Poker Video: Misc/Other by WiltOnTilt (Micro/Small Stakes)

can't wait to watch it

33 min J9s hand.

I think that the EV calculation for the turn play is only correct if you make the assumption that he can never raise. This looks like a wrong assumption to me.

If for example this villain either jams or folds in this spot, our equity is irrelevant.

33 min J9s hand.

I think that the EV calculation for the turn play is only correct if you make the assumption that he can never raise. This looks like a wrong assumption to me.

If for example this villain either jams or folds in this spot, our equity is irrelevant.

it's only irrelevant if we're never considering a call. against weak players such as this they could raise to an amount that still prices us in.

but you're right, I should have done a better job of explaining that, and not just commenting about the fact that it doesn't take into account any river actions.

The example was supposed to simply show how you could go about analyzing a situation based on info learned in a theory video, but I do agree with you I should have been more clear about what considerations that particular formula doesn't cover.

Thanks for watching

WoT

I don't know excel either, so how is it going to improve my poker game if I need to make the EV sheet and learn excel for it?Oh I forgot the Dude is downloadable.

Favorite Quote: "I don't want to beat this horse until he is totally dead."

I don't know excel either, so how is it going to improve my poker game if I need to make the EV sheet and learn excel for it?

the act of doing it yourself improves your understanding of the formula. i even put the exact excel syntax for setting it up right in the video.

the horse is now totally dead!

its probably more useful to do it all by hand then.

its probably more useful to do it all by hand then.

Maybe the first couple times just to make sure you know the formula... but using excel speeds the calculations for you so you don't have to do the work... as long as you know how the equation works and how the variables are connected.

Maybe the first couple times just to make sure you know the formula... but using excel speeds the calculations for you so you don't have to do the work... as long as you know how the equation works and how the variables are connected.

I thought I went over this in the video...it was in my notes to talk about, but if I didn't this is a pretty good summary.

Oh I forgot the Dude is downloadable.

When I created the speadsheet which eventually became "The Dude!" I basically did exactly what WoT advocates in this video. I learned all the math that I used for "The Dude" from WoT's awesome math series and I felt I needed to understand it better (i.e. practice). I never actually used pen and paper but every time I had to solve a math problem in my session reviews, I fired up an empty excel (openoffice) sheet. I did this until felt comfortable with the equations and after a while it became more of a boring task to everytime create everything from scratch. So I put in a few hours and created the spreadsheet which now allows me to go over math situations way quicker than before. However I could do all these equations on my own and that is also what I encourage everyone to do at the end of my video. If you download it and use it without understanding the math behind it, it won't do you any good.

Time Link to 00:20:48

Wilt you're a cruel man!

Time Link to 00:39:25

At first: I just wanna to say thank you for this great series - I love it^^

regards to the whole EV-calculation, one question:

It did not onlymiss the riverplay, but also exspecially the probability that we will got 3betted on turn or got shoved - I guess it is just too complicated with too many different variables to consider this (for us negative) scenario - but how realistic is then our consideration here - let`s say on a scala from 1-10 - what you think?

At first: I just wanna to say thank you for this great series - I love it^^

regards to the whole EV-calculation, one question:

It did not onlymiss the riverplay, but also exspecially the probability that we will got 3betted on turn or got shoved - I guess it is just too complicated with too many different variables to consider this (for us negative) scenario - but how realistic is then our consideration here - let`s say on a scala from 1-10 - what you think?

You're right, it is a consideration that I left out of the video (for simplicity sake). I usually like to break down the problem into smaller parts anyway and examine the profitability of each separate part, then try to estimate how often he will be shoving over or calling or folding to determine the overall profitability of the play.

In this particular case, I think he'll be calling and folding way more often than shoving, but you are correct it is something you need to consider and think about.

You're right, it is a consideration that I left out of the video (for simplicity sake). I usually like to break down the problem into smaller parts anyway and examine the profitability of each separate part, then try to estimate how often he will be shoving over or calling or folding to determine the overall profitability of the play.

