Search Results

[x]

Search Results Showing 1 to 30 of 98 results [Advanced Search]

P5's Training discussion. Top pair on a strange board. Re-thinking conventional lines If we're thinking that check/call flop -> lead turn is a viable line with top pair hands, and given that top pair hands are going to be a chunk of your hands that you can continue with in the first place (as a result of combinatorics), I'd say we can't take the check/call flop -> check/call turn -> jam river line with any hands - because we should probably also be taking the check/call flop -> lead turn line with two pair or better. Posted in: Poker Discussion	KillerEV Aug 31st, 2012
P5's Training discussion. Top pair on a strange board. Re-thinking conventional lines Someone pointed me to this thread. I've been thinking so much about preflop play, that it's nice to see an interesting postflop discussion. To the potential dismay of some, I'm going to make some preflop range assumptions here - I don't see any other way of looking at play of the hand starting from the flop :( The equilibrium shoving range for the button is 24.9% of hands - making that the likely minimum bound for button's opening range. Given that button and BB are about 35.75bbs effective, they are too deeply stacked for raise->3-bet jam pseudoequilibrium analysis to apply. As a result, ... Posted in: Poker Discussion	KillerEV Aug 31st, 2012
Folding quads in the One Drop - holy crap... After a nap and some driving around, I realized I'm not so excited about how I did the second part of my analysis (I can cling to a problem for awhile - even after it seems to have been solved). I tend to do that kind of thinking in situations where there aren't "overlapping" outs. In this case, 8s gives Smirnov quads and gives Morgan the straight flush (if he has Ts9s). As a result, my implied odds reasoning doesn't really make much sense :( I think the first half of my analysis (the hand combos part) is the best we can do. I still think it's a call, but I'm not going to disparage Smirnov ... Posted in: Live Poker	KillerEV Jul 4th, 2012
Folding quads in the One Drop - holy crap... Someone pulled me out of theory land and directed me to this thread to comment. Interesting action! A few issues are tugging at me. Not considering Smirnov's read on the turn, let's suppose that Morgan actually flats JJ 50% of the time preflop and that he flats KK about 10% of the time preflop. And given the postflop action, suppose that Morgan always makes it to the river if he has JJ or KK. JJ and KK each comprise 3 hand combos. 3(.5) + 3(.1) means that JJ and KK are effectively about 1.8 hand combos. Meanwhile, Ts9s is only 1 hand combo. Not accounting for naked bluffs (which I can't ... Posted in: Live Poker	KillerEV Jul 4th, 2012
Raise -> 3-Bet Pseudoequilibrium Calling Cheat Sheet See attached. I talk about this in Part #3 of my Beyond Jam/Fold series. I'm not sure when the video is being released, but I figured it's better for this to be posted beforehand rather than after. This sheet contains +cEV calls assuming that you open to 2.5bbs and that a single opponent has jammed over the top of your open. The importance of these ranges is that the following strategy is a likely candidate for being guaranteed to perform better than jam/fold (assuming opponents are 3-bet jamming or folding in response to your non all-in open): 1.) Open to 2.5bbs with the ... Posted in: Training Forum	KillerEV Jun 28th, 2012
Table of Likely Stat Ranges Given an Observed Percentage This table goes with the material in my Interpreting Event Frequencies series. I'll be explaining this table in part 3. But basically, it tells you what a reasonable stat range is given what you've observed. As an example of what this table tells us, suppose an opponent's open-raising percentage from the button is 50% after 10 open-raising opportunities. Looking up the "50% observed percentage" column and "10 Trials" row, you'll find that your opponent's true open-raising percentage from the button is likely to be 26.66%-73.25%. Meanwhile, if an opponent's open-raising percentage from the ... Posted in: Training Forum	KillerEV Feb 26th, 2012
Tony Guerrera's Equilibrium Calling Cheat Sheet See attached. I'll be out of town for a few days, but once I return, I'll be checking in here periodically to field questions. Posted in: Training Forum	KillerEV Oct 14th, 2011
Transitioning to Live need input. Besides learning to deal with multiway pots, another big thing is position relative to players at the table. Nsinger makes a great point in one of his recent videos about trying to sit across from aggressive betting machines rather than sitting immediately to their left. When playing online, you get used to trying to isolate single limpers - if you're lucky enough to even be at such a table. In live cash games, getting money trapped in between you and your intended target serves as a big boost to your winrate- whether it be raise, call, call, you = ' or call, call, call, you = '. Also, ... Posted in: Training Forum	KillerEV May 31st, 2011
Article: The Path to Good Deep-Stacked Play Begins at the River You can view the page at Posted in: vBCms Comments	KillerEV May 21st, 2011
Full Tilt's new Multi-Entry tourneys Gimmick maybe wasn't the best word choice on my part. I think the multientry tournaments are here to stay as well...and I think it's a good thing (just like cashout tournaments). The various formats that Full Tilt has been rolling out have created some interesting decisions for players to make. Posted in: Off Topic General Discussion	KillerEV Jan 27th, 2011
