Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Poker Theory General poker theory

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-22-2019, 01:31 AM   #51
robert_utk
Pooh-Bah
 
robert_utk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: ValueTown
Posts: 4,129
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Sklansky View Post
I am asking how low the rake has to be for the overall EV of the blind pushing strategy to be negative.
This is as close as I can get, within a few combos (non-mixed), and within 4 significant digits digits, over 500 million trials.

Rake% = 26.21 percent
Rake$ = 55.04 dollars

Pot = 10
Dark Shove = 100
Call = 100
Pot after rake = 154.959
Rake per player if tied = 22.5205



Caller calls with a range of: 66+, A5s+, K9s+, QTs+, JTs, A9o+, KTo+, QTo+



When the game runs with these parameters this happens (using Equilab):

Caller calls with frequency .17948718
Caller folds with frequency .82051282
The Caller wins with frequency .6354
The caller loses with frequency .3446
The players tie with frequency .0200


The expectation value of the game to the caller is:

(.17948718)(54.959)(.6354) - (.17948718)(100)(.3446) - (.17948718)(.0200)(22.5205) = .00189 -->.189 cents

The expectation value to the dark shove is:

10(.82051282) + (54.959)(.3446)(.17948718) - (100)(.6354)(.17948718) - (.17948718)(.0200)(22.5205) = .11895 --> 11.895 cents


If the rake goes any lower, the caller will start to add combos and the shover goes negative.
robert_utk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2019, 03:30 AM   #52
ZKesic
adept
 
ZKesic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Slovenia
Posts: 1,009
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Sklansky View Post
I am asking how low the rake has to be for the overall EV of the blind pushing strategy to be negative.
The rake has to be under 17,48%. At that point the caller starts calling A5o (if he plays perfectly), which makes the blind pushing strategy -EV (it would be more profitable for the pusher to just fold any two cards).


EV for blind pushing when the rake is 17,48%:


EV for blind pushing when the rake is 17,47%:


EV for calling A5o when the rake is 17,48%:


Calling range when the rake is 17,48%:
ZKesic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2019, 03:50 AM   #53
ZKesic
adept
 
ZKesic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Slovenia
Posts: 1,009
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

The formula for calculating the pusher's EV at 17,48% rake (to double check):

1050/1326*10+276/1326*(.3611*(.8252*210-100))-276/1326*(.6389*100)= 0.13

It checks out.
ZKesic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2019, 03:52 AM   #54
plexiq
old hand
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Vienna
Posts: 1,998
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZKesic View Post
He loses money with the bottom of his range (27o) once the rake gets below 20.50%.

The push is going to be 0 EV for 27o everywhere between 20.61%-20.50% rake.
That's not correct if the pusher plays fixed 100% and the caller plays best response. Neither the pusher nor the caller are playing a mixed strategy in that scenario, so we don't get that 0EV range you describe.

In our scenario the bottom of the pusher's range becomes -EV at 20.619% as calculated above. Any slight deviation of the rake from that exact point will make K9s either +EV or -EV (and therefore the bottom of the pushers range -EV / +EV).
plexiq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2019, 04:00 AM   #55
ZKesic
adept
 
ZKesic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Slovenia
Posts: 1,009
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

Quote:
Originally Posted by robert_utk View Post
This is as close as I can get, within a few combos (non-mixed), and within 4 significant digits digits, over 500 million trials.

Rake% = 26.21 percent
It doesn't make sense for the limit rake% here to be bigger than the one 27o had (~ 20-21%).

Also, your calling range doesn't make much sense again, since some hands with 57% equity are calling and some with 60%+ are folding.

Quote:
Originally Posted by plexiq View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZKesic View Post
He loses money with the bottom of his range (27o) once the rake gets below 20.50%.

The push is going to be 0 EV for 27o everywhere between 20.61%-20.50% rake.
That's not correct if the pusher plays fixed 100% and the caller plays best response. Neither the pusher nor the caller are playing a mixed strategy in that scenario, so we don't get that 0EV range you describe.

In our scenario the bottom of the pusher's range becomes -EV at 20.619% as calculated above. Any slight deviation of the rake from that exact point will make K9s either +EV or -EV (and therefore the bottom of the pushers range -EV / +EV).
You're right, the 27o pusher is shoving a fixed 100% range.
MonkeyT1lt made that comment about the 20.61%-20.50% range and I didn't really question it too much. This range of the same EV for the caller can't exist in this case though, so 20.619% rake is the only point at which K9s is a 0 EV call and 27o is a 0 EV shove.

Last edited by ZKesic; 01-22-2019 at 04:21 AM.
ZKesic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2019, 10:12 AM   #56
robert_utk
Pooh-Bah
 
robert_utk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: ValueTown
Posts: 4,129
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZKesic View Post
Also, your calling range doesn't make much sense again, since some hands with 57% equity are calling and some with 60%+ are folding.

