[GTO] GTO+/CardRunnersEV?
12-13-2015
, 04:16 AM
12-16-2015
, 03:17 PM
12-16-2015
, 03:20 PM
12-16-2015
, 10:38 PM
12-17-2015
, 09:07 AM
Quote:
I'm trying to figure out the EV of reshoving a particular hand on crev and when I do that it shows an EV of -1,058. Using a different program to calculate the same thing under same conditions it shows -3,058. I'm in the sb have posted 2k blind. So does the program I'm using count the sb in the ev loss? Whereas CREV just counts the amt of chips won or lost and EV of fold being 0?
The -3,058 number will tell you what you will expect to make in the entire hand. So if you're at the point of posting your blind, you may want to reconsider, given that you're about to first 2000, after which you'll lose an additional 1058 with a bad play.
After you have posted the blind though, and the hand has started, the -3058 number is completely irrelevant. You have posted your blind, your money is gone and you should focus on making good decisions from that point on.
That being said, CardRunnersEV does offer the -3,058 number in the "Strategy EV". This is the performance of your hands prior to posting. It tells you whether or not you should be in the hand at all. Mouse over it to see the performance of individual hands.
Please do observe though that strategy EV is only useful if you define your strategy for your entire range ("all hands"). You can't just give a player a single hand and then assign any meaning to it, given that at the point of posting your blind your range is "all hands"; you don't know yet what you're about to be dealt.
Last edited by scylla; 12-17-2015 at 09:14 AM.
12-18-2015
, 12:39 AM
I know you explained everything very in depth but I'm having trouble following. This situation is that of an online tournament so there is no choice whether or not to post a blind, it's going to happen. Below I have a screen shot of the situation and the code if you care to take a look. I just wanna be sure I'm interpreting EV on crev correctly.
To be sure to get most accurate results I've just used A9s as range for hero. Will my result be any different if I recreate with my entire shove range? Or will it still show that amt of EV when I hover over the combo in range after solving?
EDIT: I've tried setting up an entire shove range for hero that included A9s and increased the monte carlo sims to 900,000 and am getting a pretty wide deviation. Sometimes it's -800 and sometimes all the way down to -1500, any way to make my findings a bit more accurate? I'm wondering if a delete action can be used to help me get the tree hu and use the math engine...
Code:
