It is for BB position only for cash play 100bb deep that Snowie is using off suited Aces as bluffs and suited ones as call.Random spaz never happens preflop especially if u learn through scenarios."Spazzing"(long term probably it is not a spaz if Snowie thinks that way after playing trillions of hands) happens when u use hand history and either by weird bet size or different action u put Snowie in a situation to analyse hand and choose an action with a different range.
I never had pro sub and after Black Friday I bought one because I think I was spewing turns/rivers.I had intermediate sub so mu preflop game was fine I guess.After just one session analysis I realised that bot is using type of hands on turn and river to make a decision when faced with action that it never recommended.It will happen even on a flop.For example,I am speaking about lowest level which is NL20 in Snowie client 100bb deep cash.It recommends to either 3bet or fold from Small Blind against a single open raise.So when u analyse a hand ,lets say from your hand histories,u opened from HJ and villain from the SB called, Snowie is already in a weird spot because it never uses that strategy.So on the flop his actions r based on type of hands that SB is holding, one pair,oesd,flush draw etc.
So when u use Snowie for learning I strongly recommend using scenarios with whole ranges not particular combos.

Sent from my SM-J600FN using Tapatalk

When you use a very large size, the raising range becomes much more polarized. Hands like A5o are just bluffs that (presumably) 3b/fold for that sizing. They aren't good enough to call with (like suited aces), but they have some EV as bluffs. If your strategy is to use a smaller 3-bet, suited Aces can 3-bet, because they still play fine if villain doesn't fold to the 3-bet.

You see the same sort of thing in 4-bet pots with "standard" sizes. If you're on the BTN and one of the blinds 3-bets, Snowie knows that calling in position with Axs is +EV, so it usually calls with suited aces, but it can't profitably call with offsuit aces, so it 4-bets some Axo, hoping to get folds.

SPR has something to do with it too. When there's an oversized 3-bet or a 4-bet, very few hands can flat call due to the low SPR. You raise with a polarized range that expects to be met with either a re-raise or a fold, and hardly ever a call.

A5o functions better as a 3bet with Ace as a blocker to villains 4bets, and has decent equity vs alot of calling ranges like pocket pairs.

A5ss functions better as a call because it helps get more nut flushes in the calling range, and can also retains its equity as a call better

on a flop like 249 with a bdfd, A5ss can call alot easier than A5o, because A5ss has more ways to river the nuts, which helps the performance of hands like 9x because we aren't so capped on river clubs

However, Snowie mostly have a calling range against BB 3bet. So your bluffs might be better having some playability postflop.

That's because of position advantage post flop.It continues with 90/10 or 80/20 % call/4bet range.U can do a math to find the real %.

Sent from my SM-J600FN using Tapatalk

I was playing around with Snowie heads up and I paid attention that it has different preflop ranges for 50nl 100bb deep vs 100nl 100bb deep.

I understand that stack size affects both players ranges but in this case stacks are all the same size. Only stake differs but it should not have affect to players ranges as long as the relative stack sizes stays the same.

I mean, open range for 3x should be pretty much same 100bb deep, no matter if your playing stakes 50nl or 100nl. Only if playing really deep (over 200bb) the ranges will probably be bit different.

Does anyone know why Snowie's recommendations deviate in this way?

Thanks in advance.

It takes into account rake, which is a higher percentage of the post-flop pot at 50NL.

from what i know that is not really true. Snowie does not play vs its own range. is does not counter its own strategy. the advice it gives is due to expierence playing against many different ranges. problem here is that most villains SB strategy is highly exploitable. for example Villain is 3 betting in that spot 1.5 % (AA-QQ) and flatting 25%... That is obiovusly a terrible strategy but snowie can not exploit it so the advice snowie gives you is far away from "optimal" vs that villain. So i would prefer to use snowie more in spots when Villain is more likely to be playing somewhat "balanced" and "reasonable"
but it is always good to ask yourself "why is snowie doing this"....even though snowie is not "thinking".

i really like that question and have thought about that myself alot. i think it is very complicated.
lets say we 3 bet Btn vs CO. Mostly on Ace high flops snowie bets 0.25 pot because (that is what i think) that flop hits our range pretty well in terms of we have Top Pair alot in that spot and villain mostly has high cards or a smaller Pocket pair. We dont need to bet big to make villain deny his equity and we dont need to bet big because we dont have too many bluffs in that spot. it also makes less sense to bet big because IF villain really hat the flop he propably has as crushed, because he has a set or Two pair.

different example
we are defending OOP , the flop is Jh Th 6s . it goes check check and the turn is a middling spade card. in those spots snowie suggests 2.0 pot a lot becauses (i think) Villain xb range on that flop are lot of hands with SDV so snowie only attacks that range with 2pair+ and very strong draws. vs a pot sized bet villain has a too "easy" call with a lot of the hands in his range.