Some kickers block more straights against a range of any two cards, than vs a range of 72o.

The exact combinatorics of a few combos is debatable, that was the beginning of my answer.

More importantly, is why does your answer vary so far from mine, since mine has the EV calculation included, which is different than yours.
robert_utk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2019, 01:15 PM   #57
browni3141
veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: South Florida
Posts: 3,144
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

Quote:
Originally Posted by just_grindin View Post
I feel like I am missing something here because I am not sure how you arrived at this simplification.

I had assumed he was asking at what rake is is shove less than EV neutral and I am not sure if the two things are the same or if you're solving for something else (i.e. a solution that has higher EV than shoving blindly, even when shoving blindly might still be +EV).
I just got confused about the way rake affects each player's EV. My first post was wrong but I can't change it now.
browni3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2019, 01:35 PM   #58
Fishing
centurion
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: California
Posts: 126
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

David Sklansky - I sent you a PM
Fishing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2019, 01:48 PM   #59
plexiq
old hand
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Vienna
Posts: 1,998
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

Quote:
Originally Posted by robert_utk View Post
Some kickers block more straights against a range of any two cards, than vs a range of 72o.

The exact combinatorics of a few combos is debatable, that was the beginning of my answer.

More importantly, is why does your answer vary so far from mine, since mine has the EV calculation included, which is different than yours.
You have a 17.9% calling range at ~26% rake and your range includes K9s. I posted the math for K9s above and it needs rake below 20.619% to be a profitable call.

It looks like you mistakenly constraint the range of the caller to be >0EV overall, but that means there will be plenty -EV calls in that range. Every single hand needs to be individually >=0EV to call.
plexiq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2019, 02:08 PM   #60
robert_utk
Pooh-Bah
 
robert_utk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: ValueTown
Posts: 4,129
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

Quote:
Originally Posted by plexiq View Post
You have a 17.9% calling range at ~26% rake and your range includes K9s. I posted the math for K9s above and it needs rake below 20.619% to be a profitable call.

It looks like you mistakenly constraint the range of the caller to be >0EV overall, but that means there will be plenty -EV calls in that range. Every single hand needs to be individually >=0EV to call.
There is a reason that Q8o is nicknamed 'The Computer Hand'.

If my answer is wrong, then simply post a correct EV for both players at equilibrium, that uses pure strategy and is more than 4 combos different than mine.
robert_utk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2019, 02:15 PM   #61
plexiq
old hand
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Vienna
Posts: 1,998
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

I posted the calculation for K9s and it directly follows that all hands need >=59.9885% equity at 20.619% rake to be profitable calls.

Your posted range includes plenty of hands with less equity at higher rake, which is clearly wrong. Additionally, by your own calculation, the caller's EV is .189 cent for the game. This obviously can't be right if every single hand in the calling range were +EV on its own.
plexiq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2019, 02:21 PM   #62
robert_utk
Pooh-Bah
 
robert_utk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: ValueTown
Posts: 4,129
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

Quote:
Originally Posted by plexiq View Post
I posted the calculation for K9s and it directly follows that all hands need >=59.9885% equity at 20.619% rake to be profitable calls.

Your posted range includes plenty of hands with less equity at higher rake, which is clearly wrong. Additionally, by your own calculation, the caller's EV is .189 cent for the game. This obviously can't be right if every single hand in the calling range were +EV on its own.


The caller is defending his tourney equity. At what +EV would you suggest he do so?
robert_utk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2019, 02:34 PM   #63
plexiq
old hand
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Vienna
Posts: 1,998
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

Why would a caller have hands in his range that lose him money on the call? Every individual hand needs to be at least zero EV to be a call, and that's not the case for the range you posted.

I showed how your K9s call is losing money in your range. Show me a single non-optimal hand in the calling ranges I posted and I'm happy to continue from there. That's either a +EV hand that's not included in the range, or a -EV hand that is included. If you can't then they are optimal as posted.
plexiq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2019, 02:35 PM   #64
robert_utk
Pooh-Bah
 
robert_utk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: ValueTown
Posts: 4,129
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

Quote:
Originally Posted by robert_utk View Post
If my answer is wrong, then simply post a correct EV for both players at equilibrium, that uses pure strategy and is more than 4 combos different than mine.


I think I will stand pat.
robert_utk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2019, 02:38 PM   #65
plexiq
old hand
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Vienna
Posts: 1,998
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

Not getting paid to give homework support here. Have a nice evening
plexiq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2019, 11:49 PM   #66
robert_utk
Pooh-Bah
 
robert_utk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: ValueTown
Posts: 4,129
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

The deciding factor in determining a call, is where does the call break even.

In this particular puzzle, this is a preflop call decision of range vs. range.

You guys are calling too narrowly, leaving your call way too +EV.

Your complaint about my range is that it contains combos that are, by themselves, -EV vs ATC.

Now, I admit, that did send me for a loop. However, after studying range combinatorics, I see the answer.

