Whilst I understand what you're saying and tend to agree, I can't see V folding to a jam when they're getting over 4:1 pot odds. Due to the amount of hands I block (as you mentioned), I couldn't put V on a bluff and therefore there's no hands I can beat really. Strange one, still confuses me even after everyone's input .

Could you please explain what you mean by Equity Denial?

Thanks.

Fold equity.

Hoping someone could help explain something.

Snowie opens 3.5bb with some range from BTN.
SB folds
Snowie gets 3bet to 11bb total by BB.
Snowie's BTN strat folds 35% ish of the time, defending 65%ish

Isn't this massively exploitable?

No, the button is getting 33% odds on a call and has the advantage of being in position after the flop which is pretty significant. Even versus a tight value range you can make some loose calls and look to hit a good flop. You can call a bet with any decent pair or draw. Then, on the turn, continue if you have two pair or a strong draw. Sometimes you won't have to when hands like ace high give up.

Overall, the off suited stuff won't have enough equity to call 3-bets, but the suited stuff will.

It isn't really about whether your defending too many combos or too few at this point. The important thing is equity. As you get closer and closer to the river, the actual combos become more important.

In what way do you think it's exploitable?
Is BTN folding "too often"?

BTN is defending too often for sure (folding too little). A ton of his calls will lose money vs the BB 3bet range. I've run this in a solver.

MDF preflop is 33%, BTN defends double that. Position/equity can only account for so much.

Isn't BTN 4-betting some of the time?

Is MDF a gto concept?At river it is but not on any other street I think...

BTNs 4bets have nothing to do with it once it defends that much

Does no one else think this is too wide from BTN?

Snowie is too rich

Haha touché

Enviado de meu XT1033 usando o Tapatalk

Question:
Snowie does not take pot odds into account?

AK vs. AA is only 6.83% equity. What action took place preflop?

Snowie doesn't know what pot odds are. It just looks in its database for analogous situations to find out whether it made money by stacking off or not in a similar spot. If it found that AKo loses in that spot, because villain almost always had KK+/AKs, it would fold.
If it had no examples of the exact same spot (because the raise sizes were non-standard, for example), then rounding errors might cause it to make a mistake. e.g. It might just think "Oh I got shoved on for 200bb, so I'm no good here", even if the shove was only for half pot or something.
What was the action sequence and sizes in your example? (The screen grab is so small that - with my old eyes - I can't even see the size of the jam).

Why would he put the villain in AA?
Against a possible range, TT +, AQs+,AKo (4%) (I think that very often it will be loose than that) gives me that we have 42.87% equity with AKo

Sorry, I try to put it bigger but I did not know how. The site resized it to that size.

The sizes for 3bet and 4bet were for the pot, which is what snowie considers optimal
The action is in "NL20" with 100bb I raise in UTG and BTN 3bet for the pot (Pot: $2.4). The action snowie recommends is 4bet for the pot (Pot: $7.2) and Snowie jam All-in (Pot: $25.55) and i have $14,75 left. I call, but snowie recommend fold.

I think Snowie folds because it expects villain to be much tighter than you think he is. A 5-bet jam vs UTG is gonna be super-strong. (Snowie definitely doesn't expect button to have hands like 87s).
I'm surprised Snowie seems to think it's a huge blunder though. I would have guessed it's pretty close to a call (i.e. almost breakeven), but it looks like Snowie says calling loses about 18bb, which is massive.

Yes. In fact, I am more on the side of snowie as to what to expect from the hand of the villain, however, I thought that snowie, despite this, would only call for the relationship between the pot and my stack/equity

Snowie 5 bet jams with 87s but probably not 100% of the time.

I second this motion. Stephan can we at least get Arty a yearly sub?? Appreciate all posts in this thread, it has helped me out ton understanding and utilizing the software. Shot outs to Godson,Broken, and Getmeoff too.

why are the 4 bet ranges snowie gives for some situations so weird compared to what I am used to seeing recommended? Does snowie do a bad job giving ranges when you use bet sizes that are not pre programmed?


For example:

folds around to CO, who opens 3bb. BTN 3 bets to 9bb. CO's recommended 4 bets are almost entirely linear, consisting of AK and JJ+, plus mixed with TT and 99 (calling the significant majority of the time for each. Only real "bluff" in the ranges is A2s which it 4 bets only 12% of the time.


I've noticed this because I tried other 4 bet scenarios and they come out weird to me and I'm hesitant to use these ranges

Also I noticed something weird with SB defend vs 3x CO open. The ONLY hand snowie wants to flat here is 77. How is this "GTO"? If we flat SB, our opponent knows our literal exact cards and can play against us perfectly

Snowie uses a larger 4-bet sizing than most regs. It generally pots it as a 4-bet (so it can be 30bb or more). This means it's pretty much priced in to call a 5-bet jam, so it chooses to be value-heavy when it 4-bets, as it is likely to stack off. (It doesn't want to put 30bb in and then have to fold).
Humans apparently play badly against the smaller 4-bets that most humans use, (probably folding too often, because people hate flatting 4-bets even if they have a great price to call), which means you can 'get away with' cheap 4b bluffs in real life. If you used a small 4-bet vs Snowie, you won't have as much fold equity as you do vs humans, as it will call and play fairly weak hands even with a very low SPR. Snowie appears to prefer to go big, so that it maximizes fold equity (preventing the cheap realization of equity) and plays bigger pots with the top of its range.
This is one of the "flaws" of using a neural network to calculate strategies vs "random" opponents in a multiplayer game. Snowie built a 'generalist' strategy that will do reasonably well vs all possible strats played against it, but it does not play optimally vs a "nemesis" opponent that effectively knows Snowie's strat. i.e. 77 might do fine as a call vs a group of players that vary between being more aggro and more passive than average, but it wouldn't be fine to flat it if the opponent played a 'perfect' "anti-Snowie" strategy.
In some ways this makes it quite useful for real life games, because you can be in a position where 3-betting in the SB might be best if the BB is a lag/reg, but flatting could be significantly better if the BB is a fish. Snowie apparently found both options are equally viable on average, even though it would make it exploitable by an opponent that had full knowledge of Snowie's strategy.

can anyone explain the different ranges for snowies button RFI
2bb - 41%
2.25 bb - 38%
3.5 bb - 36%

6 bb - 38%

why is the 2.0 pot raise size range so wide ?

Cause having guaranteed position against 2 random ranges is great.

that did not help at all.

no matter what raise size, you have guaranteed position against 2 random ranges. that does not explain why 0.5 Pot raises wider than 1.0 Pot. but 1.0 Pot raises tighter than 2.0 Pot.