Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > Tournament Poker > STT Strategy

Notices

STT Strategy Discussion about the play of single table tournaments.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-14-2008, 11:08 AM   #1
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Hood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 99 problems but a TT+ just ship pf
Posts: 6,172
LT: The card-removal (or bunching) effect, a simulation.

Card removal effect, or the card bunching effect, describes the changes to opponent card ranges considering that other players have folded preflop. Let's take an example from sit n' go wiz:



Here we have hero in the SB, looking at an ATC push. With the BB calling as loose as 37% of his top range, this is a +EV shove with 23o.

However what this simulation doesn't take in to account is that 4 players have folded before you. These players folded ranges of hands that included less higher cards. That means the stub of cards to be dealt to the BB includes more higher cards, and hence card combinations - especially Ax and Kx - are more heavily weighted in BBs potential holecards. So the question is, is this card removal effect great enough to make this move a fold?

This has been discussed a lot before. This zoo thread, once you wade through all the zomgrigged posts, includes posts from microbob who suggested this could be an effect for why large samples of all-in hands became below expectation. The author of pokerEV also posted to confirm this effect could exist for certain styles of play. It's been brought up various times before (see here, also here I brought it up in STTT a few months back). But I haven't seen any actual maths.

So armed with our new favourite friend - Stox EV - it seemed a doddle to calculate this and see what the effect was.

First, here's the same scenario as we had in wiz above:



Note here that the EV of hero's 32o push is 0+.27, same as we get in SNGW.

Stox EV shows more clearly the problem with this simulation - the 4 players before SBs folded all their hands. This is unrealistic. So I add in raising ranges for each player. For simplicity, if one player pushes all in, then everyone else in the hand folds (this won't effect what we're looking for).

Without further ado:



The most important figure here is the EV of SBs push - it is now -0.01, an unprofitable push. You can see the opening shove ranges I've put in - from top 9% for UTG through to 21.5% for button.

This example is obviously cherrypicked to get a negative EV result "punchline", but from a little playing around I've found that in this setup, the EV reduction is between 0.15 and 0.3, depending on blind size, BB calling range, and opening ranges.

I also ran the same setup but at 120/240 blinds, with BB calling top 18%. This is +0.28% without card bunching effect; around +0.1 or 0.05 without.

Interestingly, I am finding that changing the opening ranges of the players before isn somewhat unintuitive. I ran the original sim again, but with tighter ranges - removing some Ax hands and low pocket pairs. IT came out at -0.03:



Anyway I'll leave it at that. I can upload my stox files if anyone wants to play around with it, but now you've seen the screens it should be quite easy to setup yourself (see previous tute on stox ev).
Hood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 11:17 AM   #2
old hand
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,244
Re: LT: The card-removal (or bunching) effect, a simulation.

Very interesting, I always assumed that any "bunching" effect would be statistically insignificant. Presumebly we should start adjusting EV thresholds for ICM by position?
FDSaussure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 11:29 AM   #3
old hand
 
chok1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Everyday I'm Shufflin'
Posts: 1,354
Re: LT: The card-removal (or bunching) effect, a simulation.

nice thread
chok1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 12:00 PM   #4
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Slim Pickens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Doin' it the eastbay way.
Posts: 7,487
Re: LT: The card-removal (or bunching) effect, a simulation.

That drop from +0.27 to -0.03% is correctly interpreted as just a drop of -0.3%, right? That number isn't what we usually think of as the difference between pushing and folding, but rather the difference between pre-post and pushing, which in this case isn't really relevant, right?
Slim Pickens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 12:06 PM   #5
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Hood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 99 problems but a TT+ just ship pf
Posts: 6,172
Re: LT: The card-removal (or bunching) effect, a simulation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slim Pickens View Post
That drop from +0.27 to -0.03% is correctly interpreted as just a drop of -0.3%, right? That number isn't what we usually think of as the difference between pushing and folding, but rather the difference between pre-post and pushing, which in this case isn't really relevant, right?
As there is no one left to act behind us, folding is an EV neutral move, correct? So with this card removal, it shows pushing as (just barely) a worse option than folding.

Without card removal considerations, it's a clear push.
Hood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 12:47 PM   #6
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Slim Pickens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Doin' it the eastbay way.
Posts: 7,487
Re: LT: The card-removal (or bunching) effect, a simulation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hood View Post
As there is no one left to act behind us, folding is an EV neutral move, correct? So with this card removal, it shows pushing as (just barely) a worse option than folding.

Without card removal considerations, it's a clear push.
I thought that in the current version of the program, all of those Ev: numbers were compared to pre-post...
Slim Pickens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 12:48 PM   #7
grinder
 
SitNGo Wizard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 565
Re: LT: The card-removal (or bunching) effect, a simulation.

