Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Criticize my method Criticize my method

08-09-2017 , 02:25 AM
We raise pre for 2.5BB and get 3 bet to 10BB. In order to break even on a call we need to claim 7.5BB of the pot postflop. In order to construct a calling range here I have been running sims on a gto solver(gto+) on lots of different flops and calculating the average ev. I assign villain a range and then I give myself a reasonable range for calling. If my average ev is below 7.5 I tighten up a bit until I reach a range that claims 7.5BB on average. I do understand that the ev given by the solver is of two players playing perfectly against each other. However while I will make mistakes postflop, so will villain, therefore this method should be good if my skill is equal or superior to that of villain's. So what do you guys think?
Criticize my method Quote
08-09-2017 , 12:32 PM
Do not understand why your EV should be over 7.5. All cash game players work with breakpoint 0 EV and every hand which shows EV>0 is profitable call.

Also to get reasonable answer from any solver you must correctly assign V's 3b range, it is not easy and crucial for correct results.
Criticize my method Quote
08-09-2017 , 02:01 PM
Yeah you should look at the marginal hands and hopefully they're earning >0 ev. Also, hopefully you're folding all hands that are <0 ev.

The strategy vs strategy evs will not be, nor should they be, equal. This is dependent on position and any and all exploits, as well as preflop action.
Criticize my method Quote
08-09-2017 , 04:07 PM
it should be more than 7.5BB because thats how much I call preflop, to BE on the call I need to claim at least 7.5BB posftlop.
Bob148
And yes I was wrong. I shouldnt do the average ev of my range, I should instead do the average of every hand in my range and than drop the ones which are not wining 7.5BB.
Criticize my method Quote
08-10-2017 , 01:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gcm1998
it should be more than 7.5BB because thats how much I call preflop, to BE on the call I need to claim at least 7.5BB posftlop.
Bob148
And yes I was wrong. I shouldnt do the average ev of my range, I should instead do the average of every hand in my range and than drop the ones which are not wining 7.5BB.
Most of the time any positive EV is reflected as better than folding (0 EV). I would assume (but don't know for certain) if your solver is saying something is "+0.5 EV" that would translate to +8BB in the way you are describing things.

So by only calling with hands that are +7.5 EV with your solver you are essentially only calling with hands that make double your investment.

Again that is just a guess. I am no expert in how solvers work.

Sent from my SM-G900R4 using Tapatalk
Criticize my method Quote
08-10-2017 , 03:06 PM
No. The solver only works postflop. So, postflop if my weakest hands are at least claiming back 7.5BB then they are +ev to call pre.
Criticize my method Quote
08-10-2017 , 04:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gcm1998
No. The solver only works postflop. So, postflop if my weakest hands are at least claiming back 7.5BB then they are +ev to call pre.
Ah so I see you give it flops and calculate the EV?

Sent from my SM-G900R4 using Tapatalk
Criticize my method Quote
08-12-2017 , 08:00 PM
Thats right. Im using flop subsets but it a very time consuming process
Criticize my method Quote
08-13-2017 , 09:43 AM
Meh but solver knows the pot size otf, true? The thing is that when we calculate EV we set the EV of fold to zero. It is not a math rule but it is done as a rule of thumbs followed by almost all soft and cash players.
Actualy we are not able to say if you are right or wrong unless anybody knows the soft.
Or you could do a simple test. Let the soft compute EV of your fold on any flop, when it is 0 then use 0 instead of 7.5 for your work. If it is anything else than 0 write to soft support and claim explanation how the EV calc works.
Criticize my method Quote
08-14-2017 , 03:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shamway99
Meh but solver knows the pot size otf, true? The thing is that when we calculate EV we set the EV of fold to zero. It is not a math rule but it is done as a rule of thumbs followed by almost all soft and cash players.
Actualy we are not able to say if you are right or wrong unless anybody knows the soft.
Or you could do a simple test. Let the soft compute EV of your fold on any flop, when it is 0 then use 0 instead of 7.5 for your work. If it is anything else than 0 write to soft support and claim explanation how the EV calc works.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gcm1998
No. The solver only works postflop. So, postflop if my weakest hands are at least claiming back 7.5BB then they are +ev to call pre.
I don't know how to explain better than this. If it doesn't make sense I'd start another thread about methods to calculate EV so this one doesn't get derailed.

I think the main factors in the accuracy of this method would be your estimation of villain's 3-betting range, the accuracy of the solver itself and yours and villain's post-flop ability. Also remember that some of your +EV calls may be better as 4-bets.

This is something I wanted to do also.
Criticize my method Quote
08-14-2017 , 07:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gcm1998
We raise pre for 2.5BB and get 3 bet to 10BB. In order to break even on a call we need to claim 7.5BB of the pot postflop. In order to construct a calling range here I have been running sims on a gto solver(gto+) on lots of different flops and calculating the average ev. I assign villain a range and then I give myself a reasonable range for calling. If my average ev is below 7.5 I tighten up a bit until I reach a range that claims 7.5BB on average. I do understand that the ev given by the solver is of two players playing perfectly against each other. However while I will make mistakes postflop, so will villain, therefore this method should be good if my skill is equal or superior to that of villain's. So what do you guys think?
I think this sounds like an excellent exercise. Can you check your findings against your hand histories to see if you are getting accurate-ish results?
Criticize my method Quote
08-14-2017 , 10:31 PM
I can but I dont have a large enough sample. But once I do(might take months) I'll post the results here.
Criticize my method Quote
08-15-2017 , 12:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gcm1998
I can but I dont have a large enough sample. But once I do(might take months) I'll post the results here.
Awesome
Criticize my method Quote

      
m