PIO Quickie - Nut Advantages and Equity Realization
Posted Aug 6, 2019, 8:29 PM UTC
3029
Quality poker theory? In my poker subreddit?...
Good post OP, liked and subbed
6
Great video. Keeps it simple and to the point, and is easily digestible content for players who want to get into a bit more advanced stuff. This is the type of content I love to advise people to watch because of how it can open the eyes of more beginnerish players, and it’s free so you shouldn’t have any excuses to not watch it! Thanks again .
4
Hey! Awesome video :) do you think the bluffcatchers will not call flop because they know that the polarised player is massively underbluffing? The flop is the street where the polarised range needs most bluffs and the bluffcatching player isn’t calling flop because he knows that villain does not have enough bluffs on the flop and on future streets thus folding right now, we are getting the same results we’d get if we were to only bet AA because it has the same effect in this case. The polarised player should have 2 bluffs for every value bet on the flop, then drop half of them on the turn and another half of them on the river. You would probably get different results if you ran the sim with all combos of AA and 32o as they will result in perfectly appropriate flop betting ranges for the polarized player if we use 100% pot as our sizing. Villain will most likely defend 1-Alpha on flop, turn and river and drop exactly 1-alpha of their range so their calldown range is 1/8*flop range assuming pot sized bets and since blockers don’t manipulate the polarised player‘s range they will just call the same frequency with TT and 99 thus calling 12.5% of the time on the river with TT and 99 if villain goes for potsized bets and has appropriately balanced ranges (or at least a wide enough flop betting range as that will allow Pio to have correct turn and river ranges but Pio is severely inhibited by the fact that it has the very tight and exploitable range arriving on the flop). I wish you all the success and a very nice day! Can’t wait for more videos :)
3
I believe this is correct, thanks for writing this out, I didn’t want to get into this level of detail in the video because I wanted to keep things pretty high level and because I want to get more comfortable before I start doing more advanced extrapolation
1
I think you could avoid the detail by giving an example hand and showing how it's -EV without laying out too much of the math behind it. Something like "say we call a 50% bet, and he bets again on the turn. We have to fold now right? But half the time we folded to a bluff so there goes half our flop equity against 23 (since we paid to see the turn against 23)"
Just kinda hint at what factors here are significant. The fact that pot size will scale exponentially (and stacks are deep) means the turn and river are brought back in a direct way to the flop equity.
Maybe show the same situation on the turn and river?
Great video by the way!
2
Agree with the first point, thanks for the feedback, I probably could have added an extra 30-45 seconds to elaborate more on what it actually means for the polarized player to “apply pressure with a high SPR”. Thanks again!
1
Hey, nice vid. I really struggle with keeping things succinct in mine so nice editing / vid length!
What did the first example show btw? Like did the wide BB range have more EV than the opener range?
I got a bit confused by the final toy game because it was on the flop and deepstack, whereas I think that particular sim is normally shown on the river. So I guess it's kinda instructive to have that change. I toyed around in PIO and came to the (obvious) conclusion: A polarised aggressive range is much more valuable than an equally strong passive range.
When you change the situation, flop/river, short/deepstack, what comes out is that the nuts/air range finds a way to put no more money in with some of his air. If the bluffcatcher player tries to ''cheat'' (alter strategy) to force nuts/air to invest all money to chop the whole amount, the nuts/air player can simply adjust strategy and fold some of the air.
It's pretty funny how the bluffcatcher player can't make any bets in any spot, flop/t/r, even with 50% equity, as he will get exploited somehow. Even when nuts/air player has a checking range of only air, the bluffcatcher still can't bet 99/TT because nuts/air can readjust and exploit!
Just wrote this out to justify it to myself... Been a while since I've stared at a sim and this one was different to the one I did in the past!
2
First example was just supposed to be a very very basic example showing that you can have an equity advantage but not a nut advantage. Mostly geared towards viewers unfamiliar with what a nut advantage looks like.