I must be missing something because it looks like you just changed BB calling range from 38.1% to 20.9%. Can you explain how you are taking card removal effects into account?
SitNGo Wizard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 01:16 PM   #8
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Hood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 99 problems but a TT+ just ship pf
Posts: 6,172
Re: LT: The card-removal (or bunching) effect, a simulation.

Sorry, I've got the wrong screenshots posted. It's for a different sim. I'll sort it out when I've finished this set.
Hood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 01:25 PM   #9
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Hood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 99 problems but a TT+ just ship pf
Posts: 6,172
Re: LT: The card-removal (or bunching) effect, a simulation.

Right here's the correct one:



Here'll you'll see that the % calling from BB is about 1.5% higher than in the folding simulation. This highlights the card removal effects nicely - because of the 4 folds behind, there are more combinations of cards in his calling range, thus he calls slight more frequently. This lowers hero's EV.
Hood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2008, 01:33 PM   #10
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Hood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 99 problems but a TT+ just ship pf
Posts: 6,172
Re: LT: The card-removal (or bunching) effect, a simulation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slim Pickens View Post
I thought that in the current version of the program, all of those Ev: numbers were compared to pre-post...
Now I'm confused Here is the EV calc for all folding:



Hero folding 23o is 0 EV. So it can't be compared to the pre-post, because hero losing his SB and BB increasing his stack reduces his equity.

Perhaps in this example pushing is still better than folding, but surely the interesting point is how much deduction there is from the push EV when taking in to account the card reduction.

Quote:
That drop from +0.27 to -0.03% is correctly interpreted as just a drop of -0.3%, right?
No, I'm saying it's a drop from 0.27 to -0.03 (or in the new sim, EV 0). I guess I'm not really comparing fold to push, but just "look at how less profitable a push is now we're taking in to account card removal effects."
Hood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2008, 04:30 AM   #11
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
RexWoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,588
Re: LT: The card-removal (or bunching) effect, a simulation.

Hood : I read this and it's like super interesting but there is something I fail to understand about how StoxEV works.

* is he, by default, taking the card removal effect into account (i.e. UTG has NOTa top 9% hand so that afffects other people distribution) or did you have to make so manipulation manually for that ?

I'm confused.
Very good post anyway.
RexWoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2008, 04:33 AM   #12
grinder
 
k4b4l's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Annecy
Posts: 667
Re: LT: The card-removal (or bunching) effect, a simulation.

Very good post

No body for make a thread with all good LC and k post together ?
k4b4l is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2008, 08:42 AM   #13
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
BradleyT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,986
Re: LT: The card-removal (or bunching) effect, a simulation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RexWoo View Post
* is he, by default, taking the card removal effect into account (i.e. UTG has NOTa top 9% hand so that afffects other people distribution) or did you have to make so manipulation manually for that ?
When it deals a hand to player 2, it can't give them either card that player 1 received so by default it's taking this into account.
BradleyT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2008, 01:54 PM   #14
grinder
 
Vorlautboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: in b4 lock
Posts: 637
Re: LT: The card-removal (or bunching) effect, a simulation.

Where do all these awesome threads come from lately?

(not from me thats pretty certain)
Vorlautboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2008, 02:07 PM   #15
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Hood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 99 problems but a TT+ just ship pf
Posts: 6,172
Re: LT: The card-removal (or bunching) effect, a simulation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RexWoo View Post
Hood : I read this and it's like super interesting but there is something I fail to understand about how StoxEV works.

* is he, by default, taking the card removal effect into account (i.e. UTG has NOTa top 9% hand so that afffects other people distribution) or did you have to make so manipulation manually for that ?

I'm confused.
Very good post anyway.
The thing to keep in mind is it runs monte-carlo simulations. So really it's quite "dumb" - it deals out a hand for all players, then just follows through the tree mechanically. In my tree, if anyone before SB catches a decent hand, they shove and everyone folds. So when it does get to SB (here you can see that part of the tree occurs about 80% of the time), "card removal" is in effect just as it would be if you were playing the poker hand.

The simulation runs a few million times (or you can force it to deal every possible potential deal for exact results iirc) and spits out the EV results and percentages at all parts of the tree.

So no manipulation is required - you just create every players "line" as some simplified tree you can model and set it off. The power of stox really comes down to:

a) The way you can set up conditions (v. powerful ways to run conditioning on hand holding and type flop)
b) Way to analyse the results with hand breakdowns, tournament EV, and graphing.
Hood is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2008-2010, Two Plus Two Interactive