Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Micro-Small Stakes Limit Discussions about micro-small stakes Texas Hold'em (all stakes up to around 15/30)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-14-2017, 05:43 PM   #1
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 9,679
no bots allowed in here; the heads up thread

I've definitely done my share of gamestarting over the years at small stakes online limit holdem. I've not studied the famous bot Cepheus much, not in over a year, and I think there's still room for exploitive profits at heads up limit holdem, depending on rake of course.

Because of the rake problem, playing heads up at a 2 max table just doesn't make sense, which is why you don't see the format spread often. However, I've been playing some 2% rake heads up sit n go games recently, perhaps even vs some of you.

So it begins.
Bob148 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2017, 11:33 AM   #2
wbatas
old hand
 
wbatas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: 'murrcah.
Posts: 1,646
Re: no bots allowed in here; the heads up thread

I just beat Cepheus by 85.
wbatas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2017, 09:59 AM   #3
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 9,679
Re: no bots allowed in here; the heads up thread

They will say things like "good luck building your bot." and "you're a sitebot." etc. Don't let it get you down. Some will refuse to play you if you're too good. I think these players are the ones that will never make it in the long run. Gamestarting yet refusing to play is just about the lamest behavior I've seen in all of my online pokering.
Bob148 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2017, 07:04 PM   #4
DougL
Too helpful for this post
 
DougL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 21,415
Re: no bots allowed in here; the heads up thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob148 View Post
Gamestarting yet refusing to play is just about the lamest behavior I've seen in all of my online pokering.
Some people are just jerks, but let's leave them out of the equation. Can you see why someone might not want to game start with someone they think is decent at poker?
DougL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2017, 07:24 PM   #5
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 9,679
Re: no bots allowed in here; the heads up thread

Yes I see why Doug, but I still think it's pretty lame to sit an empty table only to sit out when I join.
Bob148 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2017, 04:56 PM   #6
Clumsy Surgeon
enthusiast
 
Clumsy Surgeon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 54
Re: no bots allowed in here; the heads up thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by wbatas View Post
I just beat Cepheus by 85.
Where?!?!
Clumsy Surgeon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2017, 04:59 PM   #7
Clumsy Surgeon
enthusiast
 
Clumsy Surgeon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 54
Re: no bots allowed in here; the heads up thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob148 View Post
I've definitely done my share of gamestarting over the years at small stakes online limit holdem. I've not studied the famous bot Cepheus much, not in over a year, and I think there's still room for exploitive profits at heads up limit holdem, depending on rake of course.

Because of the rake problem, playing heads up at a 2 max table just doesn't make sense, which is why you don't see the format spread often. However, I've been playing some 2% rake heads up sit n go games recently, perhaps even vs some of you.

So it begins.
Which site for game starting? Which site for the SNGs?
Clumsy Surgeon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2017, 06:04 PM   #8
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 9,679
Re: no bots allowed in here; the heads up thread

I've gamestarted on PokerStars, FullTilt, UltimateBet, Most of the WPN skins, swcpoker, carbonpoker, and probably some that I'm forgetting.

I discovered the 2% rake husng on swcpoker, which is quite reasonable imo.
Bob148 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2017, 01:37 PM   #9
AlanBostick
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
AlanBostick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Value Town (Pronouns: he/him)
Posts: 9,298
Re: no bots allowed in here; the heads up thread

My pet hate: seeing a head-up game at a 6max table, sitting in, and one of the two players quits their big blind.
AlanBostick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2018, 07:13 AM   #10
phunkphish
veteran
 
phunkphish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,878
Re: no bots allowed in here; the heads up thread

Same as being buttoned by a game starter.

Why the f hasn't any software addressed these issues? A complete fix may be tough, but so many ways to at least improve on the situation.
phunkphish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2018, 01:01 PM   #11
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 9,679
Re: no bots allowed in here; the heads up thread

If I had a nickel for every time I've been buttoned? lol.

I've discussed potential fixes with other players, such as a minimum number of hand requirement. Also, I think this is relevant:

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/1...light=grimming
Bob148 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2018, 03:36 PM   #12
wbatas
old hand
 
wbatas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: 'murrcah.
Posts: 1,646
Re: no bots allowed in here; the heads up thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clumsy Surgeon View Post
Where?!?!
http://poker.srv.ualberta.ca/
wbatas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2018, 11:45 PM   #13
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 9,679
Re: no bots allowed in here; the heads up thread

This is my current understanding of heads up poker ev. Cross posting from the theory forum for more points of view.
Quote:
I raise preflop on the button huhu, big blind calls.

A62r

I bet, big blind calls.

Jo

I bet, big blind calls.