If that's true than there is no reference point in making decisions for either action to be +EV or -EV.Snowie was playing randomly at first and learning +EV moves.So it came to its optimal ranges.So it plays against that ranges because there is no "better" strategy .I know that 100% is true for pre flop because I am building full pre flop tree.I believe AI is the future now when there is already real time GTO solver on the market.(www.mypokersolver.com)

Sent from my SM-J600FN using Tapatalk

That web app is actually quite similar to a basic version of Snowie's scenario builder. It uses pre-computed solutions from Monkersolver, and can only tell you what to do with a particular hand combo in a particular situation, but doesn't show you the complete strat for the range as a whole.
I suppose that if you had a very long timebank, you could use it to find out what to do with a specific combo on every street on a particular board, but it's a bit clunky. (Imagine trying to build a scenario in Snowie at the same time as actually playing the hand).
Voice-activated real-time AI assistance bots will no doubt be widespread eventually, however. i.e. Something like Cortana/Siri will tell you to fold pre.

Ofc. It is very expensive at the moment,the cheapest is 799eur for 10k solves but u can use it simultaneously while playing and u can take on anybody.U can play a High Roller for example against best players and won a tournament worth 10 or 50 times more.This tool is not for learning, this tool is taking on game integrity and I wonder does anyone had taken an action against this?

Sent from my SM-J600FN using Tapatalk

that´s kinda scary

Thank you for answer, Arty. Did not know that.

Do you know if it is adjusting these rake percentages correctly to meet given rake levels on sites where player has played? Or if not, can they be modified by user to meet different rake levels?

I believe that the makers of Snowie copied the rake structure from Pokerstars.com, since that structure is the one that the vast majority of cashgame players are subject to. If you play on a less popular site with a non-standard rake system, Snowie might give "incorrect" suggestions.

Hi,

I'm using the trial version of PokerSnowie and found that the way that you are supposed to play post flop is very different from how I actually play.

I'm very aggressive and protect my strong hands, I don't try to instigate bluffs very often and I cbet a lot. I figured I'd try to play some 2NL zoom on 1 table while training with PokerSnowie on another table to test out how it went, trying to mimick what PokerSnowie would tell me to do on the zoom table.

After ~1.5K hands I'd lost 4 buyins, I appreciate that it's a small sample size but it's made me think that maybe playing like that isn't actually profitable.

I feel like an idiot asking this as I'm pretty sure that it's more likely that it's the sample size or my interpretation of PokerSnowies strategy that caused it but playing 2NL zoom and closely mimicking the way PokerSnowie suggests you play, whilst not optimal, should be at least profitable in the long term, right?

From experience of both Snowie and 2NLz, I think you'd be fairly close to breakeven if you played exactly like Snowie at 2NLz, and you'd actually be missing out on some very +EV spots, while you'd also be making pseudo-GTO bluffs that have a high failure rate.
Playing in a style that was heavily influenced by Snowie, I've actually had better results at 10NL+ than I did at 2NL.
At the lowest stakes, your opponents are very unbalanced and exploitable, so if you want to maximise your winrate you should focus on identifying and exploiting those imbalances.

e.g. If your opponents have tight/strong 3-bet ranges, don't try 4-bet bluffing them like Snowie would, as that would basically be spew. Similarly, if they only 4-bet KK+, don't pay them off with AK/JJ.
At a basic level, don't bluff the fish. Just value-bet them to death, and check-fold your weakest hands.

All that said, Snowie is very useful for teaching you which kind of spots should have high (or low) betting/raising frequencies, and you can learn to adapt your play towards more of a balanced style that will be very helpful if and when you move up.

You've been around the block a bit haven't ya

Thanks again for the advice, I figured that while not optimal against the fish of 2NLz, playing somewhere somewhat close to a near GTO manner should at least be somewhat profitable.

Do you think that PokerSnowie is a particularly good investment for somebody like myself looking to plug leaks and move up stakes then?

I was thinking of playing one zoom table and one Snowie table so that I can learn what I'm doing wrong from the Snowie table whilst learning how to adjust to certain player types and player pools from the zoom.

Also, in theory, shouldn't you get a higher winrate from playing a GTO strategy playing at 2NL than you would at 10NL where the player pool is playing closer to GTO?

In theory as knowledge progress playing GTO would be the only way.In reality also playing GTO should be the most profitable way.The problem is u can't copy Snowie 100%.U can't copy PIO 100%.

this is probably a question that's been asked plenty of times in this thread, but does snowie try to exploit people? i assume no, that it's basically playing it's best version of GTO defensive style. like, snowie isn't gathering statistics on my mistakes and trying to exploit them, right?

It's a myth that GTO style is defensive.It's max EV style so that means it's the best u can do long term.It is max offensive style.

It does not keep track of what you do in the training sessions, nor does it try to exploit. It just looks up previous results (from its "learning period") and plays the way that maximised EV on average. e.g. It would continue to bluff at a pseudo-GTO frequency even if you decided to always call until the end of time. It did all its learning in the "lab", and isn't going to change its style just for one new opponent.

Does Snowie constantly adjust its findings? Meaning, does it adapt or change as it plays more hands?

They said it played trillions of hands.I guess it don't have to anymore.

Is it me or have pokersnowie reduced the scenarios allowed ? I have intermediate and its 1200 ? I thought it used to be 3000 or am I imagining that