I stand by my range, with pure strategy, within 4 combos.

Now, normally this is where one might say 'DUCY?'.

However, given who the OP is and the importance the he see it also, that would be inappropriate.


-Rob
robert_utk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2019, 03:42 AM   #67
plexiq
old hand
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Vienna
Posts: 1,998
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

Quote:
Originally Posted by robert_utk View Post
Rake% = 26.21 percent

Caller calls with a range of: 66+, A5s+, K9s+, QTs+, JTs, A9o+, KTo+, QTo+
This is not a Nash Equilibrium, not even remotely close.

I'm happy to do an exile bet with you:
If I'm mistaken and this is indeed a Nash Equilibrium for the game at 26.21% rake then I'll refrain from posting in this subforum for 1 year. If it is not a NE then you will refrain from posting in this subforum for 1 year. Quote within 24h to book.
plexiq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2019, 04:29 AM   #68
ZKesic
adept
 
ZKesic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Slovenia
Posts: 1,009
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

Why are you all still arguing about the Nash Equilibrium of this spot? I posted it already, it's 17,48%.

If you think I'm wrong, find one mistake in my calcs.
ZKesic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2019, 04:32 AM   #69
plexiq
old hand
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Vienna
Posts: 1,998
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

I already pointed out the mistake in his calculations. Hint: I don't think he is posting in good faith. Hence the exile bet proposal.
plexiq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2019, 06:46 PM   #70
just_grindin
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,838
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

Quote:
Originally Posted by plexiq View Post
This is not a Nash Equilibrium, not even remotely close.



I'm happy to do an exile bet with you:

If I'm mistaken and this is indeed a Nash Equilibrium for the game at 26.21% rake then I'll refrain from posting in this subforum for 1 year. If it is not a NE then you will refrain from posting in this subforum for 1 year. Quote within 24h to book.
Too risky to loose you for a year. Quite glad to see you posting in this sub forum again.
just_grindin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2019, 08:00 PM   #71
robert_utk
Pooh-Bah
 
robert_utk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: ValueTown
Posts: 4,129
Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

Quote:
Originally Posted by plexiq View Post
I'm happy to do an exile bet with you:

If I'm mistaken and this is indeed a Nash Equilibrium for the game at 26.21% rake then I'll refrain from posting in this subforum for 1 year. If it is not a NE then you will refrain from posting in this subforum for 1 year. Quote within 24h to book.

Within what percentage? My answer with pure strategy is within 4 combos of NE at 26.21 percent rake.

Last edited by robert_utk; 01-23-2019 at 08:12 PM. Reason: Added ‘with pure strategy’
robert_utk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2019, 11:22 PM   #72
ZKesic
adept
 
ZKesic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Slovenia
Posts: 1,009
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

Quote:
Originally Posted by robert_utk View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZKesic View Post
There were two different questions in that thread:

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Sklansky View Post
At what rake should I stop pushing everything in the dark?
My answer to this is: 20.61%.

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Sklansky View Post
How low the rake has to be for the overall EV of the blind pushing strategy to be negative?
My answer to this is: 17,48%.

How can you possibly think these questions have different answers?

Please post back in the other thread, so we don't derail this one.
The first question is asking: At what point does it become -EV for the pusher to shove the bottom of his range.

The second question is asking: At what point does it become -EV for the pusher to blindly shove any two cards.
ZKesic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2019, 11:25 PM   #73
robert_utk
Pooh-Bah
 
robert_utk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: ValueTown
Posts: 4,129
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZKesic View Post
The first question is asking at what point does it become -EV to shove the bottom of the pushers range.

The second question is asking at what point does it become -EV to blindly shove any two cards.
I am currently writing a refutation of your answer. Which one again is supposed correct? Ah, no matter. The refutation will cover them both.
robert_utk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2019, 03:27 AM   #74
plexiq
old hand
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Vienna
Posts: 1,998
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

Quote:
Originally Posted by robert_utk View Post
Within what percentage? My answer with pure strategy is within 4 combos of NE at 26.21 percent rake.
Please confirm that we are booked for the exile bet under your proposed conditions: At rake 26.21% your claimed calling range of 66+, A5s+, K9s+, QTs+, JTs, A9o+, KTo+, QTo+ is not within 4 combos of a NE. Pure strategies only.
plexiq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2019, 03:37 AM   #75
robert_utk
Pooh-Bah
 
robert_utk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: ValueTown
Posts: 4,129
Re: Can Someone Do This Calculation I Put In My Book

Quote:
Originally Posted by plexiq View Post
Please confirm that we are booked for the exile bet under your proposed conditions: At rake 26.21% your claimed calling range of 66+, A5s+, K9s+, QTs+, JTs, A9o+, KTo+, QTo+ is not within 4 combos of a NE. Pure strategies only.


I decline. The forum is for learning, not excommunication. Hang around more often so that you can learn.
robert_utk 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


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2017, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online