Full Tilt's new Multi-Entry tourneys These tournaments are another gimmick - like cashout tournaments. Say you're able to play 4 tables at once and say that you're playing tournaments at the $10 level. You're better off playing 4 different $10 tournaments then you are playing 4 entries in a single multientry tournament (and at the $10 level, it's going to be very easy to get 4 different tournaments at that level up if you throw MTT SNGs into the mix). The reason for this is that your ROI in tournaments is largely dependent on your big money finishes. With 4 entries, your best possible finish is 1st, 10th, 19th, and 28th. Because ... Posted in: Off Topic General Discussion	KillerEV Jan 24th, 2011
Tony Guerrera's Jam/Fold cheat sheet It's a PDF...Adobe Reader will suffice. Posted in: Training Forum	KillerEV Jan 6th, 2011
PART2 3b,fold,flat Let's take the extreme case: 32o. If you 3-bet with 32o, original raiser is on 104 combos and will give you action with 46 of them (I guess we're assuming that flatter will never give you action, which is a pretty good place to start...though, really, if flatting is an option then the flatter should have AA and KK in his range sometimes). Pot has T19510 in it, and T13345 was invested on the 3-bet. 3bet/folding needs to work 13345/(13345 + 19510) * 100% = 40.6% of the time. Against the opponent described, you can 3-bet/fold ATC and show a profit chipwise. The big point here, however, ... Posted in: MTT Strategy	KillerEV Jan 5th, 2011
Tony Guerrera's Equilibrium Calling Cheat Sheet Sklansky-Chubukov ranges/rankings are useless IMHO. Your goal shouldn't be to make shoves that are profitable if your opponent knows your particular hand. Your goal should be to make shoves that are profitable if your opponent knows your range. My charts were generated using the ICM Nash Jam/Fold Calculator at with the payout structure set to 1. Regarding your two examples, knowing the equity required to call isn't helpful unless you know your opponents' ranges. And it's important to note that my charts are approximately equilibrium calling ranges...meaning that: 1.) They are the ... Posted in: Video Discussion	KillerEV Dec 18th, 2010
??? for KillerEv (others can post to)... Rextar, thanks for helping saintjohn49 out. To add more: 1.) The percentage is the percentage of hole cards, but saying "top X% of random hole cards" isn't necessarily quite right. I'm being really pedantic here, but the percentage is simply the number of combinations divided by 1326 and then multiplied by 100%. The reason why I don't like to say "top X% of random hands" is because the ranges aren't derived by ranking with respect to a random hand; they're ranked with respect to the ranges themselves. 2.) The ranges specified are good for whenever you're playing with respect to ... Posted in: MTT Strategy	KillerEV Dec 16th, 2010
??? for KillerEv (others can post to)... Forget about the complexity of postflop play and factoring in mistakes. The fundamental concept is that cEV play is simpler to think about than non-cEV play. When we're at a final table, the best we can do is make adjustments based on what we think proper adjustments are. You're not going to be seeing the non-cEV version of my cheat sheets any time soon...it's probably going to take some huge advances in computing for anyone to produce the non-cEV version. Posted in: MTT Strategy	KillerEV Dec 9th, 2010
??? for KillerEv (others can post to)... 2.) Yes 3.) If you follow the typical derivation of ICM, you'll note that it doesn't account for that. To see my derivation of ICM, see pgs. 107-108 in Tournament Killer Poker by the Numbers. 3a.) The only known way at this point of completely solving final table play is to write a program that treats a tournament as a recursive game (like the researchers did for a 3-handed situation in this paper: ). Even solving the 3-handed game requires substantial computational resources. Posted in: MTT Strategy	KillerEV Dec 8th, 2010
??? for KillerEv (others can post to)... 1.) If a range is something like 22+ Qx+ J2s+ J5o+ T2s+ T6o+ 95s+ 97o+ 85s+ 87o 75s+ 65s 54s, then any king and any ace are also part of the range. I can see how the shorthand could be confusing...my apologies!! Unfortunately, it was needed to keep columns from becoming too wide. (Also, it was easier for my wife to simply copy and paste from the calculator - which uses the same shorthand) 2.) My understanding is that the ICM Nash Jam/Fold calculator, when set to a payout of 1, optimizes cEV play without accounting for clumping. It also only tries to optimize cEV solely for the hand in ... Posted in: MTT Strategy	KillerEV Dec 8th, 2010
Tony Guerrera's Equilibrium Calling Cheat Sheet The point of playing equilibrium is that you don't care how your opponents play (for example, if your opponents shove too tightly, then the chips you lose in showdown are compensated by the chips you gain all the additional times that action folds to you). Of course, the equilibrium ranges don't perform optimally against a specific strategy...but that's not the point. For example, if you know your opponents are shoving tighter than they should, then you'll be better off calling tighter than the sheets; however, making a blanket assumption that everyone is shoving too tightly leaves the door ... Posted in: Video Discussion	KillerEV Dec 7th, 2010
Tony Guerrera's Jam/Fold cheat sheet I'm actually about to commence on work to see if I can gain any insight into raise->3-bet shove equilibrium. We'll see how far I can get on that front :) Posted in: Training Forum	KillerEV Dec 3rd, 2010