[CardRunnersEV v3.1.6] [This text block contains a savefile for CardRunnersEV] [Use Ctrl+I to import into CardRunnersEV] [www.cardrunnersev.com] [yur4J.zj?cD?SI01yvxyDSGL!TjTQRuxy!b#NT@X.gZx?z-VxqiMlVehB2z2PKcKgJK_T4] [hz&jM82QvGSUqZJVm=kf*(uw5U&)5Z.=1&$Da*uMRq!LTEA=U6*BsfJrpRtUaM.&O@hcOs] [Y@Zpi8$Y.HnMeLjLI4j0xjK$Wh2tNKUOYpUVl@?QHp.c#S?23@a_j_C5-mWmd5Z&6du9Iu] [u&&sWU76xgZODpnE2?dO$kV5jRMLD7tdnKF9@Z.qyaEHMGNKm@K?8&ZfSIz7tVhLsSpf&P] [uxrOWCiBCPvHc+E36EuQnOa5_3g30oSA71xSmNi#?rJ_w$b#iNRv-T&SXe8OmwWo#OTaVn] [Y!rE&TqvbCb,sw9YRdD,wscPapxm4$xzLYbst$Uzh0z.&pjnGh1luDLD7Jq_kz.q?PKhnp] [AdizOxx#Gg2n@-@sPZHiLJzwdenoX$@e@7q7GVCTqdgty7f71Eg$pegy6Wc._rN_w3xp.E] [.UaD#Dzz9$g@TP?KhDeb#mVj!9MuvaC3D0_!HpxjMPlpCpJlD,1zj,KDnWj6Z_nfh!$FB_] [CI5AVA64TmMgObowJ%lL6Ivy18Wp6+MU#NZO&GdETVo2qUjc16m3XyqxLM?zv-fLjkH-i2] [8$NZ+e#e62Px_0dzJpCPUzj9f52nwyFKv#?V4$wla9Xl-C4t7GrAeqHKjhc1rgs#kPco7o] [6rOTqkoMRfHElhBGrtSU#bh36S2i6$5sjYT1c1skYcqtUz5xO8NI2D+bD+2PxNM5e!stwQ] [CXCETCrTZ5wme&TxHK21d9O0TJkGx!l5J7+dIT84Dijx68T7.7T,KGWq7zZ,7uKJ&LD$b4] [LoMC&ky?NdbA2HotffBzOEnKiL_2UwzsDMNc$JK&U-_!+I2rhPJSjmfdET7!!vxP810ncM] [VC8E24LJAAmx6BV$to7On_b1hy2wUewJi&SH+GT2o@syyy?vmIIeIYrzq_OXoscy2Cv#aM] [s4a_14hi6LT_7e4Yf91nPQ8#x#uyAY0pgphERjqm$diWA9WzD13R88puN$y3?N95jOdOgz] [K!um$?By!KKwGj#f?.JXTv8td$9w0yjgrAWEHfJfa+z9atffKiEF?PukgyKjRst_BSV99C] [61ztWrYbwC3Wj5v5g$xR9WEA8diSBj8E0R_ju6TGCayLug#Vnz6BU.9JI3r@zB3mhuqhee] [QdHoYC587Z$xq--OgXVg8d?PegX+l1Uz.744.E-7Hh4Mk5powTgzFFy..KuY_Z1l+w#t2x] [PRn7PDcseZjsnf8wb6p@$VSA29jMq_Hb&256iW7vNGz#oD&YWpow+7$40KLpV48qfoaOfY] [pychk.pS.NpLYUs&K6hrfuPF!s@wx#gvobg7XEuSEajqAm8aBtVHnz6UGyO.nnOw818dy4] [Gs4_B0D.Rx@KVFvFS&#sd!0IAV#Rd.LTF8i0DZDM3Pe4nljlMk5LF5Fl&#?+8I#UFu@Dgj] [8KNv9?-&zOurcrInY!.Fun2jzFj0M38HF@pGyp$GE8?77a$N0WEL0O!q@mN!Q7D#8UE2TH] [WM0DENsNscij0og48+edHJmvoAglh41v9#iWt.IXN8MuCRZnXU@.WW&!Zo2cyjxHBsuXEL] [NpzVgXrzOW4SIP&&NlTEK87pY4oEJ!I-qb8U5TT!0?n0lu3.1fijY4BjZ4j&C9VzoEVpnC] [VIHt,V#f$Z-.,iZM1fZ-8sh9TC.lDsQyof&8hg?K.LbN6Aam4-s86%5pW4gVOjUU,-q5Pr] [erIBbmr.W37bDf6u4CZF74dHxm8OmJ++remLkKh.9LCks1pV+JND6yj_G012aUJ_Gxc6J7] [_5CEhKltAxIDoGbxrXtXmBNBu29Smw4n.D?m9Hy1e?+hSzMqqS4.-VJ_2SHdZI7O@oe&VP] [zc.Jk&JGOOp9KLW@Yi8.VTKkHnUD-7sy.?3l98v0o9Pf+PY2L$RkXqRGYFesa8P2exhgON] [gTZm8bH7OCk8P54WgrCspD+ZcsEEtp0JclKateA?I6u5qNJpN_WQ_wFfOw1Oc_rAvvCfI8] [O6.u_fpwJJeKS.j0KLGG@k2HwJ7.aNLdVFfy6m@734xE8tOzGpujea2l.-WyS#aUmsBtu-] [-2@t1lNJ0cqvOyRb5WN$?8Je$rDzyf$wnd&_FpqqWXH-nG1mcM#JRNc_-ezhhvaMV&fUsl] [Ks_FC_78OASJgEJ_mr0miZ-QX1EfESF6L7-Bp9vgCbpfzETU968Onf1T-XcM9vw-lIFYuu] [EVc-?C!K3hb3DYQnJP$Vi&S!6]
EDIT: I've tried setting up an entire shove range for hero that included A9s and increased the monte carlo sims to 900,000 and am getting a pretty wide deviation. Sometimes it's -800 and sometimes all the way down to -1500, any way to make my findings a bit more accurate? I'm wondering if a delete action can be used to help me get the tree hu and use the math engine...
Last edited by squintster; 12-18-2015 at 12:45 AM.
