Personally I started out with:
- Small Stakes Hold'em Poker
- Hold'em poker for advanced players
- Theory of poker

Lots of wear and tear in my copies of those books.

However, those are limit hold'em books, given that I started around 2005 (pffff, has it been that long?). I can't really give any recommendations as to other books, since I don't know them from a beginner's perspective. You should probably ask at the NL forum (any which one will do) for tips from people who started a bit more recently. I would expect you'll get a decent amount of response there.

excellent thanks for the help, top man. gl with everything

I followed your previous discussion and do not understand what the problem is.

I'm pretty new to the software, just 2 weeks now, but when I'm looking over the picture, I would say that BU is loosing 1,53 bb whenever he is taking this particular line on this particular board, although BU's calls postflop are plus EV. (I may the wrong?)

Misread question ...
One sec please.

Yes, on this 6s4s2dQhTh board Button's preflop call has an EV of -$1.53, while his next flop decision has an EV of $1.47.

The reason for this is that Button's preflop call costs him $3 and gets him into a $1.47 spot on the flop. Given that he's investing $3 to get into a spot that's only worth $1.47, his preflop call actually loses him $1.47-$3=-$1.53.

Similarly, if you pay $10 for a lottery ticket that's only worth $7 EV-wise, then you're actually losing $7-$10=-$3. So ... should you buy the lottery ticket? No, you shouldn't. It costs $10, while it's only worth $7.

Ok, I got that right.

Coming back to my problem with the equilibium, one page before.
At the moment I am pretty close to the equilibirum I was searching for (by using another script).

You told me to use a more dynamic hand ranking, and yes, thats the way to solve my problem.

I created my own hand ranking and that worked very well, but it is not that perfect I want it to be.

So the problem is, that the step from one combo to another one makes such a big diffrence between perfect play and incorrect play that I need to optimize the hand ranking system.

So it is possible to creat a ranking for diffrent suits?
For example AsKs > AhKh > AdKd ...

That would show a huge diffrence in the results, because the step from (for example) 9,2% to 9,5% would be more splitted, so you could reach 9,3 - 9,4 ...

Hope the problem became clear

No, I'm afraid that it's not possible to define a hand ranking up to individual combos.
How far off is your solution?
I've always managed to get pretty close myself.

what I'm working on is semicomplex and hard to explain, especially with my bad english

plus, I dont want to spam this thread.

I would prefer to talk about this via skype, if its okay.

Nick there is [snip]

No need, I'm pretty sure I understood you the first time.
What you're saying is you want the top% command to give exactly a top X%, and not one that's rounded up/down to the closest starting hand. This is to prevent jumps in applying the top X%. I think I can actually do that for the next release. I'll just round X% down to the nearest starting hand and then add the remaining percentage as a separate, weighed condition. I think I can make that work.

Cheers,

Scylla

nice to hear that you want to implement my request.

do you have a date for the next version?

It will be somewhere next month.

btw, if you're still looking for suggestions... having a label with the GOTO would be obvious, or you could just automatically tie it to the line it originally pointed to, even if some lines are added before.

Also, when dragging IF to the script, an automatic addition of ELSE and END if would save many a clicks (and wrists) over time.

Ability to type in the script (with autocompletion which would eliminate any errors) would be equal to flopping a royal, imo.

Ok, I'll take care of this.

Can't do this. It would make it too easy for an external piece of software to operate the software (like bots).

Thanks for the feedback!

Lacking the precise implementation of this feature;
Do you think it will become possible to find the equity of each combo seperately without losing the connection of which combo has which equity?

(ie 500 combo's in range; 1 combo ~ 0.2%; so you let top% range variable vary with interval 0.2% to land at each combo).
=> This of course assumes that you will be using always the exact same order of combo's within a hand;
ie AhKh AcKc AdKd AsKs
ie AhKc AhKd ...
=> This of course assumes that the accuracy of the equity number presented by CREV has enough digits in it to display differences.

As I see it, this will also allow to figure out the relative frequency of the combo being part of your range because:
- the moment the combo is selected with top command by expanding the range with 1 combo; &
- because CREV takes removal effects correctly into account:
You can log the relative frequency of your opponent by script & in excel you can substract 2 consecutive relative opponent frequencies to find the relative frequency of that 1 combo happening
The results will be slightly different then 0.2% because you having this combo will remove the possibility of your opponent having certain combo's.

Would be great if my italic question will be possible.

Dear Scylla, I´ve worked into scripting and I have a question. I´m relating to this video about creating 2D graphs:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_Mvvd7Ekzs

Everything´s explained in a crystal-clear manner (as always, thank you very much for that!!!) - but I come to different results? Here´s your screenshot from the tree - and my own tree for comparison (I can´t see any difference):





And here´s the resulting grid - first from your video, 2nd from my calculation:





Can you see the difference in the figures? Any explanation for that?

You're probably using a different hand ranking for the top varX%.

Thanks for looking into the suggestions.
I guess I could see someone running a bot that runs the scripts, filling in board cards as they come*... but a bot building the scripts? If I was able to build a bot to build my scripts for me, I'd likely be able to handle the drag&drop interface too. Or rather, just build my own line analyzer

* which brings me to another thing: personally, considering how quick some sites are nowadays in the bankroll confiscation business, I'm a bit paranoid on double and triple checking that I don't have CREV open when launching poker sites, as it's clearly a forbidden program on many sites (while playing, obviously). I started thinking about an AHK script to poll for the situation and issue me a warning... unless you'd be interested in implementing something like that in CREV (poll for user defined processes -which would be the poker clients-, save work and shutdown CREV if a poker client is open). I do realize this is not exactly your core business, though.

Any chance of adding user defined comments to the script code?

I start to use tons of variables, referencing each other and I know that I´m likely to not know anymore what I did if I re-open the script in one week.

I'll have to stick by it
I don't want this software to have input/output modes that are easy to manipulate by external software.

You could simply make a software suggestion/request in the software forum.
I'm sure someone out there can pretty easily write a script that checks for conflicts between poker clients and poker software.

I'll see if I can squeeze that in.

big +1 to this

I'm not sure if anyone has asked yet, but having more than 8 Locations would be a huge help. I'm starting to run into the problem of not having enough Locations possible.

all of these would be great, especially that top one. the GOTO function is the bane of my existence.

one other suggestion I have would be to be able to call another script. for example, I have a script that manually performs an unexploitable shove. if I want another script to incorporate a manual unexploitable shove, I have to physically re-create that unexploitable shoving script within the new script. it would be great if I could simply use some function like call('unexploitableshove') from within the new script. it would help tremendously in terms of making manageable and efficient scripts.