01-02-2015 , 04:40 PM
^ Yes, this is a typo.
01-04-2015 , 10:47 PM
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.
01-04-2015 , 11:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sigis123
Hi, this question is not related with a book, but as Game Theory expert maybe you could take a look.

It's 6max situation BBvsBU and SBvsBU, lets assume we somehow solved BBvsBU game tree and found out that BB 3bets top 10% BU responds with poloraised 4bet range of 4,5% and we found that bottom of BU defend range vs 4bet is to cold call with 99.
Do you mean BB defend range vs 4bet?
Quote:
Now we sloved for SBvsBU and found that SB 3bets top 15% BU responds with 4.5% 4bet range but its's value heavy, JJ+ AK, and 1/4 bluffs, and we found that bottom of SB defend range is to cold call with 77. My question is if it's theoretically possible that defanding 77 can be in equilibrium strategy for SB, but NOT for BB, because if there is a way to defend 77 profitably vs stronger range as SBvsBU, how come it's not vs weaker range as BBvsBU.

I would appreciate if you could only say yes it's possible or not.

And once again thanks for your books, and time you spend here ITT.
Ok let me try to summarize -- we're looking at a spot where BU opens, gets 3bet, 4bets, and then gets flatted by 77. We're wondering if the 77 flat can be good when the 4betting range is strong at the same time as it's bad when the 4betting range is weak.

I guess the standard thoughtprocess you're thinking about here is something like "if villain has a v strong preflop range we can setmine profitably, whereas if he has a weaker preflop range we actually do worse to see a flop with small pairs because we don't get paid when we hit"? And you're wondering if this is theoretically-sound?

So um, I can't think of anything that makes it fundamentally impossible, but seems unlikely. FWIW, my experience with equilibrium preflop strats is that they're highly mixed. I doubt there's any one cutoff pocket pair rank such that anything better is always a call whereas anything worse is always a fold, at equilibrium in that spot.
01-04-2015 , 11:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benni19
Hi,

Why are you multiplaying it by 4 on flop and by 2 at turn?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlton Banks
Because there are 2 cards to come after the flop, and 1 after the turn.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benni19
Lets see we have 5 outs why are we having an eq of 20 on flop and an eq of 10 on turn?

Shouldnt we just multiply it by 2 at flop and 1 at turn?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlton Banks
No because 1 out is roughly 2% chance to hit per street.

Google something like "rule of two four poker" and im sure you will find the relevant info.
Yea it's just an approximation. I believe I've heard it called "Solomon's rule" in addition to the rule of 4 and 2.

Thanks Carlton.
01-04-2015 , 11:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by vherreral
Hi, I'm on section 2.2.3, here you talk about hero and villain's best river play on a J63J2 board where hero cr flop, barrel turn, and shoves or cf river. You say villain should call hero's river shove if 48.5bb>150bb EQh, where 48.5b is vill's remaining stack on the river, 150bb total size of the pot if he calls river shove and EQh is the equity of his hand vs hero's shoving range.

Shouldn't it be that vill should call if 48.5bb<150bb EQh instead??
Quote:
Originally Posted by TDTheTruth
^ Yes, this is a typo.
Indeed. Check out the Errata doc on the book's webpage.
01-23-2015 , 10:08 AM
As others I found p. 124-125 incredibly frustrating.

1.) We look at Qs9h as the borderline shoving hand for SB. However this hand is not included in the shoving range on p. 124? It seems to have way too low equity to be included in the top 2/3?

2.) The books says BB calls with "19.23% of hands". The specified range is 21.57% (286/1326) of all holdem hands or 21.68% (255/1176) of all hands possible after the flop though. Took me some time to figure out you mean 255/1326.

3.) The quote below seems to be pretty important. Because you are encouraged to use your own scenarions but it is pretty easy to pick a scenario where all of this is hardly applicable. And then you desperately try to come up with correct results using the presented method when it is not really possible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yaqh
When the indifference breaks down in that way, BB bets 100% of hands, then SB jams whatever hands are more profitably jammed than folded (< 2/3 of his range), and then BB calls whatever hands are more profitably called than folded.

So, as you've said, SB jamming depends on BB calling, and BB calling depends on SB jamming. So we still have to find the equilibrium in this subgame, given that BB starts by betting 100%. Indifference relationships aren't very easy to use here (like in the shove/fold preflop-only game).