12-18-2015
, 06:38 AM
12-19-2015
, 03:22 AM
Hi Scylla
I tried to build script to check the EV of defending BB vs open, tried to get it in function of open raise range vs calling frequency calculated by max exploit tool.
at the end I get only one column and not all the frequencies of BB call vs BU open.
the result
script
I tried to build script to check the EV of defending BB vs open, tried to get it in function of open raise range vs calling frequency calculated by max exploit tool.
at the end I get only one column and not all the frequencies of BB call vs BU open.
the result
script
Spoiler:
Last edited by lafauriea; 12-19-2015 at 03:29 AM.
12-19-2015
, 12:59 PM
Quote:
Hi Scylla
I tried to build script to check the EV of defending BB vs open, tried to get it in function of open raise range vs calling frequency calculated by max exploit tool.
at the end I get only one column and not all the frequencies of BB call vs BU open.
the result
script
I tried to build script to check the EV of defending BB vs open, tried to get it in function of open raise range vs calling frequency calculated by max exploit tool.
at the end I get only one column and not all the frequencies of BB call vs BU open.
the result
script
Spoiler:
For example, try writing down how the 2x2 table for the following data should look:
#1: 1 Freq: 23% EV: 12.3
#1: 2 Freq: 31% EV: 13.7
#1: 1 Freq: 42% EV: 14.8
#1: 2 Freq: 55% EV: 15.1
As you can see, it's not possible to store this data in a 2x2 table.
A 2x2 table can only be created if for every value of #1 there's the same set of the other variable.
So like this:
#1: 1 #2: 10 EV: 12.3
#1: 2 #2: 10 EV: 13.7
#1: 1 #2: 20 EV: 14.8
#1: 2 #2: 20 EV: 15.1
In this case the data can be displayed as:
___10_____20
1__12.3___14.8
2__13.7___15.1
12-23-2015
, 06:10 AM
12-26-2015
, 05:37 AM
12-26-2015
, 06:08 PM
12-29-2015
, 04:44 PM
12-30-2015
, 03:23 AM
Hi scylla,
When I was reviewing a hand in CREV today. I give SB and BB a range on the flop as the picture. I locked the flop condition. Ran the equilibrium tool from the turn. After some investigation, I suspect that the SB could play any two cards, probably because the BB range I gave is too tight. So I tried adding 73o in SB flop range, then pressed F7. (without running equilibrium tool again). I was expecting to get an error because 73o wasn't in my previous range. So CREV shouldn't know the strategy of 73o, because it didn't calculate it. But surprisingly, CREV still gave it a strategy which seems pretty reasonable. I wonder where does it come from?
Cheers,
pokoteng
When I was reviewing a hand in CREV today. I give SB and BB a range on the flop as the picture. I locked the flop condition. Ran the equilibrium tool from the turn. After some investigation, I suspect that the SB could play any two cards, probably because the BB range I gave is too tight. So I tried adding 73o in SB flop range, then pressed F7. (without running equilibrium tool again). I was expecting to get an error because 73o wasn't in my previous range. So CREV shouldn't know the strategy of 73o, because it didn't calculate it. But surprisingly, CREV still gave it a strategy which seems pretty reasonable. I wonder where does it come from?
Cheers,
pokoteng
12-30-2015
, 05:26 AM
12-30-2015
, 05:29 AM
Quote:
Hi scylla,
When I was reviewing a hand in CREV today. I give SB and BB a range on the flop as the picture. I locked the flop condition. Ran the equilibrium tool from the turn. After some investigation, I suspect that the SB could play any two cards, probably because the BB range I gave is too tight. So I tried adding 73o in SB flop range, then pressed F7. (without running equilibrium tool again). I was expecting to get an error because 73o wasn't in my previous range. So CREV shouldn't know the strategy of 73o, because it didn't calculate it. But surprisingly, CREV still gave it a strategy which seems pretty reasonable. I wonder where does it come from?
Cheers,
pokoteng
When I was reviewing a hand in CREV today. I give SB and BB a range on the flop as the picture. I locked the flop condition. Ran the equilibrium tool from the turn. After some investigation, I suspect that the SB could play any two cards, probably because the BB range I gave is too tight. So I tried adding 73o in SB flop range, then pressed F7. (without running equilibrium tool again). I was expecting to get an error because 73o wasn't in my previous range. So CREV shouldn't know the strategy of 73o, because it didn't calculate it. But surprisingly, CREV still gave it a strategy which seems pretty reasonable. I wonder where does it come from?
Cheers,
pokoteng
12-30-2015
, 12:31 PM