Poker Video: Limit Hold'Em by sthief09 (Micro/Small Stakes)

Do you guys have any of the configuration files you can post for the decision trees? I'd be happy to host them on DC if you could get them to me (the same can be said for the rest of the series).

Rob

Do you guys have any of the configuration files you can post for the decision trees? I'd be happy to host them on DC if you could get them to me (the same can be said for the rest of the series).

Rob

Shipped!

Hey guys!

I would love to get some feedback and/or questions. I have no idea of where people are at in terms of math and doing pokerazor analysis. I'm totally blind if I don't get any feedback. Please help make this series as good as possible !

For example was it clear how to condition villains river strategy on if an A falls or not? It's an important feature, but the logic is slightly tricky.

good video sushi & josh

Is pokerrazor free? If so were can i find it. I think that is awesome that it breaks down the ev of all possible river cards. Given the assumptions on your opponent's actions it gives you a better idea of which river cards you can call on. Sweet!

Ty BU!

http://www.pokerazor.com/ I think u use one r too many . I've made that misstake too! It's poker-azor (wtf that means)).

It is free-ish. U get all features except that u can't save ur tree's. If u want that u have to pay $50. I recomend playing aroud first and see how much u like it. And decide if this is someting u will do regularly. One reason to pay the bucks is that the program sometimes crashes (not super often, but it hppenns). When it does u really wish u had saved ur tree.

I agree that the MESF is peraps the coolest feature. Just notice the warning I gave that in practice it often over-estimates ur equity. That is because u can't expect to outplay ur opponent that perfctly.

I've been quietly waiting for this series since you did the first up in the member vid section. I've been trying to nag myself to do more of this sort of analysis, no more excuses hehe. Nice work on the series so far, keep up the good work guys.

BTW Entity where is the files section so i can grab the trees?

Hey guys!

I would love to get some feedback and/or questions. I have no idea of where people are at in terms of math and doing pokerazor analysis. I'm totally blind if I don't get any feedback. Please help make this series as good as possible !

For example was it clear how to condition villains river strategy on if an A falls or not? It's an important feature, but the logic is slightly tricky.

Peter and I have also been discussing ways to make this series as interactive and viewer-friendly as possible. For now, we encourage you to follow along while we create our models, but we'll soon be looking to get some viewers into the videos to show how possible it is to construct these yourselves.

zomg. maths.

Next time please make sure one can actually see your mouse pointer while using pokerazor.
And please use proper names for your conditions/ranges. I think this could help a lot.

Sushi, this is pure gold. never had the patience to learn how to use Pokerazor before but the example at the end of episode 1 was enough to get me going. Thanks!

Sent off payment today (cant abide effort of defining decision trees without the save button ) - you and sthief should get commission

Next time please make sure one can actually see your mouse pointer while using pokerazor.
And please use proper names for your conditions/ranges. I think this could help a lot.

Thanks for ur feedback! It hink the mousepointer is a good idea. I've sn it'spossible to get a yellow cirle around it, so will look into to that. The second thing Im not sure what u mean. Proper names? Could u explain a little bit?

Did you actually watch the final product?
From 21:10 on one can only see stheif's cursor. I think this has to do with the fact that his video material was used and Teamviewer and Camtasia didnot work properly together.

With proper naming I mean when you for example make the condition that he Valuebets all Pairs and does bluff with his air 50% of the time (36:00-38:00) Then it would be nice to type in the text-boxes on the upper right things like "Valuebetting Range" and "Bluffing Range".

When you look at the video from 50:00-56:00 you now have 5 conditions each labeled with "New Condition", "condition1" etc. this can be really confusing when you revisit your project. Better I think would be "A-River V-Bet" or "A-River Bluffs".
It is almost like programming, if you donot name the variables properly and didnot comment the code, you will have problems understanding the code when you have to make some significant changes later.

Did you actually watch the final product?
From 21:10 on one can only see stheif's cursor. I think this has to do with the fact that his video material was used and Teamviewer and Camtasia didnot work properly together.

With proper naming I mean when you for example make the condition that he Valuebets all Pairs and does bluff with his air 50% of the time (36:00-38:00) Then it would be nice to type in the text-boxes on the upper right things like "Valuebetting Range" and "Bluffing Range".

When you look at the video from 50:00-56:00 you now have 5 conditions each labeled with "New Condition", "condition1" etc. this can be really confusing when you revisit your project. Better I think would be "A-River V-Bet" or "A-River Bluffs".
It is almost like programming, if you donot name the variables properly and didnot comment the code, you will have problems understanding the code when you have to make some significant changes later.

