What an Elite Player Thinks During a Big Final Table (Analysis)
Many tournament players love to talk about their bust out hands.
They might play dozens of interesting hands over a 10-hour span, yet that final one is usually all you’ll hear about.
We’ve all done it, but this really misses the bigger picture.
What separates the tournament crushers from the bad regs isn’t just how they play their bust out hands. It’s the thought process that goes into every decision, no matter how simple some may seem.
You’re about to improve your own thought process by examining a hand played by Nick Petrangelo at the final table of a $1k buy-in tournament with $36k going to the winner.
If you’re a member of Nick’s High Stakes MTT Sessions course, you can watch every hand from this $1k tournament in the Hand History Review section. Not a member yet? Learn more about the end boss MTT course here.
Nick doesn’t run a sick bluff or make a crazy hero call in this hand, but he does demonstrate the level of consideration that should go into every decision.
Final Table Details
Any final table hand analysis wouldn’t be complete without considering the ICM conditions.
The payouts look like this with 8 players remaining:
1st – $36,249
2nd – $27,403
3rd – $21,484
4th – $16,623
5th – $12,862
6th – $9,951
7th – $7,700
8th – $5,958
Going into this hand there is a 95bb chip leader, two stacks around 50bb, a 34bb stack, and four 21-24bb short stacks (including Nick with 24bb).
As is often the case in these smaller field, high buy-in tournaments, the pay jumps aren’t that significant until the final three. Additionally, since there isn’t one short stack who has a lot less chips than the others, and Nick is in the group of short stacks, there isn’t much ICM pressure on him.
Due to both of these factors, Nick doesn’t have to worry too much about preserving his stack and can instead play to win the tournament.
Preflop
Nick is dealt 6♥ 6♠ in middle position and raises to 2bb off of a 24bb stack. The hijack 3-bets to 5bb leaving 45bb behind. The action folds back to Nick who calls.
With only 24bb, Nick should certainly be opening tighter than if he had more chips. However, he can still open with a decent-sized range because of the large antes, which add an extra big blind to the pot.
Those factors considered, 66 is towards the bottom of his opening range in this situation, with 55 being the worst pocket pair he'd play.
Nick's RFI chart for MP on a 25bb stack. It's one of 250+ charts in his Winning Poker Tournaments course that cover different stack depths, facing 3-bets, 4-bets, and more. See a review of the course here.
When his opponent uses a very small size for his 3-bet, Nick thinks he’s likely doing this with a polarized range. Here's what Nick had to say:
He probably just wants to [shove] it in with nines or tens and still call with eights and sevens, and I don’t think he’s going to three-bet stuff that's linear like KQs, so [his range] is pretty polar.
In other words, the hijack is 3-betting with a range of very strong hands (QQ+ and AK-AQ) that is balanced by bluffs like A8s or K9s. Medium-strong hands like AJs or KQ are not included -- the hijack would likely call with these hands.
Flop
With 12.5bb in the pot, the flop comes 2♣ 6♦ 5♦.
Nick checks, his opponent bets 2.75bb, and Nick calls.
Check-calling with top set is much better than check-raising in this spot. The stack-to-pot ratio is low enough that he will have no trouble getting all-in by the river if he calls. Additionally, check-raising will likely make the hijack fold his unpaired overcards, whereas check-calling gives those hands a chance to continue to bluff or make top pair.
But don’t take it from me, here’s what Nick says about it:
Since his bluffing range and a huge bulk of his value range is AK or AQ high and then KQ, AJ, AT, I want to play a call here. It's not that he’s gonna bluff it off, we just need to let him catch up. I don’t think he’s playing for stacks with ace-high very often here. With his [one] diamond combos he should be checking quite a bit so I think he’s got ace-high with no backdoor a lot when he bets.
If the hijack has an ace-high with backdoors hand (like A♦ K♣ or A♣ K♣), he probably wants to check back so he can’t be blown off his equity if Nick check-raises. It may not seem like much, but having a backdoor flush draw adds ~3.5% equity and a ton of extra playability on later streets.
This means the unpaired hands with which the hijack is c-betting will mostly fold to the check-raise. Check-raising does allow his opponent to get in it with QQ+, but that will happen anyway barring a terrible run out.
There is not much merit to check-raising here, so Nick calls.
Turn
The turn is the (2♣ 6♦ 5♦) J♣ and the pot is 18bb.
I’m not going to [have a leading range] on the jack. In fact, I’m not going to play any leads in this pot in general until the river. The jack will connect with his bluffing range, since AJo is one of his best bluffs [preflop]. Maybe some J9s a little bit, but I don’t think so against my position.
I think KJs just calls preflop, but he might be playing a linear tight-aggressive range, which in that case [KJs] would be in the range a bit. But for the most part I think it’s just AJo, ATo as far as primary [preflop] bluffs and then A8s and A9s.
Leading into the hijack on this turn just doesn’t accomplish much. If his opponent does have a jack or AA-QQ, he’ll probably bet himself. If his opponent has a hand like AK or AT, checking gives him another chance to catch up (or bluff).
The only hands his opponent could have that he would prefer betting into are A8s or A9s that have a flush draw. However, that is only four combinations of hands meaning it is very unlikely. (By contrast there’s up to 16 combinations of AK the hijack could have and 6 each of QQ, KK, and AA. For more on combinations and how to use them, check out this article by Ryan Fee)
With less than a pot sized bet behind, Nick can still get it in on the river, so there is no reason to lead on this turn. So, he checks, hoping to see another bet.
River
The river is the A♥ making the final board 2♣ 6♦ 5♦ J♣ A♥. The pot is 18bb and Nick has ~16bb remaining in his stack.
Nick checks, his opponent goes all-in, and Nick calls. His set of sixes is good enough for a double-up versus AQo.
The hijack's likely range contains a bunch of ace-high hands that have now rivered top pair. AK and AQ are the most obvious, but he could have many others (A9-A8s, AJo-ATo, etc.) depending on his specific preflop strategy.
Against those rivered top pairs, checking and betting are similar in expected value because they will both call a bet and bet when checked to. In other words, Nick can't go wrong against an ace on the river -- he's almost certainly going to get the double up vs them regardless.
The chance that the hijack tries to bluff the river makes checking on the river a superior option. If he has K9s, for example, he's never going to call a river bet, but he very well may bluff with it to get Nick to fold a hand like 77 or J♦ X♦.
Checking this river does possibly lose some value against QQ and KK specifically, (because they will probably check back but may call a bet) but how often does he have those hands? When he checks the turn back we can heavily discount overpairs.
These factors make checking on the river the right play. If the hijack ever gets to the river and bluffs with hands like KTs, QTs, or 89s, checking becomes even more profitable.
Most of the time it’s not going to matter which line Nick takes -- his opponent will just have an ace and the money is going in either way. But the few times it does matter make a huge difference in the long run.
Final Thoughts
I once heard a tournament player say,
The more boring a spot is, the more often it comes up, and therefore the more important it is.
They’re right. Even though we all lose sleep at night thinking about the hand we busted, it’s the little decisions, like Nick’s decision to just call the preflop 3-bet, that will have the greatest impact on our win-rate.
So, stop worrying about your bust out hands and get in the lab!
