i'm not quite sure what you're refering to.

I mean that even if villain doesn't know your range or your hand, Nash its still good because it only can be ev0 if you push right like Nash charts

depends on the stack depth.

at 20bb it's very -ev

at around 8bb it starts being better than 0.

(nash that is, playing push/fold chubukov is always awful)

if you're shoving Nash, Villain can only decrease his average expectation by deviating from the Nash calling ranges.

that said, certainly some of your individual shoving hands could become less profitable (and perhaps even worse than open-folding) while others became more profitable.

having a Nash chart doesn't mean you don't need to think about exploitative play.

I think of it like this:

If Chubukov says it's a jam, you're making a mistake if you open fold.

Great read.

hi
I am a husng player.
Ive been using nash for like 5 years and I never deviate from it starting from 20bb apart against 1 or 2 hyper weak opponents that I know very well and can just grind off.
Im facing a problem (I mean its not new but I have always refused to adjust since I "know" that nash push chart is unexploitable and I just love autopilot mode)
its feels its been forever that games against the worst clowns have been so hard to finish
my sb ev graph for effective stack under 20bb is never positive. example over the last 5k hands in the endgame situation Im losing a sick 4 chips per hand and 0.03BB. I play against the worst players. They are completely unaware of eveything for most.
one could think 5k hands is a small sample. but the truth is its all I have on this fresh windows install to look at yet I can recall this has been going on over probably 200k hands at least (not always losing ev so hard but never showing a steady gain of ev).

my feeling is that unlike my unaware opponents, pokerstars knows very well what Im doing and deals hole cards accordingly to help the recs (I remember my early years and it felt like a shove fest now it feels like I have to wait forever to see a T6s and when I can finally shove a hand its straight into queens). I know how it sounds but come on. a proven unexploitable strategy getting crushed?

OR

NASH is exploitable by monkeys.

Is there a place where one can see the full detailed maths behind the charts

Also, is there anyone else here using nash from 20bb in the sb against an ignorant field and can they take a look at their graphs and tell me what theyre like.

Using NASH from the SB at 20BBs is completely ******ed. All you're doing by playing this way is losing to rake long run. All NASH push hands are + ev in that the total EV of the push range is > -0.5 BB per hand, but at these higher stack sizes the push range may only be -0.4BB per hand or something. Better than open folding, but is never going to make you money.


Edit: Why not just do some EV calcs so you can see for yourself? Use the NASH push ranges at stack depths 18-25BBs & choose various call ranges. You'll see how this is unexploitable in that the EV is > open folding but realise you're passing up on so much extra EV by omitting your other options, & you'll never have enough of an edge to beat rake at this depth.

You have misunderstood a concept for 5 years.

Nash charts for 20bb is a losing play for the SB, but you can minraise/limp open shove for a strategy that wins.

Only stick to nash from 10bb or less.

that is very interesting.
I am surprised to learn that this chart is only meant to achieve a slightly better result than sitting buttons out.
I am a very steady winner long run 20% ROI over 40k husng games or more so I am in real shock at these news.
where have you seen that the chart is just looking to top -0.5bb/hand?
thank you

the chart is meant to do as well as possible vs an opponent who's also trying to do as well as possible. just turns out that your best case isn't that good when you restrict yourself to playing shove-or-fold 20bb deep.

standard advice is to start playing by the chart at 7ish bbs deep, and there's evidence that it's actually representative of unexploitable/gto play under 5ish bbs deep.

incidentally, if both players play by the chart 20bb deep, SB loses about 18.3 BB/100

wowza how long did it take to play 40k NBIs?

the math behind the shove/fold equilibrium is covered in both MoP and EHUNL

please pardon my curiosity
if a push fold chart to top -0.5bb from the bb can be calculated, what stopped a push fold chart to maintain 0bb gain to be calculated?
its not like having posted the smallest blind puts you in such a dead spot. what would be the point of such a chart??

also why would it even be ok to use it from 10 bb if its still ev- no matter how tiny
thx

Ive been doing this for 5 years, maybe more I lost track of time.

when you say 18.3bb/100 do you mean 18.3bb/100??