I do the editing and reviewed this video before submitting. I didn't notice the part you're talking about while editing, but I'll make sure to check for that type of issue in the future. We've also re-created the next episode to meet some of the requests on here. It's definitely a unique experience trying to teach this program, but I think we're both catching on very quickly. Because of this learning curve, look for the vids to get better and better as the season progresses. We both have some great ideas in store for this series.

Did you actually watch the final product?
From 21:10 on one can only see stheif's cursor. I think this has to do with the fact that his video material was used and Teamviewer and Camtasia didnot work properly together.

With proper naming I mean when you for example make the condition that he Valuebets all Pairs and does bluff with his air 50% of the time (36:00-38:00) Then it would be nice to type in the text-boxes on the upper right things like "Valuebetting Range" and "Bluffing Range".

When you look at the video from 50:00-56:00 you now have 5 conditions each labeled with "New Condition", "condition1" etc. this can be really confusing when you revisit your project. Better I think would be "A-River V-Bet" or "A-River Bluffs".
It is almost like programming, if you donot name the variables properly and didnot comment the code, you will have problems understanding the code when you have to make some significant changes later.

Good suggestions, thank you!

Time Link to 00:11:06

Hi Guys,

So, completely just making up some numbers for the variables here, if our "E" is say, 40%, and the pot ("P") is 4BB on the flop, this would give us:

( 1 - E ) / ( P + 3 )
= ( 1 - .40 ) / ( 4 + 3 )
= 0.60 / 7
= ~ 0.086% bluffing frequency?

As in, out of all the times he is betting this river, he is bluffing about 8.6% of the time, and value-betting the rest? Is this correct?

Thanks!

Time Link to 00:12:01

Oh what the heck. Bungling right along with my self-taught math skills here... :

So, continuing the above example, where I made P=4BB, and our E=40%, to tackle problem #2, calculating our EV of calling the turn, we use this formula:

EV = E * ( P + 1 ) + ( 1 - E ) / ( P + 3 ) - ( 1 - E ) * 2
EV = 0.40*( 4 + 1 ) + (0.60) / 7 - (0.60)*2
EV = 0.40*(5) + 0.086 - 1.2
EV = 2 + 0.086 - 1.2
EV = 2.086 - 1.2
EV = 0.886 (BB's?)


Am I on the right track here?

Hi Guys,

So, completely just making up some numbers for the variables here, if our "E" is say, 40%, and the pot ("P") is 4BB on the flop, this would give us:

( 1 - E ) / ( P + 3 )
= ( 1 - .40 ) / ( 4 + 3 )
= 0.60 / 7
= ~ 0.086% bluffing frequency?

As in, out of all the times he is betting this river, he is bluffing about 8.6% of the time, and value-betting the rest? Is this correct?

Thanks!

This is correct in a global sense. However on different river cards his bluffing frequency should be very different. He needs to match it with how many value-betting hands he has.

But note that this is very theoretical.

Oh what the heck. Bungling right along with my self-taught math skills here... :

So, continuing the above example, where I made P=4BB, and our E=40%, to tackle problem #2, calculating our EV of calling the turn, we use this formula:

EV = E * ( P + 1 ) + ( 1 - E ) / ( P + 3 ) - ( 1 - E ) * 2
EV = 0.40*( 4 + 1 ) + (0.60) / 7 - (0.60)*2
EV = 0.40*(5) + 0.086 - 1.2
EV = 2 + 0.086 - 1.2
EV = 2.086 - 1.2
EV = 0.886 (BB's?)


Am I on the right track here?

The math looks correct. However the point of this example is not to calculate our EV, but to find an equity that is right on the border between a fold and a call on the turn, for a given pot size. So typically E is the unknown.

My idea is to use these equities as an indicator of the right play on the turn. Using pokerazor we can do much more specfic estimations based on villains tendencies.

@10:17
I don't get how (1-E)/(P+3) gives us the global bluffing frequency. And I don't get how the "bluffing frequency to value betting is the same as P+3 to 1". Please explain? =)

@10:17
I don't get how (1-E)/(P+3) gives us the global bluffing frequency. And I don't get how the "bluffing frequency to value betting is the same as P+3 to 1". Please explain? =)

Sorry I haven't replied sooner. Have been away a couple of days. Hmmm this was some time me ago !

Is the problem that u think it should be (1-E)/(P+4)?

If we are getting (P+3):1 we have a break even call if he bluffs 1/(P+4) of the time. He is value betting (1-E), so it should be (1-E)/(P+4).

Sorry about that.