. I'll be posting it after I get some opinions on it from other regs.

[fahl]

Originally Posted by Nostalgica

First thing, do you adjust raise sizing? This is very important. It will make it play much more easierly. Some hands/situations also calls for shoving at 12-18bbs, even if it's not optimal. You can also work in limps into your game, but 3xing at these stacks are a huge leak against any competent player.

I have an article that's about done on preflop, but it does not focus specifically on late game. That said it should help a little. I'll be posting it after I get some opinions on it from other regs.

Yeah, I usually go down to 2,5x-ing when the blinds get bigger. Should I go smaller? And what about minraising? I sometimes start minraising when the stacks get to 12-13 I think, it depends on the ratio of the stack sizes.

I very rarely limp but the players are very very passive so I guess thats not a bad idea. What hands should I be limping? Supposing I have a very loose-passive player who will fold most flop?

I'll gladly accept any help I can get.
Anyways, im off to watch your latest video.

[Nostalgica]

You should be minraising at something like 20-30bbs, and 2.5xing at 30-50 mostly, although against different opponents you adjust this. At 12-13bbs, you should be minraising if you do raise/fold, but for the most part you should be shoving or limp shoving because you cannot afford a limp/fold range at these stacks.

I will post an article up on adjusting stack sizes in a bit. Still waiting on Cog Dissonance to edit it. I'll post some extracts:

Adjusting Raise Sizes

The standard raise sizing would be to 3x from the start, begin minraising at about the 30-45bb stack size, or 2.5x raising at those stacks, and min raising when the stacks drop below that range, mixing shoves, limps, and minraises at 20~ or below. (Limps are dealt with in the next sections, as are 3bets.)

Whilst 3xing is generally preferable at the start of an HUSnG against most opponents (50-70bbs), a player who 3bets a lot and/or does not flat call very often might be better dealt with through minraising, especially if they do not adjust their ranges based on your sizing. If you do not expect your opponent to call, raising more to play bigger pots IP will be less relevant. Minraising would give you a better SPR and increase your positional edge. A higher SPR allows the player in position to adjust better to 3bets either with 4bet bluffs or flat calling with non premium hands that play well postflop.

Minraising is also useful against an opponent who defends a considerable amount, even if he does not 3bet very often, simply for the sake of gaining initiative. This is especially if the opponent does not fold to cbet an exploitable amount, is not extremely predictable, and will overall make life difficult for the hero. In such a scenario one would not want to bloat the preflop pot at every opportunity. Instead, the hero should try to gain an advantage by playing more pots in position and at a higher SPR, which would gives the hero more room to pot control, call down, barrel, and playback appropriately, as well as giving the opponent less incentive, or at least smaller rewards, for bluffing pots.

Exploitative raise sizes (ie. raise more with strong hands, less with weaker) are also acceptable against bad players who do not adjust or adjust enough as long as you keep the ranges for both sizes reasonably wide, for example, by minraising all trash, and 3xing pairs, good suited connectors, gapers, and broadways. This is also useful against a player who may notice but will be too low intensity to do anything about is. As such, his range for calling your 3x raises will not change with your better hands, but his frequency for calling/3betting your minraises will not change that much either, even if you are folding your entire minraise range to a 3bet. This is because some players, particularly those less used to HUSnGs, do not realize how wide one may defend against minraises, and have been taught to not “call with trash” because it is a bad play.

[Nostalgica]

Part 2:

Limping, on the other hand, is a good adjustment, against both overly aggressive and passive players. Against a very loose and passive opponent, one has a very sizable advantage when raising with hands that are either very strong or playable postflop, and when one has such a hand, it is ideal to make the pot bigger as the hero will have a huge advantage in these situations, and the bigger the pot preflop, the bigger the expected value. At the same time, it is not optimal to play tight against these opponents, as they are so full of leaks postflop, it is likely at least marginally +EV to play even the very weakest part of one’s range. Raising a wide range, therefore, is somewhat +EV, but the EV gained by raising the weaker hands comes at a cost of higher variance, which would shorten the game, and therefore shorten the hero’s exposure to the villain, and as a result, reduce the hero’s chance of coming across aforementioned significantly +EV situations. Not raising against such an opponent is a clear example of giving up a marginally +EV situation to increase the chance of finding a much more significantly +EV situation. Of course, if you are 4 tabling this fish that will keep rematching, or this is a cash game where he will not hit and run, CEV is all that matters, but there are spots where limping does not reduce your CEV much, or might even increase it, making it a far better alternative.

A very different reason for limping is when playing against a player who has a very good light 3bet range, especially at 15-30bb~ stack levels. Even when minraising, a good player will be able to realize good spots and frequencies with which to 3bet shove light. Limping, on the other hand, makes a 3bet shove highly unprofitable if a limp/call range is introduced, and so is raising a lot OOP. A balanced limping strategy is going to be based entirely on adjustments and meta or at least perceived meta, as some players will not steal vs limps very light, while others may 4x your first limp thinking that you are adjusting firstly by limping your weaker range after raising multiple hands in a row, and he perceives you to be fearing a 3bet, and therefore limped the next hand you wanted to play but didn’t want to get shoved on. This in turn allows you to level by limping your first strong hand, etc, or have a good blocker/equity hand to limp shove with, such as 22-66 or Axs Kxs.

