Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by WiltOnTilt (Micro/Small Stakes)

Mathematics of NL Hold'em: Season Premiere

This is a free video. Like what you see? Log In or to view the rest of our Poker Videos.
Get the Flash Player to see this player.

Mathematics of NL Hold'em: Season Premiere by WiltOnTilt

WiltOnTilt begins with a primer on the importance of math in NL Hold'em. In a classroom setting, he discusses probability and odds, variance, pot equity, and introduces us to Expected Value (EV).

WiltOnTilt will discuss key concepts related to the mathematics of No-Limit play using Powerpoint. Begin with the basics: probability and pot odds. Then follow Wilt to more advanced arenas: implied odds and reverse implied odds, software tools and mental shortcuts for equity calculations, complex EV calculations, and an exploration of fold equity. And watch this series conclude with a discourse on the ultimate in professional poker math: hand frequencies, valuebetting, and G-bucks.

Video Details

• Game:
• Stakes: Micro/Small Stakes
• 43 minutes long
• Posted over 5 years ago

Comments for Mathematics of NL Hold'em: Season Premiere

or track by Email or RSS

Tommytrix

81 posts
Joined 09/2008

Thanks for making this Wilt, i knew all the terms and had a basic understanding of them but never understood it in depth.
The way you explain it makes everything much clearer to me, going to make me some exercises next weekend .

mcapital

5 posts
Joined 02/2009

hey maybe missed something but i think there is a discrepancy with one of the slides. On the "converting a percentage into a ratio" you say 33%>ratio is 2:1 as in 2:1 dog. Then afterwards you say 83%>ratio and say the ratio is 4.9:1 but you are referring to it as a 4.9:1 favorite. someone new could be confused

Cheggers

2 posts
Joined 03/2009

Thank you for this video, very clear explanations.

Just a quick question, in the AK vs flush draw example towards the end of the show, you mentioned that our stacks were 'effective stacks' of \$1000, but I'm not quite sure what this means. Is there a different meaning to saying '\$1000 stacks' vs '\$1000 effective stacks'?

Great job and I'm gonna watch part 2 now.

Lateksi

597 posts
Joined 03/2008

if you have \$2000 and your opponent has \$1000, your effective stack if \$1000 as well since the most you'll be able to win/lose against that opponent is \$1000

Cheggers

2 posts
Joined 03/2009

if you have \$2000 and your opponent has \$1000, your effective stack if \$1000 as well since the most you'll be able to win/lose against that opponent is \$1000

Thanks mate!

GinaSD

20 posts
Joined 03/2009

I joined this site specifically for this series. I haven't played in a long time and am very rusty. After watching the first video- and also poking around, I have no doubt I'll stick around for a long time. Thanks Wilt. I know it's a long time since you created this series, but just so you know- it just brought deuces-cracked a new customer.

Pickaface

459 posts
Joined 10/2008

Man I love this series!

After this I will know if I make the right decisions after getting suckout.

Pinda

16 posts
Joined 02/2009

A couple of slightly better approximations concerning the rules of 4 and 2.

4 * #of outs -(# of outs greater then 8) = turn percentage

for outs 6 and above
2 * #of outs + 2 = river percentage

That works well, thank you.

RushingOver,

I put the oddschart up on my website for you. you can find it here:

http://www.plusevpoker.com/images/oddschart.jpg

Aaron

it's good to just screw around with these numbers a little. seems to sink in better if you actually do the math. mess with approximation help sudic gave us and test it out a little bit

can't wait to watch the rest of the series. very solid stuff

deacon

1 posts
Joined 08/2008

I know I'm late to the game, but thanks Aaron for a GREAT series that was sorely needed in the community.

monsterzero123

3 posts
Joined 08/2009

Hi WoT, I have a question here regarding your math for the 33% ratio to percentage problem. Wouldnt the correct ratio be - 1:2 b/c, 33% wins to 67% losses is equal to 1:2. In the powerpoint presentation it is written, 2:1. Can you clarify please??

Thanks,
Brian

WiltOnTilt

2404 posts
Joined 10/2007

ya 1:2 or 2:1 is fine, its just typically ratios are expressed with the larger number first, then either "favorite" or "underdog" is placed afterward.

so like 2:1 favorite. 3:2 underdog (or "dog" for short)

but 2:3 is not incorrect, it's just different than the standard way of saying/expressing it.

djdag

19 posts
Joined 10/2009

I joined dc 4 weeks ago and just got done watching this series.

Its soooo good.

Thanks a lot WoT. Great work, awesome presentation!

PygmyHero

4246 posts
Joined 08/2007

Sorry for being a nit here, but there's an error on the pocket pair line (in the bottom part of the slide).

On the turn your PowerPoint slide shows us as a 44.5:1 dog with one card to come. In fact we are an ~22:1 dog (in other words, approximately what you listed as the flop odds). The flop odds are also incorrect - we are ~10.9:1 against.

This error is also present on the chart you linked.

PygmyHero

4246 posts
Joined 08/2007

Hmmm...too late to edit - now that I read the thread I see this has already been mentioned. That said, it doesn't seem the link on your web page has been corrected.

Also, I see the first poster said the percentages were still correct. Upon review I agree that looks reasonable - I didn't notice since I tend to deal strictly on the odds and ignore the percentage equivalents.

Anyway, nice job on the vid.

Nizdraw

9 posts
Joined 09/2009

This is fantasic, the basic core mathematical points that are so hard to find info on, and often taken for granted by a coach/expert when teaching a new player Leading to being told what to do when, but not why, which I think is the reason many new players and even some old hats can't learn how to play a dynamic game. I look forward to watching the rest.

HomePoker ForumsMicro Stakes Online NL → Mathematics of NL Hold'em: Season Premiere