Appreciate the feedback and thought-out comments, basically if you ever find yourself in this situation as the bluttcatcher player you get screwed, which I think explains why checking range or checking the nuts OOP in certain spots on boards that favor the IP player can be good, because it prevents you from getting into these situations where you never have the nuts and villain can just blast away. I had a bunch of follow-up ideas for this video (like adding 0.1 combos of nuts to OOP and seeing how it changes things), but ultimately decided to just keep it short and sweet
1
Short and sweet seems meta for youtube atm. 10 mins or less.
And yeah, would be a very marginal gain for the vid probably.
What do you play these days?
1
I played a bunch of 500NL last year, sun ran and won 60 buy-ins in my first 50k hands, withdrew in BTC, then BTC plummeted and I went on a 30 ish buy-in downswing and somehow found myself down money overall.
Ended up like 130k ish hands in last year at midstakes with a decent winrate but basically down money overall cuz I stupidly withdrew into BTC. I took a long break from poker before WSOP this year and now I’m trying to rebuild some fundamentals at 200NL before going back to 500NL where the regs start getting really good
1
I think you could reframe the problem from "equity vs nut" to "who has more information" which is the AA 32 player. He knows who is winning the hand and the other guy has no idea.
1
I’m not sure I follow - can you explain more? In this theoretical case both players know the other players range, they just don’t know whether they have hand 1 or hand 2 within that range
1
On the flop, player 2 will always estimate a 50% chance to win at showdown, whether he has TT or 99. Player 1 on the other hand will estimate either a 100% chance to win showdown (when he has AA) or a 0% chance (when he has 23). Player 1 of course knows he wins "50% of the time in this situation" but in each actual hand he knows the actual outcome.
Imagine you're a third party and you want to estimate which player would win at showdown. Would you choose to look at player 1's hand or player 2's hand?
This information is what allows player 1 to win regardless of position; he threatens to adapt his play in later streets based on the info he has.
2
Great vid, you've got my sub ;)
2
I think you could have done a better job explaining the AA,32 vs 99,TT example. I didn’t get it at first and only worked it out for myself as I was typing a question about it. You could have explained why the bluff catcher can’t just call the bets even though they have 50% equity vs range (because it’s exploitable right?)
But I really enjoyed the video thanks for making it!
1
I answered the reason why they cannot call in my comment if you’re interested. If you are curious about anything else just reply to that comment :) have a nice day!!
2
Piosolver will actually give you EqR in aggregated reports. EqR=Ev/((Eq*Pot)). Not exactly the same thing, but pretty interesting concept. Janda called it robust equity.
1
Interesting - I'll check that out. Big Janda fan, he was way ahead of his time back in the day
1
[deleted]
-6
What's your point? Yeah, I've been inspired by channels like Finding Equilibrium that are doing some really cool PIO experiments
8
[deleted]
-11
Hey man, I'm making content for free on YouTube, I'm not forcing you to watch it. I intentionally kept this video very objective, but I'm open to constructive criticism. I have posted midstakes results here (albeit not giant samples), but at the end of the day, I'm not making value judgements about exploitative strategies, I'm just explaining solver outputs so it's pretty objective. The results of this PIO experiment are the same regardless of whether a microstakes player or a high stakes player runs it. Like I said, though, I'm open to constructive feedback, but I don't think it's fair to just be toxic for the sake of being toxic
14
snake oil salty losing player scam artist
link?
4
[deleted]
1
Furples doesn't fall in the bracket of ''no results'' and definitely doesn't fall in the bracket of ''may not be good''.
3
Hi all! Back with another video - an introduction to nut advantages and equity realization. This is targeted towards microstakes/small stakes players. I didn't delve into the specific strategic implications of nut advantages (i.e, how should it affect our flop cbet sizings, whether we construct turn leading ranges, etc); the goal was just to introduce the topic with a PIO toy game to those that might be unfamiliar.
I'm not selling any sort of coaching product, just making these videos for fun. If you like the content, feel free to subscribe, I am hoping that the production value (audio/editing/etc) will exponentially improve over the next few videos.