What's your minimum playing hand in this game - Page 3 - Poker Theory

Two Plus Two Forums Poker Strategy Poker Theory & GTO

What's your minimum playing hand in this game

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 3 of 3

1 2 3

Page 3 of 3

1 2 3

04-14-2016 , 08:14 AM

#51

samooth

veteran

Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 3,350

gotta love 2p2, a ****load of noise, and underneath, gold

Quote

04-14-2016 , 02:17 PM

#52

ArtyMcFly

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Dec 2014 Posts: 13,256

Very nice work Plexiq!

Quote

04-14-2016 , 03:18 PM

#53

David Sklansky

Administrator

Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 17,074

Wow.

Great.

I should be able to tell you why I wanted this fairly soon. Once I do that it will be awhile before I know whether my scheme turns into money but that will be apparent when I explain further.

Quote

04-14-2016 , 03:20 PM

#54

David Sklansky

Administrator

Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 17,074

Notice how you don't tighten up much as the number of players increase.

Quote

04-14-2016 , 06:12 PM

#55

David Sklansky

Administrator

Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 17,074

Though its not related to my project, it might be fun to search for anomalies such as a hand being playable against 2 or 9 but not 3 or 6.

Quote

04-14-2016 , 06:46 PM

#56

plexiq

veteran

Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 2,554

Here are the strategies/evs as .csv if anyone wants to play around with the results:
http://www.holdemresources.net/misc/...skygame_v1.zip

Quote

04-15-2016 , 12:14 AM

#57

David Sklansky

Administrator

Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 17,074

Unless I am misunderstanding the chart, the EV for AA against one player when the ante is ten is an impossible $30.70

Quote

04-15-2016 , 03:13 AM

#58

plexiq

veteran

Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 2,554

The pot is 60$ total, AA has roughly 85% equity:
> 60*0.85-20
[1] 31

Looks about right, why do you think this is impossible?

As mentioned before, the EVs are in comparison to a fold - not money won during a hand. EV=0 in the chart means that folding and betting are equal.

Last edited by plexiq; 04-15-2016 at 03:18 AM.

Quote

04-15-2016 , 04:53 AM

#59

bachelder

grinder

Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 435

Quote:

Originally Posted by ambientsilence

plexiq and me are pretty sure the answer is actually 13.7%

and I*

Quote

04-15-2016 , 04:59 AM

#60

plexiq

veteran

Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 2,554

Looking into the specific example in more detail:

AA vs 98.2%, 22+ 5x+ 42s+ 43o 32s 42o(5%)

AA equity when called, fully enumerated: 85.169%

Called, considering card removal: 1-(12+12*0.95)/1225 = 98.09%

Gets us an EV of:
> 60*0.85169*0.9809+30*0.0191-20
[1] 30.69836

For the Monte Carlo sample we get 30.6959 (see .csv), which was rounded to +30.7 in the grids. That seems to be well within expected variance.

Quote

04-15-2016 , 01:28 PM

#61

David Sklansky

Administrator

Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 17,074

Quote:

Originally Posted by plexiq

As mentioned before, the EVs are in comparison to a fold - not money won during a hand. EV=0 in the chart means that folding and betting are equal.

Oh, sorry. I skim a lot.

Quote

04-15-2016 , 02:25 PM

#62

ambientsilence

journeyman

Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 391

Quote:

Originally Posted by bachelder

and I*

I like to mix it up. Keeps the Grammar Nazis on their toes.

Quote

05-31-2016 , 03:12 PM

#63

lafauriea

enthusiast

Join Date: Mar 2013 Posts: 54

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Sklansky

so what is your project David?

Quote

08-09-2016 , 04:25 AM

#64

plexiq

veteran

Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 2,554

Bump for update?

Quote

08-09-2016 , 05:20 AM

#65

Kelvis

banned

Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 8,737

David Sklansky is obviously putting together a new game of poker.

Quote

08-09-2016 , 09:45 AM

#66

tight=aggressive

newbie

Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 17

that's how half of pokerstars play in mtts now lol

Quote

08-09-2016 , 03:09 PM

#67

David Sklansky

Administrator

Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 17,074

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kelvis

David Sklansky is obviously putting together a new game of poker.

Yes. But it doesn't look like it can be patented. It was simply simultaneous limit betting on all rounds. It need not be holdem. I think beginners would like it yet pros would find it interesting. Obviously plexiq's preflop strategy would no longer be completely correct. It wouldn't work too well live because of collusion concerns. But we would all benefit if online sites introduced it even if I don't get royalties. If that happens I will not fail to note plexiq's contribution.

Quote

08-09-2016 , 04:53 PM

#68

plexiq

veteran

Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 2,554

Huh, could be a fun game for beginners i guess. Make it 20-handed for huge pots every hand

I'm pretty sure this isn't hard to solve even including postflop play, at least with a cap of 1 bet per street. (Maybe not quite easy enough to just do it for giggles, but in case this ever sees play on a real money site.)

Quote

08-10-2016 , 12:32 AM

#69

David Sklansky

Administrator

Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 17,074

Quote:

Originally Posted by plexiq

I'm pretty sure this isn't hard to solve even including postflop play, at least with a cap of 1 bet per street.

Even nine handed? I'm no computer expert but I think I would bet against it. I'd definitely bet against it if the game was seven card stud.

Quote

08-10-2016 , 05:41 AM

#70

plexiq

veteran

Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 2,554

Yeah, I was only talking about holdem.

Nine handed should be around the edge of being solvable using only lossless abstractions, it's somewhere in the order of FLHU. If I'm not mistaken the size of the nine handed tree is ~5% the size of FLHU, which has been solved successfully.

"Not hard" is hyperbolic considering the effort it took to solve FLHU, but you also don't necessarily have to stick with lossless abstractions to get a strong strategy.

Quote

Page 3 of 3

First

1 2 3

Last

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 3 of 3

First

1 2 3

Last