Hey
Just bought the software recently. seems good.

I would like some advice regarding the following:
- im trying to simulate an UTG open with tweener hands (this range: A9s-A8s,KTs-K8s,QTs-Q8s,J9s+,T9s,ATo,KJo-KTo,QTo+,JTo ) with the following lineup: 3 nitty regs, 1 whale OTB >50% vpip and one whale in the blinds. this is a line up i face a lot recently but im not sure opening these hands are +ev though.
is this too complex of a situation to simulate? (cause my tree is like... whatever.) if you had some recommendations on how to proceed that'd be great.

- also, how can i know the nb of trials which is relevant for a simulation X? like, i assume that the std 100k trials are enough to work out a postflop strategy HU vs a flop c/r, 2barrel spots or w/e.
But what if when the hand starts preflop, with some postflop conditions etc...

thanks
Ben

4bet range not a subset of 2bet range, nor is 3bet call.

Can I PM you with the tree and script files.

Great software by the way.

I'd use a delete action to turn the 3 nitty regs into just one reg who has a 3x multiplied artificial strength. I believe I discuss how to do that in the second instructional video. Or here in the written one: http://www.cardrunners-ev-calculator.com/multiple.html

And I'd do the same thing to artificially strengthen the range of the whale, so that you're only dealing with one whale with the strength of two.

In that manner, your tree should become a lot easier to work with. Dealing with only two villains instead of 5 will cut down the number of branches in your tree considerably.

At the flop, you could consider just checking down. Should you be up against a nit on the flop, you'll probably only want to use a percentage of your equity instead of the full 100%, since his range is stronger and he's in position. Kind of depends on the nit of course.

Just mouse over the EV you're interested in.
In monte carlo mode, behind that number the error in its estimation will be given by the "std:" value. If you feel that this std is too large compared to the EV, then you'll need more simulations (unless the EV is very near 0, in which case you should just consider it roughly 0).

It's probably best if you mail support.

exactly. perfect!

Is there a way to use this to figure out a c bet's success percentage?

Also, I had asked this earlier but no one responded: has any developed any useful/clever scripts they would like to share or sell? PM me if you do!

Also, with the ability to select multiple turn and river card scenarios, it appears that we can select when a generic flush card has hit (as I had understood when watching a video), but I was unable to select a card range on my own. Did I do something wrong, or did I misinterpret this feature?

Tried support [@] cardrunners-ev-calculator [.] com but got:

Hi. This is the qmail-send program at qmail22 [.] zonnet [.] nl.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
------------------------------

Also tried support[@]cardrunnersev[.]com. Same outcome.

A mail server was down.
Please try again.

The layer system is explained both in the video manuals and here: http://www.cardrunners-ev-calculator.com/turnriver.html

Sure, just set up a cbet spot and let villain either call or fold (or possibly raise).

For example, in the pic below, I have SB c-betting 100% of the time.
BB only continues if he holds:
- at least middle pair
- a flushdraw
- an OESD
- a gutshot and overcards
- a gutshot and a backdoor flushdraw
- overcards and a backdoor flushdraw

The cbet succeeds 34.3% of the time.

Did indeed mail support, and service provided by scylla was superb.

I'll pass on his account of the point raised.

I wrote a script to find an equilibrium involving a 2bet range of top 6% EVs. The executed script produced a 4bet range which included a starting hand that was not part of the 2bet range.

Reply included:
This is actually a card removal effect that is noticable when ranges are extremely tight.
At the time when the hand ranking for the 4bet range was determined with the Top% command the performance of hands is not the same as when it is determined at the time of the 2bet decision.
Because you’ve used some top% at the 4bet, the ranking now changes for the 2bet decision.
There’s nothing to be done here, and from a practical effect the influence on the final outcome should be very marginal.
In fact, I mention it in the 3part video series on the unexploitable shoving algorithm

Once again, thanks scylla.

Hi Skylla, I have just downloaded the free version, intending to buy this week.

The first tip is to openQQvsFlushdrawblockbet.stx. I have no idea where this is, do I need to download it?

Thanks

It's in the /savefiles subdirectory of the program's main directory.
Most likely you'll find it in
C:\Program Files (x86)\CardRunners\CardRunnersEV\savefiles

Other than that, I would advise using the beta instead.
You can download it here: http://www.cardrunnersev.com/download.html
Go to "Click here for the beta of the software"

Hey there,
I'm having trouble with the post flop filters. Lets say I want the villain to barrel turn with TP+. What happens is that he ends up betting TP+ on 4 flush boards and things like betting JJ on 5678 boards. How do i set the filters to avoid that?