NES cheat sheets for 6 max super turbo SNG thoughts on adjustments? Sorry about the delay in getting back to you. I'm just finally settled in the US after my travels in Asia. There are a lot of points to address...hopefully I cover them all: 1.) Since ICM is flawed, it follows that non-cEV ranges suggested by Nash ICM Calculator are going to be off. If you're going to use the Nash ICM Calculator to calculate ranges for an STT or late in a MTT SNG (yeah, you're going to deviate from pure cEV at or near final table), then you have to accept that you're getting approximations at best. 2.) The approximations you get from the ICM Nash Jam-Fold Calculator need ... Posted in: SNG Forum	KillerEV Dec 3rd, 2010
Tony Guerrera's Jam/Fold cheat sheet The jamming sheets are only for open jamming (i.e. jams when action folds to you). For the situation you cite, your starting point should be my calling cheat sheets (if you can call a jam with it, you can probably 3-bet jam with it). Optimal 3-bet jam ranges are probably different from the 2-bet shove calling ranges, but I feel that they provide a starting point that's more solid than what many players 3-bet jam with. Posted in: Training Forum	KillerEV Nov 23rd, 2010
NES cheat sheets for 6 max super turbo SNG thoughts on adjustments? I have quite a few thoughts on this, Unfortunately, I'm currently sitting in the lobby of Hotel Shangri-la in Kota Kinabalu (city in Malaysia)...not exactly the best place to give your post the careful attention it deserves. However, here are three biggies: 1.) ICM isn't perfect. You can't just go blindly by what the ICM Nash Calculator cranks out for your situation. 2.) It's not good enough simply to have everyone at same stack depth. Bubble play in STTs is very much a function of relative stacks. For example, suppose you're only the button, you have 8bb and the blinds each have 10bb. How ... Posted in: SNG Forum	KillerEV Nov 16th, 2010
PTR has SNG HH's now 4 sale? I'm talking about PT3/HEM HUD (i.e. you purchase HHs and import them into your DB)...not HUDs that call players fishes/sharks. Here's the Stars ToS: /. You'll see that Sharkscope and Sharkscope HUD are prohibited while playing. PTR is probibited at all times (which is a big joke because Stars has no way of enforcing that rule; again, just reference my first post). Meanwhile, OPR is on the allowed list...even though it displays info that a player wouldn't have access to from simply his own playing (wtf Stars...make up your mind). Posted in: SNG Forum	KillerEV Oct 21st, 2010
Tony Guerrera's Calling Sheet Video The calling cheat sheets can now be found here: Posted in: Video Discussion	KillerEV Oct 20th, 2010
Tony Guerrera's Jam/Fold cheat sheet The calling cheat sheet can now be found here: Posted in: Training Forum	KillerEV Oct 20th, 2010
Tony Guerrera's Equilibrium Calling Cheat Sheet See the attachment to this post for my calling cheat sheets (the shoving cheat sheets are in the following thread: ). The videos explaining the usage of these sheets are somewhere in the queue (but I'm sending herschelw an email right now to make sure that they didn't get lost in the mix). (btw, I'll let the powers that be decide whether this thread should be merged with the NES cheat sheet thread or kept separate) Posted in: Video Discussion	KillerEV Oct 20th, 2010
PTR has SNG HH's now 4 sale? IMO, going against site ToS isn't advisable. With that being said, here are my thoughts on the whole datamining issue. The big problem is that the sites currently have a rule that isn't enforcable. Anyone who's really paranoid can have two internet connections going into their home and use one of those connections exclusively for connecting to datamining sites. (and furthermore, said paranoid person would use email addresses not connected to his poker accounts...and might even purchase using a wife's of friend's credit card). Meanwhile, when it comes to importing mined hands into ... Posted in: SNG Forum	KillerEV Oct 20th, 2010
Tony Guerrera's Calling Sheet Video GamingFoSho: As far as I know, the videos are in the queue. However, I don't know the official release date. As usual, Chardrian+1 (though I think this probably gets said so much here that it should probably just be assumed at this point). Even WITH the cheat sheets, there's still a lot of work to be done. What other adjustments are there to be made for multiple effective stack sizes' When you're at a final table of a 180-man SNG, how do the ranges change' I did a coaching session earlier today where we spent a ton of time looking at 4- and 3-handed jam/fold decisions at . At the same ... Posted in: Video Discussion	KillerEV Oct 18th, 2010
Tony Guerrera's Jam/Fold cheat sheet You quite correct regarding shoving ranges as shorty being influenced by how deep other players are (since the other players still have to contend with each other). However, one very important point is that the calculator assumes that callers go all-in. Therefore, in the situation where you shove 5bb into 50bb stacks, the results from the calculator are going to be a bit off, because it's likely that it's better for deeper stacks to do something like iso-raise to 10bb instead of iso-shoving to 50bb (well, the results aren't off in that it IS calculating the correct equilibrium if everyone is ... Posted in: Training Forum	KillerEV Sep 23rd, 2010

Page

PF

Search Results Showing 1 to 30 of 98 results [Advanced Search]

PocketFives