To

checks to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob148 View Post
Ok so we get to the river with this action and my range looks something like this:

KQ maybe 14 combos.
AA 3 combos
JJ 3 combos
TT 3 combos
66 3 combos
22 3 combos
AJ 9 combos
AT 9 combos
A6 9 combos
A2 9 combos
JT 9 combos
J6 9 combos
J2 9 combos
62s 2 combos
AK 12 combos
AQ 12 combos
A9 12 combos
A8 12 combos
A7 12 combos
A5 12 combos
A4 12 combos
A3 12 combos
A2 12 combos
KJ 10 combos
QJ 10 combos
J9 12 combos
J8 12 combos
J7 12 combos
J5 12 combos
J4 12 combos
J3 12 combos
KT 10 combos
QT 10 combos
--------------------
total value combos: 314

bluff combos:

43s 3 combos
53s 3 combos
54s 3 combos
73s 1 combo
74s 1 combo
75s 1 combo
83s 1 combo
84s 1 combo
85 4 combos
87 4 combos
93s 1 combo
94s 1 combo
95 4 combos
97 4 combos
98 4 combos
Q3 4 combos
Q4 3 combos
------
total bluff combos: 43

-----------------

value:bluff = 314:43 = 12.04% bluff frequency.

------------------

My checking range on the river is then Q4 (1) or anything better up to QT and everything in between that I would play that way up to the river:

Q4 1 combo
Q5 4 combos
Q7 4 combos
Q8 4 combos
Q9 3 combos
K3 3 combos
K4 3 combos
K5 3 combos
K7 3 combos
K8 2 combos
K9 2 combos
K6 6 combos
77 3 combos
88 3 combos
99 3 combos
------
total check combos: 47 combos + 357 bet combos = 404 total range combos: 47/404 = 11.63% checking frequency complemented by 88.37% betting frequency.

I'll have to come back later and pick apart the big blinds strategy to complete the ev calculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob148 View Post
The big blinds strategy probably looks something like this after this action:



JTo maybe 5 combos
T6 maybe 9 combos
T2 9 combos
J5s 3 combos
J4s 3 combos
J3s 3 combos
----above this line can beat some of my value hands.
K6 12 combos
Q6 12 combos
96 12 combos
86 12 combos
76 12 combos
65 12 combos
64 12 combos
63s 3 combos
33 6 combos
K2 12 combos
Q2 12 combos
92 12 combos
82s 3 combos
72s 3 combos
52s 3 combos
42s 3 combos
32s 3 combos
K9 16 combos
K8 16 combos
K7 16 combos
K5 16 combos
K4 16 combos
K3 16 combos
Q9 16 combos
Q8 16 combos
Q7 16 combos
Q5 16 combos
-----------------
total combos that can beat a bluff = 336 combos

hands that only beat part of my bluffing range:

Q4 16 combos
Q3 16 combos
-----------------
this means that my Q4 will win the pot 6.52% of the time and thus the big blind should fold at frequency that allows my bluffs to profit exactly 6.52% of the pot. Here's some math for fun:

before I bet, the pot is 6.25 big bets. 6.52% of 6.25 = 0.4075 big bets of profit must be allowed for my bluffs (Q4) or else I could exploit by not bluffing the bottom of my range.

This equates to 80.59% calling frequency for the big blind on that river and a complementary 19.41% folding frequency, which is admittedly higher than i expected. Let's see what that works out to for a call or fold strategy:

19.41% * 368 combos = 71.43 fold combos.

so:

big blind should fold 7 combos of Q7 and anything worse in order to make me indifferent to bluffing the river with Q4. big blind calls 9 combos of Q7 and anything better for ev greater than or equal to zero.
Edit: Should read: folds 7 combos of Q8..........calls 9 combos of Q8.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob148 View Post
So what does this mean for long run final pot distribution? Looks like this imo:

when I check 11.63% of the time, I win a fraction of the pot that is greater than or equal to the ev of checking Q4o = 6.52% of the time I win (pot) = + 0.4075 big bets profit or more up to the ev of checking with my 99, which is apparently quite high: 91.3% equity = +5.70625 big bets of profit. It would take me a while to figure the avg value of checking, but I think that knowing it's somewhere between 0.4075 big bets and 5.70625 big bets is useful. So multiplying that by the checking frequency we get this as the checking range ev source: 0.0486 big bets/hand minimum up through 0.6808 big bets/hand maximum ev for checking. The mean, although not quite the same as a pure average here, would be about 0.3647 big bets/hand

when I bet my 314 value combos: my ev is at or above the ev of value betting QT.

331 calling combos: 32 of which beat QT. QT has 90.33% equity when called 80.59% of the time: (8.25*.9033*.8059) = 6.006 big bets of profit/hand when called.

Also, a seemingly hidden ev source is that of winning the whole pot when the big blind check folds the river:

19.41%*7.25 = +1.407225 -1 big bet invested = 0.407225 big bets of profit/hand with value hands when big blind folds the river.

So if all of that is true, then that means my pot share adds up as such from the two ev sources of having the best hand at showdown, and winning when the opponent folds:

6.777925 big bets realized at minimum per hand on the river.