In this particular case, I think he'll be calling and folding way more often than shoving, but you are correct it is something you need to consider and think about.

Hey,

Thank you for answering

Hey, first of all thanks for the great vids.
Secondly, I think I may have spotted a little mistake in something you said in this video.
@25:30 You do the Excel equation calculation. You have made the positive EV of your opponent folding equal to the negative EV of your opponent calling, resulting in a required 50% Fold Equity to make shoving profitable. You say the following: "If it doesn't really matter, in terms of whether he calls or folds in terms of our Expected Value, that just means the more he folds the better".
In this example it seems to matter whether he calls or folds, as one is +EV the other -EV. I assume that as long as EV(Call) is negative, the more he folds the better, correct?

If I'm wrong here, I blame the Whiskey and it being 4am.
If I'm correct, I'm not complaining. I know you put this in the video on purpose ;-). Anyone who didn't spot this, has not seen this video enough times and heeded it's call: Do not try to be spoonfed; Make sure you understand all that is said.

Another question. It seems to me that the formula used to calculate EV @35:00 is different from the one shown in the slide @15:00. I'll compare the two methods from both timelines in the vid.

@15:00 the [what we win] in the EV-equation seems to be made up out of 1) what was in the pot when the current street began (700), and 2) our opponent's bet of 650. Resulting in a total of [what we win] of $1350.
@35:00 the [our win] variable seems to be constituted by only what is currently in the pot (590). While the $630 our opponent will put in the pot on this street if he calls should be added to this, if following the formula as @15:00, is this correct? This would result in a [our win] of $970.

For the second method the same difference seems to be present.
@15:00 the [total pot] consists of 1) what was already in the pot at the beginning of the street (700), 2) our opponent's shove (650), and 3) our own call (650). Resulting in a total pot of 2000.
@35:00 the "total pot" seems to include all the above, except for the opponent's call of the player's raise (630-250 = 380).

Should the EV @35:00 not be as follows?
EV = [Our Equity] * [Total Pot] - [Cost to bet/call]
EV = 0.23 * 1600 - 630
EV = 368 - 630
EV = -262

It seems like the formula @35:00 is a combination of EV(call) and EV(fold), in that the total pot used in the calculation assumes the opponent folds (thus leaving out the extra amount needed to call).

If I'm wrong, same excuse as above + it's even a bit later now ;-)

Thanks a bunch in advance!

Ya your right PACS the EV calc for opponent calling is not correct. The total pot is off in the video because we didn't add in the amount villain calls to the total pot.

Time Link to 00:29:33

Hi Wilt,

Quick question, what does the number of players at the table have to do with the likelihood of the board being dry or wet?

Cheers.

Hi Wilt,

Quick question, what does the number of players at the table have to do with the likelihood of the board being dry or wet?

Cheers.

nope, don't think so. There could possibly be some slight correlation that the more people in the pot, the more dry the board should be just because people are more likely to play suited hands compared to unsuited hands (so since they didnt fold pre, more likely to be suited, therefore fewer cards of a given suit in the deck), however the difference would be so slight that I wouldn't worry about it too much, and really it would be practically impossible to do anything with that knowledge in game. Also each suit is equally likely to be played, so you couldn't say something like "well 8 people in this pot so hearts are less likely to come on the flop" unless you think people are more likely to play a suited hand if its hearts but fold a suited hand if its clubs or something.

lol what a long winded answer that could have taken two letters: no

Thanks Wilt, I didn't understand at all why a board could be 'ridiculously' dry, 'especially' for heads-up!

Thanks Wilt, I didn't understand at all why a board could be 'ridiculously' dry, 'especially' for heads-up!

the degree of wetness or dryness is just related to how many draws are out there, not how many hands are dealt to the players.

so ridiculously dry might be K72r since there are zero straight draws. especially wet might be 9 T J etc