It is arguable whether it is possible or useful to try place a villain on stereotypes and predict adjustments ahead of time, but regardless of that, it is important to be able to establish an effective frequency for limp/fold, call, and shove depending on what you perceive your villain’s initial adjustments will be, especially if you are introducing limps later in the game. That said, many players prefer to do so earlier into the match and gain more insight on the villain’s adjustment against limps earlier on in the game, but there will be some situations where you will want to minraise 100% and not limp at all early.

Regardless, it is vital to have a limp/shove range, and not composed solely of monsters, because one’s limping range will be fairly weak in general, and in order to balance it, you will need to have a fair amount of limp/shove hands, but if they are composed solely of monsters or strong hands, you will severely weaken your raise range, miss value on the bottom of your strong range, as well as making your limp/shoves very easy to play against, and against a player who is going to raise your limps light, this is a far better adjustment than limp/calling at lower stack sizes where floating will be difficult and you have little fold equity if they hit the flop well. At higher stacks and against someone who is fairly tight OOP, it will be adequate to merely balance your l/f with some l/c in your range.

Against a straightforward and exploitable player, it is of course acceptable to l/f your entire limp range.

In Summation:

By 3xing, the hero allows himself to pick up bigger pots and exploits a weak-tight opponent’s unwillingness to play back often enough postflop OOP.

By raising a smaller amount, the hero takes advantage of the villain by forcing him to play lots of pots OOP with weaker hands, shifts the risk:reward ratio to the hero’s favor for stealing wide, whilst also making a loose opponent’s aggression less rewarding by keeping pots small. That said, it is advisable to begin lowering raise sizes once the effective stacksizes reaches 30-40bbs even against less aggressive villain’s, although there are always exceptions.

It can be profitable to raise exploitative amounts against some opponents who do not adjust or adjusts poorly against it.

Against a player who is very station and passive, mixing in limps with 3x raises will often be a better choice. It allows the hero to play big pots in position with hands that have very good expected value, as well as seeing many flops in position with somewhat weaker hands against a bad opponent at a cheap price, in position, and with a higher SPR, and therefore better implied odds and better maneuverability.

Limping is also a valid adjustment against aggressive players by pot-controlling and seeing flops cheap with weak hands, but this will require more complex adjustments against a thinking player.

[podbelski]

Wow this is so in time for me

It seems I'm missing that stage of 2.5x raise, either start to minraise too early, or too late, or mix my sizes all the way from beginning to the end. Limp-shoving is a thing I'm currently messing with, so seems it is good in right spots.

One thing I was stuck at is a following style in mid-to-later stage:
- the guy calls most of my opens, then donks pot so I have not many options... sometimes I hit or float successfully but there are clearly too many bad spots and his play costs me
- at the same time, he limps every button, floats most often if I start to bet consistently (or raise PF, he can even limp-reraise). If he limps and I check the flop he is betting 2-3 streets 3/4 pot like 80-90% of the time, and again it is tricky to outplay due to being OOP

The two lines above combined made me a no fun game, any thoughts on big general adjustment to be made for this? At the end, I started limping a lot and it seemed to be better with him...

[Upd] written the above before Nostalgica's strategy post which clarify many related things. Regardless, any comments on countering this particular playstyle are appreciated.

One more question - what is CEV?

[Nostalgica]

CEV means Chip Expected Value, meaning the amount of chips you expected to win, as opposed to $EV which is Money Expected Value. Sometimes letting go a +CEV spot can expose you to an even MORE +CEV situation that you might not have otherwise, making the fold better in terms of $EV.

As for playing against a player who donks a lot and calls light and such, you just have to adjust and adjust better. By the sounds of it your opponent may not be that good, but certainly very good players will be making life difficult for you. I suggest posting hands or session reviews and such (cough I do coach =P) but there really is not easy solution to this.

Keep thinking about his range, and adjust, and if postflop is difficult because of bloated pot, then make smaller raises preflop, limp more also, or 3bet lighter/wider preflop depending if he's spewy loose or just aggro and will raise/fold or 3bet/fold, etc. Check back to pot control A high or weak pair, or check to induce bets and bluffs and raise or c/c down, things like that. Don't just auto cbet in HU, it can be a huge leak against "tricky" players, good or bad.

As for 2.5x raises, on stars especially, it is not needed because the jump from some blinds is so high that you don't have too much time spent in the intermediate stack depth.

And yes, originally I'd meant stack depth, because SnG players tend to have better awareness for that compared to cash players who expect most players to have 100bbs and aren't as good at adjusting every time.

[podbelski]

Ok, understood about that guy, so basically I did it right, clearly noticed my adjustments upset him and, eventually, I've got all his chips

As for HH reviews - I understand it will be unfair to abuse your willingness to help for free. As I see it atm, I have so many general things to rule out by myself it is not worth it going down to review tons of particular spots. You are doing really great "preparation" job by vids and overview posts, which are essential steps to pass if one wants to get the most out of "coached" HH reviews. If I keep enjoying SnGs/HU I expect your paid coaching will boost my advance at the right moment, like when transitioning to 20+ levels. Hope you won't leave this site soon


That said, the simplest question from my list:
In short, how HEM "Luck adjusted winnings" is calculated? As now I'm not sure what conclusions can I make from it.
And BTW, what do ROI% and ITM% mean?


[Off] And to illustrate my situation considering coaching question: I've played not enough yet for coaching, just enough to be sure I'm interested in. I beleive this winrate is unsustainable at higher stakes, but I'm certain it's not a matter of luck now (I never played any HU before!):