That equates to a minimum 93.49% pot share for the button on the river after I bet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob148 View Post
What does that all mean for the big blinds ev/hand? I think it looks like this:

6.51% share after I bet = 0.471975 big bets of the pot belong to the big blind, all of which is due to the hands in range that can beat some of my value hands. All bluffcatchers are, or should be, strictly breakeven in the long run.
For those wondering where some of the combos of certain hands went: this is due to mixing on the turn. The weaker my draw, the less often I bet it on that particular turn.
Bob148 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2018, 12:13 AM   #14
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 9,679
Re: no bots allowed in here; the heads up thread

Quote:
That equates to a minimum 93.49% pot share for the button on the river after I bet.
Very interestingly, imo, this is not the first time this number showed up in my analysis. Notice that it shows up when we do this:

(pot - ev of bluffing and checking Q4)/(pot) = button's pot share expressed as a fraction of the pot, or a percentage like this:

(6.25 - 0.4075)/(6.25) = 93.48% of the pot belongs to the button, which is almost identical to the sum of the evs which the button receives from the pot as shown above:

Quote:
That equates to a minimum 93.49% pot share for the button on the river after I bet.
Maybe it's a coincidence, but I think it indicates that (QT) is at or near ev neutral between (bet/check) as both options are quite profitable. Since I chose this hand as the bottom of my value range? I'm quite happy with this coincidence.

Also, this means that (big blinds pot share) is equal to (ev of bluffing Q4) is equal to (ev of checking Q4) is equal to (ev of check calling J3s).

Last edited by Bob148; 02-07-2018 at 12:26 AM.
Bob148 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2018, 12:54 AM   #15
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 9,679
Re: no bots allowed in here; the heads up thread

correction:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob148 View Post
Also, this means that (big blinds pot share) is equal to (ev of bluffing Q4) is equal to (ev of checking Q4).
Bob148 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2018, 02:30 AM   #16
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 9,679
Re: no bots allowed in here; the heads up thread

I had a long analysis typed up but the internets ate my homework. Here's the important part:

QTo is near ev neutral as a bet or a check; it's quite profitable either way.

Despite having big equity, 99 seems to earn more as a check:

90.91% equity for 99 vs the big blinds checking range. That means we can check back and earn (6.25*90.91%) = 5.681875 big bets of checking ev.

If we bet 99:

we win (7.25*19.41%) = 1.407225 - 1 big bet invested = 0.407225 big bets.

we win (8.25*88.11%*80.59%) = 5.8581475 big bets of profit - 1 big bet invested = 4.8581475 big bets of profit.

added together: +5.2653725 big bets of profit betting 99.

despite having well >50% equity vs the calling range, checking is better with 99.

Unless I made a terrible mistake here, I think this is good.
Bob148 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2018, 10:52 AM   #17
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 9,679
Re: no bots allowed in here; the heads up thread

Had another long analysis typed up but the internets ate my homework again.

cliffs:

Quote:
What if we give player B this range?: (0.4, 0.65, 1)

and keep player A's range the same: (0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7)

player A checks, player B bets 1 pot with 100% of the listed range, player A?
standard pot limit (0,1) game with one pot sized bet left.

the results?

player B's total ev = 75% pot/hand

player A's total ev = 25% pot/hand

Now, the equation a few posts back did not correctly predict the button's pot share, but I think the catch is that both players can hold (.4) without removal effects. The difference between the prediction (87.5% pot share) and the result (75% pot share) is exactly the fraction of the pot that player A is entitled to forfeit at will without fear of exploitation. Thus there is no loss of value.

I think.
Bob148 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2018, 11:11 AM   #18
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 9,679
Re: no bots allowed in here; the heads up thread

Actually I think that conclusion is wrong, or misguided. Instead:

Since (.7), which player A holds at 25% frequency, can beat exactly 50% of player B's value hands, then we see the difference:

player A's ev = 25% pot/hand

player A's ev broken down:

(.4) = 0ev fold
(.5) = 0ev fold
(.6) = 25% 0ev fold; 75% 0ev call.
(.7) = +1 pot +ev call.

So I think I need to tweak the equation that I believe predicts player B's share:

[pot - (2* value of checking/bluffing)/(pot)] = player B's average pot share.

(pot - player B's avg pot share)/(pot) = player A's complementary pot share.

The (2) is bolded to note that it's there because player B has bet, thus doubling the pot size.

Last edited by Bob148; 02-07-2018 at 11:16 AM.
Bob148 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2018, 12:51 PM   #19
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 9,679
Re: no bots allowed in here; the heads up thread

cross post for posterity:
Quote:
I raise preflop on the button huhu, big blind calls.

A62r

I bet, big blind calls.

Jo

I bet, big blind calls.

To

checks to me.
big blind's ev:

( 0.6312 * 8.25) = 5.2074 big bets -1 big bet investment = 4.2074 big bets profit earned by hands that can beat QT. * 30 = 126.22 big bets profit/range

(0.9184782) 0ev call/fold range for everything else.
--------------------------------------------------------------
total: 126.22 big bets/368 combos in range = 34.29945% pot share for the big blind per hand. *6.25 = 2.1437156 big bets/hand for the big blind.

Thus the button must have a complementary share in the pot:

1 - .3429945 = 65.7055% pot share for the button per hand. * 6.25 = 4.1062843 big bets/hand for the button.
Bob148 is online now   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ę 2008-2017, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online