The other difference with,let's say solver play is simplifying by Snowie. Checking 100%,Betting 100% with a particular combo is more common when Snowie is playing his own strategy. Solvers will rarely give u a simplified (rounded 100%) strategy if u not give them order to do it(something that Nick Howard is doing in his PIO course ).His course is mass data analysis and then simplified PIO moves based on population tendencies (like folding too much,calling to much in some spots and so own...).

More would be better.

^Are you f*cking cheating at 2nl?

The strategy seems OK.

Confirmed cheating at 2NL. That guy has made various videos where he uses virtual boxes and screen-scrapers to run solvers alongside Stars, against their rules.

Im sure this has been asked in the thread before, but how is Snowie at heads up? Is it worth the time if you havent played a ton of heads up?

If not, is there something else?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And someone tested Snowie in heads up?

Actually Snowie heads up play is the best money can buy.

Is it still cheating if you're transparent about it?
I guess it is, but you need to applaud the honesty.

I am confused about something regarding Pokersnowie Preflop Advisor:

Pokersnowie open size is 2.25bb everywhere except in SB where it advocates for 3.5bb open.

But when using a function "Facing a 3b after my raise" it assumed we opened for 2.5bb

Also when you are using a function of "Facing a raise" it assumes the raiser opened for 3bb

Also when using a function "Facing a 3b after my raise" it assumed we opened for 2.5bb

Can someone explain me the reasoning behind this?

From the SB it advocates a 3bb open, not 3,5bb.
Thinking about it, does it exist a customizable version of the preflop advisor anywhere? not necessarily made by PokerSnowie obviously, something similar.
I like the concept of fast switching through the preflop ranges.

That's pot size bet.In a wide vs wide range confrontation Snowie prefers pot size open.For micro stakes also prefers pot size open almost from any position(HJ only opening 0.5pot,that's 2.25bb up to 2.5 bb) because of the high rake.Preflop advisor is out dated I think.

I'm a bit confused by Snowie's analysis of a real hand I played, and would like some help/insight. Briefly, I was in the SB with KK 100 bb deep, action folded to BTN who min-opened, I 3-bet, BB 4-bet, BTN flatted, I jammed, BB called (with AA, natch), and BTN called (with QQ and then flopped his set to triple up). I wasn't sure whether my jam was correct so I set the hand up as a scenario in Snowie and it said that flatting the 4-bet would've been a better play, with an EV of 8.36. However, although it preferred the flat, it said the jam had the higher EV (18.33), so... what gives? Why does it prefer a play that it estimates to have a lower EV here?

Because it prefers to play its whole range the same way, even though it's -EV for some of the hands in the range.

Because snowie is garbage.

Don't go to Snowie for 5betting advice

So is Pluribus?It plays the same way.By the way it's 3 way scenario.Who can tell what's the equilibrium play?Maybe Monker?

Why not?Their creators said it same but i don't think that it counts for preflop.The real deal in this hand is that it is 3 way.

It thinks based on it's data streets ahead. In other words said his opponent continuation range. The balance is achieved when 2 modes of action produce same EV(calling and betting in this scenario with KK as a part of his range).What's the point of jamming when opponent will call with AA only?(plusEV is a result of already a lot of dead money ).

Really sick/scary developments from Snowie, I'm cautiously excited for this

https://www.pokersnowie.com/blog/201...ie-still-alive

Anyone have any luck importing the 10k of Pluribus hands into pokersnowie?

For some reason, I can only import these HH into PT but not into HM2 or pokersnowie?

I wonder what that reason could be

I'm fairly sure someone did convert the hands into a format that Snowie could read, as they posted something about it on twitter. I think it was for a training/coaching video. I just can't for the life of me remember who it was. :/

EDIT: Oh, it was Davitsche. Someone else converted the hands, and he was going to study them on his Twitch. I didn't watch the stream, but it's archived here: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/454001231
If you contact him on twitter, maybe he'll tell you where he got the hands from.

Thanks. I will look him up.

I was recently playing around with Snowie, and was wondering what might cause the following:

When on the BB (heads up), Snowie raises pot (3x) against limp 48.11% of the time. This is betsize it prefers. However, I decided to go little bigger than that, so I was curious to see how the recommendation will change based on this bigger size.

My guess was that the frequency will go down, but not at all. At 2 pot bet, it will raise 60.29%. Yet when we raise bigger, our opponent gets to fold more hands. I think we are going to get ourselves in deep trouble, if we play like this.

^ This doesn't really surprise me, as the same thing happens with regard to post-flop sizing*.
Using a larger size creates more fold equity, so the weaker hands in the range gain more EV from eliciting folds than they would with a smaller size. At the same time, the best hands in the raising range will get additional EV on the (rarer) occasions when they get called.
The total EV of the strategy might be a little lower with 2x pot than it is for 1x pot, so Snowie generally prefers the latter, as it uses a fixed sizing for its entire range.
Obviously you'll "get into trouble" with trashy hands if the oversized raise doesn't work, but the "balanced" strat means the top of the range will counteract the loss-making failed bluffs, making the overall EV fairly similar.

* e.g. On the river, you might pick a really large size so that your bluffs have more chance of working, while simultaneously getting max value with your nut combos, although the bet won't called so often. Then again, it's sometimes the case that you generate more EV by betting smaller, such that your value-bets get paid off, even if it means the (less frequent) bluffs don't work very often.

In short: Small size => Your range is more value-heavy. Large size => More bluffs. If you're not comfortable bluffing a lot, don't use large sizes with a lot of trashy hands.

Thank you Arty for bringing up good points.

I agree with what you said, that we get to bluff more with bigger sizing. However, my concern is this: when we bet 2xpot, our opponent will only need to call 33% (according to mdf). That range would look something like:

22+, A2s+, K2s+, Q9s+, J9s+, T9s, 97s+, 86s+, 75s+, 65s, A2o+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo.

In my opinion, this is fairly strong and easy range to play in position. Yet, I am sure our opponent will raise some of these hands, so he will deny our opportunity to see the flop, and might get away with defending less. And when he calls, we will be out of position with a wider range, and it´s going to be quite obvious to him which flops our range will hit. Because of this, I think we are going to under realize with our good hands by not getting enough action with them.

Also, regarding to Snowie´s bet size and range, it is raising more hands also with 1/2 pot bet compared to 1 pot bet. So it is raising more hands with 1/2 and 2 pot bets, but less with 1 pot bet. Maybe rake has it effect too, but I am still curious, why it is constructing it´s ranges like this.

It is right what you said about bigger bet sizing, but I think that I am missing something else too.