Calling range from SB on satellite bubble

With the stacks the way they are, I don’t think you’re getting paid to gamble here. I think your calling range should be pretty conservative - I’m thinking AQ+ and TT+.

It’s not that I don’t think the short stack isn’t opening light - I’m sure he is. It’s just that you have such a strong stack at this point that you can basically coast to a win. Obviously eliminating this player would speed you to that point, but the chance of doubling him up and dropping you down into the middle of the pack doesn’t seem worth the risk with a marginal hand.

What actually happened: You had A3 and folded

QQ+

Guess I am a spewtard who doesnt play enough satellites, but I was thinking of calling sligthly ligther than the staff, given that we will still have several shorter stacks in which can bubble before we do if we loose.

I was thinking omething like 88+ AJ+. But perhaps the staff is smarter than I.

TT+, AJ+, KQ.

TT+ AQ+ are ok.
But then there is still the BB left to say so I’d call a reraise with QQ+.

Any two cards

I fold. I have no reason to get involved. I don’t need to get involved when my goal is to win a seat. I’m fairly assured that I’ll get a seat. If I call and lose to two of the short stacks, I’m endangering winning a seat.

I’m not playing to win the tournament. All I want to do is win a seat. My job is not to knock anyone out.

Agreed!

Any two cards - and the other knucklehead with $17K should have done the same.

If you lose you are still a big stack. If the short stack steals like this a few times uncontested he will probably tighten up so this is your best chance to end it now.

If you play conservative and the stacks even up you can easily be the one who bubbles out. Happens all the time. So try and end it now. Ax is an absolute no-brainer here.

Yeah, I think the DHQ staff is being too conservative. You have a great chance to put an end to this. Your stack is tied for the lead, even if you lose you’re still in the middle of the pack, ahead of four others. This was the perfect chance for cooperation; the button should have called with any two cards and hoped you and BB called.

In this situation though, I call with 77+, any ace, K10+ and QJ+. I also pray BB has a hand and calls as well, so we can all go home.

kk-aa

Click the “Sit out next hand” check box and walk away. OK, probably not because if this was a smart table they would just blind me out.

But I would fold any hand that isnt better than JJ+ or QKs+

AK, JJ+

ATC

from SB here, range: nothing to AA.

The most important question, “Will not calling here give an opponent such an edge as to endanger your chance of advancement in the longterm and put you in more danger of failing to advance than if you had your called?”

Don’t make yourself do someone else’s dirty work. Let B, D, and the BB fight it out.

You are not the only person there, and as they go up, others go down, and as blinds rise, other people who are within 1M of the allin-mover will feel the heat/pressure to make a move, and if they have a good hand, and know that they might not get a better chance before the blinds roll around, they’ll make a stand. Thus, the shorter stacks will have a conflict that will knock one of them out or leave one of them crippled, who then shoves, is called for minimal chip investment with the hand being checked down in a multi-way pot with them usually losing.

I like Marion’s reasoning.

What would have to happen here to actually endanger your chance of winning a seat?

Pure stealing or is folded to.
1. B steals the blinds 8 times in 4 rounds.
2. BB steals the blinds 5 times in 4 rounds.
3.D steals the blinds 6 times in 4 rounds
4. A steals the blinds 5 times in 4 rounds
5. B, D, and BB never steal the BB from each other, while A only steals your blinds.

In addition to these strict guidelines for targets for stealing required, none of the 24 allins are called.

I’m not joking, this is what is necessary to put you at risk without a confrontation at these blind levels, and if there’s a confrontation between short stack large stack and since the chip stacks are about 2:1, just substitute in the losing larger stack for the others name in the above scheme. If there’s a confrontation between the short stacks, great, 1 is knocked out or crippled, in which case, he’ll have to go allin at least twice then win.

The point is actually even if you have AA, it would be best for you to fold.

With that said, if the blinds double within the next 4 rounds, this schema’s requisite number of steals is about cut in half.

must disagree that is better to fold a monster…that sounds ridiculous…since you are fairly above the bettor.
I think that as small stack, would go all in with most pairs and AQo+ as he can’t wait long for the blinds to increase or monster hands.
In case of a monster I doubt he would go all in…probably raise to 1k or something like that

I’d call with AK or JJ+

You can walk to a seat sit back relax and enjoy the show.

Nice quiz. We should tend to the conservative here and not splash our chips around, but we should not fold with any reasonable value either. Things can change quickly in holdem and if you try to blind away to the seat you might find yourself under pressure. I call with AT+ and 77+. I don’t think we need to wait for super-premium to call the short stack all-in, though the staff makes a good argument.

JJ+,AQs+,AKo

AK, AA, KK

QQ+ only. With one to go no need to get crazy! QQ+ ONLY

any playable hand, i.e suited connectors, 88+ Ace anything suited, etc I wouldnt call with just anything. You gotta give yourself a sporting chance of winning this pot to some degree.