Yea, first and only for now, another coming in a few weeks or so

Welp I noticed that the wrong figure got stuck in Figure 16.3. Was a last minute edit . It should show:

Same reason why you'd put you bluff cr range right between your x/call and x/fold ranges, not at the very bottom: people can still make mistakes when they're not actually playing GTO.

Say villain is otherwise perfect GTO player but he calls too much, say 66% of his range. Now it doesn't matter whether you bet top 17% or 33%_to_ 17% range. Vs a true GTO opponent it doesn't matter either. But what happens if he's otherwise GTO but nittyish in this spot? Only calls top 17%, or top 33%?

In two of those cases, it doesn't matter how you built the betting range (within the equilibrium boundaries). In one case, you wish you'd have stuck to f13.10.

I know it's possible to build scenarios where you'd rather move the regions (say villain calls 100%, now you'd rather have bluffed with the stronger hands in the bottom of your range), but generally, vs real life opponents who don't deliberately do something extremely stupid, the "sensible" equilibria (like f13.10) tend to do better than others.

Will, congratulations on another ground breaking book!

How did you arrive at the computational solutions to the large model games of Chapter 14? Which software or combinations of software did you use?

Did you select the bet sizing options (1/2 pot on flop and 3/4 on turn and river) because you think these are likely to be close to the best when sizings are standardized or restricted?

Hey guys im doing 2nd exercise on page 35. How can i use my database to find out how much of a pot can i capture if i check back weak high card hand or if i c bet it on KJ5r flop. Im using PT4.

figured it out

Hey Will,
Great book so far. I was looking at the preflop chapter because I have been changing my own preflop strategy a bit. Unless I am missing something the SB limp-reraise range is not included for 7BB Deep in the ranges chart. You do say that "He jamms even less than he folds with a range containing some middle pairs and high suited connectors" on pg 346. Did you just leave that out?

Kind of regarding the above: how much of the mixedness of the strategies do you think actually happens because your algorithms haven't converged yet? On p 359 you suspect the 20BB open jamming hands might be because of this.

One would think that with these stack sizes, going for the "Fundamental theorem of chasing" -i.e. threatening to have the nuts on any possible board and situation- wouldn't matter too much.

Did you ever try
-letting one of the algorithms run way longer than normal to see if the mixedness diminishes
-hand-tune some small mixes (say fixing a 90/10 mix to a pure strategy, or clean the mixes among offsuit/suited versions of a hand) and see if the player actually gets hurt doing this? This especially in cases where XYo and XYs hands both employ mixed strategies of jamming... take J8s/J8o from the "BB jam facing a limp" table at 10BB, p348, as the first example I come by. I could see arguments either always jamming J8s (it's the stronger hand) or always jamming J8o (it's never needed for nuts when play commences "deep" from flop on, but J8s can be), but can't get the idea of both of them mixing.

Maybe any1 wants to explain to me how you did 2nd exercise on page 40? When im calculating the resaults looks like villain have to 3 bet even more than 100% value hands because if he bluffs he almost always looses except for 15% of pot what he wins. But my weakest calling range vs his value range has around 31-35% (the same equity preflop vs villains value range like villains bluff vs my calling range.) But im in position so i can win more than his bluffs OOP

Bluff catching indifference when villain 3 bets 2bb - 5bb
S-2=V(S-5+0.35*10)+(1-V)(S+5-0.15*10)

What did i do wrong here?

Minotaurs,

I think the equation is correct. That is the same thing that I got. I wasnt sure why we would use one of the equations from the SB Bet-Or-check game that he mentioned. Did you look back at chapter 7.3.2 from first book? I think your 35% is too high. 35% might be your equity but vs his value range I think it is safe too assume that you would be capturing less than 30% of the pot. You want the percentage of the pot you expect to capture just like the estimated 15% that is being used.

It was all right for river SB's bet or check game because there werent future cards to come so BB's BC's always loose or win.

Now in preflop 3 bet game every1 can hit a quads. Do you really think i dont capture at least 30% of pot (with hands like T9o or K2s) when i call his 3 bet and BB happens to hold his value range this time? Its not like His value range is only AA and KK. From equation looks like if my BC's equity is >=30% villain should never bluff 3 bet.

[Bluff catching indifference when villain 3 bets 2bb - 5bb
S-2=V(S-5+0.35*10)+(1-V)(S+5-0.15*10)]

There must be something wrong here

I'm not very sure I understood correctly the raise sizings allowed of 1/2 pot in the flop situations.
If the SB makes a c-bet and it is raised, why the folding frequency for the naive bluffing indifference is 1/3?(page 267). It means that in a pot which has 4BB, if the SB c-bet 2BB, the BB raise of 1/2 pot is to 6BB doesn't it?
My calculation results to be 50%.
If players start with 25BB and are now in a single raised pot: EVBB (bluff) = EVBB (fold);17BB*%call + 29BB*(1-%call)= 23BB, so %call=1/2.
Anyone can help?

In your flop play and c bet dynamic section, you mention that by checking back the flop with our marginal/middling hands, we put ourselves in a PvBC spot that is often difficult to play. But by doing this we make our cbet range polar and very easy and profitable to play. Are you suggesting in a vacuum that it might be more profitable to play hands of this strength as a bet on the flop, but they are checked for the sake of our range and strategy? I'm guessing you didn't mean it quite like that, but it is how I interpreted it, was hoping you could clear that up.

Thanks,

Steve

Hey, any news about video pack?

I think there is a errata on the second paragraph of section 14.2.2.
"he makes his standard c-bet of half-pot 44% of the time and checks back the remaining 58%" and in the first paragraph is explained that he also open-jams but not with what frequency. So maybe "58%" means 48%?

The figure 14.27 is the same as figure 14.26, so it seems the image of the ranges that should represent the strategy on the Kc3d7h flop are the ranges corresponding to the Js8h3h flop.
There is not a problem because the strategy on the Kc3d7h flop is quite well described on chapter 14.4.1 but I think this is useful for the errata.

Will has done his part, now we have to do our's, another few days it should be ready to go.

Pack is out! looks awesome.

http://www.husng.com/content/will-ti...video-pack-2-0

In the Equity Array video you mention that to make the preflop equity array takes forever so you've included the file, but I don't see it anywhere in what I've downloaded. Is there something I'm missing or can you (or the publisher) upload the file?

Really enjoying the videos so far!

We're adding this in the downloads area later today. Sorry about that!

Why is the video-pack an .exe file?

for you to not share it as easily with ur buddies

Read your first book and really enjoyed it. Just ordered volume 2, looking forward to getting into it.

Have you looked at any of the annual computer poker competition hunl hands and do you think they're useful to analyse?

- maybe not useful to look at individual hands without knowing their full strategy. (and it's just a huge decision tree anyway)

Ben Sulsky reviewed some hands in a video and it was quite interesting..

Is there an official errata list published anywhere or is this the only error found?

Thanks . The large models were all solved with my own (not publicly-available) fictitious play software. My new video series shows how to do it. I chose those sizes mostly, because I think they're fairly standard, although an argument could certainly be made that smaller sizes are better as standard at shorter stacks.