Easiest way that I see to approximate the subgame equilibrium here by hand is to just go back to first principles -- both players try to play as profitably as possible. So, start out with a good guess at SB's jamming range, then find BB's calling range, and see if that makes SB want to add or remove a few borderline combos, etc. Repeat until you find SB's jamming range that doesn't want to adjust given that BB is max exploiting it.
01-25-2015 , 05:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yaqh
Check out the Errata doc on the book's webpage.
I mentioned this in the thread for volume 2, but you don't seem as active over there, so I'll just mention it here as well. You mentioned that you would post the errata for volume 2 after some time had passed (that was back in July or so), but I don't see a link to the errata on the webpage for volume 2 on D&B's website. Did I miss it, or is that something you are still planning on doing?
02-03-2015 , 08:55 AM
Hi Will. Do you still have the tendencytree.vis software. If so would it be possible to get to copy please? I am happy to pay for it.
02-15-2015 , 06:15 AM
Is there any good post on the equilibrium exercise in this thread? What software have you been using? Which sort of hands?
02-17-2015 , 03:12 PM
On page 115 there is this equation:

EVsb(raise-fold=EVsb(4-bet-fold)
48=38X+55(1-X)

The answer for X is given (X=7/17). But I want to know how I can solve for X myself. Anybody can help me out here? Which steps do I need to take to solve for X?
02-17-2015 , 11:14 PM
http://mathpapa.com/algebra-calculator.html

02-18-2015 , 05:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of the North
Thanks mate! Appreciate it!
03-22-2015 , 09:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickman
Hi Will. Do you still have the tendencytree.vis software. If so would it be possible to get to copy please? I am happy to pay for it.
Hey mickman, that software isn't publicly available for now -- sorry!
03-22-2015 , 09:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ikillpikachu
On page 115 there is this equation:

EVsb(raise-fold=EVsb(4-bet-fold)
48=38X+55(1-X)

The answer for X is given (X=7/17). But I want to know how I can solve for X myself. Anybody can help me out here? Which steps do I need to take to solve for X?
Lots of good resources for this available online, but I answered a similar question to this here:

hope that helps
03-22-2015 , 09:52 PM
hi,

tendencytree.vis software
03-22-2015 , 09:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benni19
hi,

tendencytree.vis software
It's a program that showed up in one of my videos -- loads a hand history file and builds a tree of all lines taken with tallies of how often each one is taken and a display of hands shown down in each case and such.
03-22-2015 , 10:53 PM
wow, you aint planning to bring this software online again?
Guess have to ask guys who have it?
03-22-2015 , 11:36 PM
More importantly:

In your book you mentioned programms who can calculate strategies of our opponents and also defining an approximate decision tree and also defines players strategies.
Which programm did you mean with those statements?

Which programm does everything we want to learn from your books?
gtorb? oddsoracle? crev?
03-23-2015 , 12:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benni19
More importantly:

In your book you mentioned programms who can calculate strategies of our opponents and also defining an approximate decision tree and also defines players strategies.
Which programm did you mean with those statements?

Which programm does everything we want to learn from your books?
gtorb? oddsoracle? crev?
crev can define decision trees and do max-exploit calcs in some pretty limited circumstances but has no equilibrium capabilities to speak of. Holdemresources.net is limited to preflop-only situations. I'm not familiar with gtorb, but glancing at its webpage, it might be what you want. There's also the Solving Poker video series if you're interested in rolling your own.
03-23-2015 , 09:19 AM
Hey,

I was just interested because you mentioned in your books those software who are actually doing all that stuff.
obv the main problem is motivation and time and therefore a programm or software is the way to go from time and motivation perspective.
Also because most of the steps are just easy doable with software i guess wouldt you think this is a good idea to make monies?

The make things clear. From your point there are no such software who is able to do everything?
03-23-2015 , 11:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benni19
Hey,

I was just interested because you mentioned in your books those software who are actually doing all that stuff.
obv the main problem is motivation and time and therefore a programm or software is the way to go from time and motivation perspective.
Also because most of the steps are just easy doable with software i guess wouldt you think this is a good idea to make monies?

The make things clear. From your point there are no such software who is able to do everything?
well, no publicly-available software . again, gtorb looks promising, I just don't know enough about it to vouch for it or w/e.
04-09-2015 , 03:56 AM
Just here to say that the book is awesome! the math is actually very easy to digest and I think any poker player that reads it will definitely get an edge over those who haven't.
04-11-2015 , 10:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickman
Hi Will. Do you still have the tendencytree.vis software. If so would it be possible to get to copy please? I am happy to pay for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yaqh
Hey mickman, that software isn't publicly available for now -- sorry!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benni19
hi,

tendencytree.vis software
Quote:
Originally Posted by yaqh
It's a program that showed up in one of my videos -- loads a hand history file and builds a tree of all lines taken with tallies of how often each one is taken and a display of hands shown down in each case and such.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benni19
wow, you aint planning to bring this software online again?
Guess have to ask guys who have it?
so I put together a web version of ttvis as an exercise in learning Javascript. no guarantees that it works and no guarantees that it'll be improved any in the future . in particular, it probably only parses pokerstars tournament HHs right now. but you're welcome to try it out at http://ttvis.willtipton.com
04-11-2015 , 10:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by M_Acevedo
Just here to say that the book is awesome! the math is actually very easy to digest and I think any poker player that reads it will definitely get an edge over those who haven't.
thanks M_Acevedo!
05-19-2015 , 06:03 AM
Is this book for only HU or can i use it for 6max cashgames?

m