Quote:
Originally Posted by MatiKosa
In this section we can work out the best strategy. However, we won't see a flop, so the hands' postflop equities are irrelevant.
There's no such thing as postflop equities.
There's just equities.
If all the play is preflop, then the equities you're getting are averaged for all possible boards.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MatiKosa
Also, the card removal effect doesn't work for ranges.
Yes it does.
For example, try letting SB raise only Ax hands.
BB's 3bet frequency will drop from 29.2% to 28.4%.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MatiKosa
Therefore why is EV of this range (74.66%) higher, than this range (also 74.66%), which contains more suited hands and less offsuited junk?
As far as I can tell, both have an EV of 0.52.
The first range will perform slightly better though.
If you're talking about some other setup, then please mail a savefile to support.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MatiKosa
#2
You said that Strategy sb/bb is counted before any blinds are being posted. So which number is more important?
- EV of our raise only?
- weighted EV of raises and folds?
- strategy sb/bb ?
The weighted EV of raises and folds is the number to be looking for.
For example, it's easily possible to dramaticlly increase the EV of just our raise if we only raise AA. However, the total EV of our decision would drop dramatically since we'd be folding many other premium hands. It's the EV for the entire decision you should be looking at.
As for strategy EV, that number is only important if you want to determine if you should be playing at all. For example, if you need to post a 0.5 blind, but your strategy only makes you 0.45 blinds, then you should not be playing that strategy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MatiKosa
#3
I'd like to develop a preflop 3-betting strategy UTG vs BTN.
UTG:
- opens 12.5% { 22+,ATs+,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,AJo+,KQo }
- 4b/c only 3.0% { JJ+, AKs, AKo } (so for now he doesn't have any 4b/f)
BTN:
- 3-bets 8.4% { JJ+,AKs,ATo+,KTo+ }
- 5-bets 3.0% { JJ+, AKs, AKo }
Why it shows us that BTN 3-bets 7.78%, while in fact he 3-bets 8.45% of his range? (I double checked it, there is a 8.45% range inside)
That's due to card removal.
UTG's range is rich in aces and kings.
For that reason, the chance that BTN álso holds a premium hand drops from 8.45% to 7.78%.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MatiKosa
However, once I remove "Fold" from the BTN's first action (which defines his range), the EV of UTG's opens goes down.
A player's range is determined in his first decision.
So in your first setup UTG was up against a BTN who was dealt a random card from the deck.
If you remove his "fold all hands" action then he will
always hold a top 8.45% hand.
Given that UTG is now up against an artifically strong range and BTN never folds, his EV will drop dramatically.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MatiKosa
#4
I know that folding is 0EV, but it looks like there is no way to make the EV of any range lower than 0. I mean, we can 3b any trash IP and the program still shows that we are +EV, while I highly doubt it's true, although I haven't taken any postflop actions into account.
You have UTG folding to a 3bet 78.5% of the time.
That justifies 3betting with trash.
Please do keep in mind though that you have not included SB and BB into the calculations, so in reality you should be using tighter ranges.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MatiKosa
Given the opening range for the UTG - how can I work out the best 4b/c strategy for him and the best 3b/f+3b/5b strategy for the BTN?
Just enter the strategy for one player and then use the Max Exploit tool for the other one. Once again though, please keep in mind that you have not included SB and BB into the calculations, so you should interpret all results with a grain of salt.
It's also possible to write a tree where you dó include SB and BB (no need to go overboard with details on their play though; just keep it basic). After that, check which hands are +EV for hero and delete the -EV hands. Do so while moving back through the tree and deleting the -EV hands; recompute after every delete action. It's the approach described for finding optimal play in the article you linked to at the start of your post.