I should be crying right now if all that is true. amazing.

no wait. I should be smiling already.

what is MoP and EHUNL

A lot of people interpret NASH as some way of "never losing" but that kind of thinking won't turn a profit. You have to remember that shove/fold places a huge restriction on the game, such that above certain stack sizes (8-13BBs are often quoted as where people start playing pure shove/fold) it isn't representative of real play - you have far more strategic options with which to exploit your opponent. When the game IS restricted, as in shove fold, we want to shove as much as possible in order to win the 1BB, & villain then needs to find the calling as much as possible such that we, the pusher, profit as little as possible. At this happy medium is the NASH equilibrium which has definitely been computed correctly!

Example at 20BBs:

Our range is 22+, A2s+, A2o+, K4s+, K9o+, Q5s+, Q9o+, J7s+, J9o+, T6s+, T9o, 96s+, 86s+, 75s+ , 65s, 54s, or 39.37% of hands.

So we fold 60.63%, & push the rest of the time.


{Fold% * 19.5 + 0.3937 * (Villainfold% * 21 + 40 * Villaincall% * EQ} where EQ is our equity vs villains calling range.


vs NASH call range at 20BB (21.72% of hands, vs which we have 44.16% EQ):

0.6063 * 19.5 + 0.3937 * (0.7828 * 21 + 40 * 0.2172 * 0.4416) = 19.8BBs

So at 20BBs NASH is guaranteed to be at least + 0.3 BBs better than folding (but notice it's still a losing play!). As we get shorter stacked the SBs NASH strategy becomes slightly more profitable (our profit is non-negative below 7.8BBs & highest ~4BBs) but it's certainly not emphatic!


I re-crunched the numbers for a tighter calling range of 44+, A2s+, A7o+, KTs+, KJo, QJs (17.95%):

0.6063 * 19.5 + 0.3937 * (0.8205 * 21 + 40 * 0.1795 * 0.4251) = 19.808BBs


Even if you're playing a spastic monkey who calls 100% your average total BBs is only 20.1. The point is that if you're playing NASH at these higher stack depths you're never gaining much advantage even if your opponent is deviating heavily from NASH. That is why someone who realises that you're pushing 100% can just sit back and wait for a hand. You're never profiting a great deal no matter what strategy they employ & you leave yourself no room to exploit someone.


So why then are you still losing? Simple, because you are only ever winning small from the SB at best, but when you're OOP you can only play NASH when villain plays it. And SB will always have an advantage at this depth.

Acronyms for books

I wish I had made a 2plus2 account sooner.
thank you everybody for the precise answers.

screenname??

dont lose sleep over it. sometimes 20% ROI does not mean more than 1 dollar average profit.
this year Im on top of 2-5 usd husng leaderboard on sharkscope. I used to play a lot higher on pokerstars.fr though and had a 14% ROI at around 13 euros average buy in, of course NASHing like a fool.
I hope dropping the 20bb openshoves will get me a nice increase.

Was there any agreement as to why 45o and 45s have such differences on the Nash chart?

Seems there are only 2 possibilities:

1) 45s has more equity, and because you see 5 cards, the possibility of a flush helps equity a ton
2) 45s is dealt much less than 45o, so the chart accounts for combinations

Also, seems like Nash assumes you are going to be playing heads up for a long time and adjusting as you go... recently more sngs are turbos or hypers where you only play 20+ hands versus a guy when it is a regular of the course of multiple tournaments.

Funny this info is still relavent since SNGs stopped evolving ....damn you doj

SNGs have evolved quite a bit in the last few years. The biggest winners are largely working their asses off to be quite a bit better than regs of years past.

I'm confused about why in the OP when he's talking about Chubukov he prefaces by saying that it's expressed in SBs so you have to half the chart numbers, but then he starts referring to them in BBs, as in when he remarked that you can profitably open jam K2o at 10bb deep.