There's several ways to check for that under the "board texture" tab of the postflop menu.
Or possibly you'll want to use the layer system to group different types of turns and use a different subtree for each group.
Could you mail a savefile to support please?
It's probably the easiest way to take a look.

Here is what I'm talking about. As you can see, BB barrels off with 2pair on a 4 flush board. Also, the small blind calls the turn, and would've called the river if the condition was >=tp. In fact, it happens for any action. How do I prevent this? I cannot use the layer system because I want to run the sim not knowing the flop. I cooked the flop just to get the right sample tun quicker to show you what I'm talking about.

How can I use the board filters for that?





Just to clarify a few other things..
Lets say the I'm looking at BTN vs BB scenario, 1-2 NL. I happen to find out that a certain hand for the BB is +1$ EV (looking at the preflop all hands popup after the computations). Does that mean that my "strategy" ev in the BB is actually -1$ ? i.e 2$ blind minus 1$ profit? But it is still more profitable than folding and loosing the big blind, right?

One more clarification question:
As in the image above, lets saw I'm looking at the very first EV stat of the SB when he limps in preflop. From what I understand that is the EV of his limping action weighted by all the EVs to the right of tree, correct? So if this number is positive, it means it is profitable to limp in given all of the conditions I've made up pre and post flop?

Thank you very much,
Max.

I just did a quick calc and there's roughly 22k different flops out there.
With an additional ~2.5k for the turn and river to come off after that, that means there's roughly 50 million different ways for the board to turn out.
I think that it would be a bit too ambitious to try to define play on an unknown flop+turn+river.
Personally, I'd just stick to defining the flop play as best as I could and then just check down the turn.
The errors that would be involved in going any further than that would strongly outweigh the benefit of specifying the actions in more detail.

That's not to say that it's not possible to define all sorts of board structures with the "board texture" tab of the postflop conditions. But the tree that would have to be built here would have to be amazingly detailed, given all the different boards out there.

In fact, even if the flop were known here at Qh9h4h I would tend to be really careful in defining play any further than the turn. There's roughly >2k ways for the turn+river to come off and the board is already very very coordinated.

If BB's EV is $1 and he's posted a $2 blind then he would indeed lose $1 in this hand, due to him not regaining the blind he posted. However, this is not to say that he shouldn't play the hand. He's got an EV of $1 after all. But at the time of his decision the blind is already posted. Thus, the blind no longer belongs to BB, but to the pot. He's faced with a choice of folding, which will mean just giving up and "winning" $0, or he can "fight back" and win $1. If given the choice between giving up for $0 or playing back and winning $1, he should fight back.

Fwiw, losing money in the blinds happens to virtually every player. Playing to win back $1 after you have posted $2 sounds like a smart plan. Two hands later you'll be in a winning spot on the button ... which is why you post those blinds in the first place. Winning back $1 in the blinds will reduce your losses, allowing you to get to that winning spot more cheaply.

Yes, all future actions are taken into account in the calculations.
For example, please see the pic below.
Button raises, bb calls, bb bets flop and Button folds.
Given that Button invests $14 preflop, only to fold the flop, his EV is -$14.
After all, every single time he makes that raise to $14, he ends up losing it.



Yes, correct.

Thanks for the response!

I still don't want to give up on an idea of defining turn and river play
One way to work around the problem that I have would be to be able to define the "not" condition to a part of a condition. So i would have something like this if I wanted to barrel TP+ but not on a 4flush board: >=TP+!Board:[4fl]. But of now I can only get !>=TP+Board:[4fl]

Is it possible to achieve >=TP+!Board:[4fl] in some other way?

Just select every option except for a 4 flush.

Excellent! worked like magic

Still would be handy to be able to apply the "not" condition to a part of a condition.

Also, in the holecards section of the posflop condition menu, there is no longer an option to graphically input the range, you have to type it in by hand. Is it supposed to be like that?

Ok, I'll consider it.

It used to be like that, but I was really never that fond of that feature.
Picking hands in a matrix is just mostly a preflop thing.
Postflop everything is relative to the board.

Has anyone combined CRev simulations with information gleaned from the HEM 1 app Holdem Vision? If so, what sort of insights did you get?

I know this is a total noob question, but what exactly do the graphs do? AFAIK, they don't provide an actual hand range in the output, so are they provided optimal equity % or frequencies?

Sorry, they seem really interesting but I am having trouble grasping exactly how they are supposed to help.

You can create a graph to see how the EV of a certain decision depends on some property (for example a stack size, a bet size, blind sizes, rake, etc).

Below is an example of a graph that shows the dependence of the expected value of a certain decision on a raise size:



Below is a link to a youtube video on creating graphs with CardRunnersEV:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuU2OHZ6Nfo

And here's a link to the written manual:
http://www.cardrunners-ev-calculator.com/graphs.html