Quote:
Originally Posted by Brokenstars
33k snowie hands?
I vaguely recall someone with a PGC thread that claimed to have played 200,000! I just do 50 hands a day as a warm-up session, about 20 days a month.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrno1324
@Arty Are you trying to emulate Snowie as closely as possible to get lower error rates or do you make a concerted effort to exploit its possible leaks? Do you ever go "I know Snowie is underbluffing here so I should fold but it's going to consider folding a mistake in the review so I'm going to call."
A bit of both. Pre-flop, I try to play exactly as Snowie would (I've more or less memorized its ranges). Post-flop, I just try to play to the best of my ability, trying to win all the playmoney. Sometimes I find myself in spots where I'm in a no-win situation, because I know I'm crushed by its range, but folding (and saving chips) will be marked as a blunder.
Example spot: I 3bet/call JJ in SB v UTG. I know that Snowie's UTG 4-bet range is weighted towards AA and Axs and I really don't want to pay it off. Apparently I'm supposed to donk the flop, but I just check-called. Then it shoves the turn. I made an "exploitative" fold, because I'm sure I'm beat, but Snowie says that folding is a blunder.
It turns out that in ^ that ^ spot, Snowie
always has AA or quads, so I'm basically dead.
But Snowie says calling has an EV of 18bb, which might well be true against the "random agents" it trained against, but clearly isn't true against Snowie itself.
That's the kind of thing that annoys me about playing it. Calling off would be "correct" against random agents, but it loses a stack against Snowie, so it's catch 22: my error rate gets worse if I fold, but I lose a stack if I call.