Quote:
Originally Posted by RFoley03
I read the p.240-243 5 times and I'm still having trouble understanding it.
Can you please explain it in a way that's easier to understand?
Why did he label the horizontal axis with "1-BB hand" and "1-SB equity"?
Is EQ(hb) BB's equity with hb vs SB's river range or SB's hc range?
The book says hc = 0.7 but the graph shows that hc = .767
Shouldn't the difference between hb and hc be the same on the x axis as the y axis?
What can be learned from studying this graph?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RFoley03
I finally figured it out. I'm just not sure of what there is to learn in analyzing the graph besides what fraction of BB's betting range SB's calling cutoff hand beats.
Is there a mistake in the book? It says hc = 0.7 but the graph shows hc = 0.767
The figure is just meant to demonstrate the relationships between the various quantities in the game... the players' various cutoff hands and their equities and percentiles.
The book does not say that hc equals 0.7, and I don't know where you got 0.767 either.
I mean, I see 0.7 in the paragraph below (from pg 240), but it's clearly just a hypothetical. hc is the SB's weakest calling hand, and its numerical value is different depending on the size of the bet he faces.
Re: 0.767, did you just read that off the graph with a very small ruler or something?
Anyway, the graph isn't drawn to scale for any particular bet size. I generally tried to note in figures' captions when they are drawn to scale for particular bet, raise, stack sizes.
Quote:
The first thing to notice here is that we have essentially labeled the hands
themselves from 0 to 1, where 0 is the worst hand in the range and 1 is the
best. So, the hand 0.7 is the 70th percentile hand, etc. This natural assign-
ing of numerical values to the hands will make it easier to talk about the
solutions. For example, if we find that hc=0.7, then we mean that 0.7 is the
SB's weakest calling hand. In other words, he is calling with the top 30% of
his range and folding the rest.