PDA

View Full Version : Calculating EV Part I: Calling an All-In Bet


fimbulwinter
07-29-2005, 06:33 AM
A lot of you are posting hands where you are facing turn and river decisions where it is very likely you are beaten but still must call. Hopefully this will help you all analyze such situations in the future and make sense of some of your easier decisions.


CAVEAT: First off, there is only one poker book that every poker player must read: Theory of Poker. From that book one can teach oneself to beat any game with enough thought and introspection.

If you dont have it yet buy it and read it (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1880685000/qid=1122628681/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/102-0971857-4680964?v=glance&s=books&n=507846)



That said, by DS's own admission, the math parts of poker are hard. moreover, it can be hard to glean an easily-applicable way of doing them so that you can honestly evaluate the value of such decisions.

Part I will be this post giving an overview of the simple analysis of calling all-in bets. there will be three examples, increasing in difficulty at the end and then one for you to try on your own.

Part II will deal with the ultimately way more interesting concept of making all-in bluffs and semibluffs. The same examples and final question format will be used.

Part I: How to analyze the EV of calling an all-in bet.

When faced with a bet that is all-in you have two options: call or fold. by definition, we set the EV (expected value) of folding as zero. this is just like standard reduction potentials, physical origins and the like in that we simply do this to set a reference by which to evaluate other options.

Another way to think of it is this: if you muck, your chipstack does not change at all. what was in it at the time stays in it and no extra money will ever come to it from folding.

The interesting thing is analyzing the "call". as i went over in the "raising middle pairs" post in MHPLNL, EV is simply the probability of each possibility times the profitability of each possibility. the probabilities portion is what you, the poker player, should (and are) constantly calculating and handicapping subconsicously.

for example:

a player raises preflop, three callers, then an uncreative, timid, tight, passive player comes over the top for a very large amount of cash, vastly overbetting the pot. Mentally you know some probabilities right off: it is highly likely he has aces, it is somewhat likely he has kings, it is very unlikely he has 94o.

So all we do is take these probabilities (in number form) and multiply them by the expected value of the play. on the river, the hand is already won or lost, so the math is much easier. the profitability of calling is the amount in the pot that your stack will increase should you call and win times the chance of that happening, minus the cost of calling and losing times the probability of that. this is extrememly simple math and so we'll start the examples with earlier street bets.

on the turn and flop, however, we need to take into account the times we have the best hand and will lose and the times we have the worst hand and will win. we can do that by taking the villains hand and estimating outs (outs*2% for turn action and outs*4% for flop actions is a good guesstimate).

onto the examples:

Ex1: Simple

I raise UTG with KK to 5xBB and are called in MP and BB.

K72 all /images/graemlins/spade.gif (15BB)

SB checks, I bet 15BB, MP folds and SB moves all-in for 30BB total. I know he will only do this with a made flush.

So now, should I fold or call?

EV folding = 0

EV calling = (probability)(profitability)

Since we know he has a flush, the probability is 1 for him having a flush and 0 for all other hands

EV calling = 1(profitability him having flush)

EV calling = (profitability him having flush)

When he has a flush, we are behind, but we have outs to improve to quads or a full house, namely we have 1 K, 3 7's and 3 2's to improve on the turn and 3 more outs if we don't make it on the river. quick head math gives 4(turn outs)+2(river outs) = 4*7+2*3 (so we don't double count) = 35% to improve to the full house and win.

www.twodimes.net (http://www.twodimes.net) can do this precisely for you if you desire (http://www.twodimes.net/poker/?g=h&b=Ks+7s+2s&d=&h=Kd+Kh%0D%0AAs+Qs)

note how close our head math gets to the real answer of 34.4%.

so we will win 34.4% of the time and lose the rest. we are paying 15BB to win a final pot of 75BB in which we will have 35% equity. we're paying 1/5 on a 1/3 shot, so even intuitively we can see we're making money here.

the real EV is:

EV = -15BB(.65) + 60BB(.35) = 11.25BB profit from making this call. therefore the call has a positive (as 11.25 is a positive number) expectation (is "+EV") and should be made.

now substitute in variables for how big his raise is and we can see how big of a raise he must make until we must fold, assuming he has the flush every time:

Note: this part is extra, you can skip it if you want

EV = (-xBB)(.65) + (45BB+x)(.35) = 0 (equivalent to folding, this is the breakoff point)

-15.75BB = -.3x
x = 52.5BB or a raise to 67.5BB or more total until we must fold, if he has the flush every time.


Ex2: Intermediate

If we have a hand range for the opponent, we can calculate how often we must not be beat in order to make a call. I'll steal a recently posted hand and simplify it a little.

It's the turn, we have AA and the board is KQ84 with no flush draws. we've bet 15BB's into a 25BB pot and have been raised 15 more all-in by a tight player (call 15 to win 70). we know he most often has KK or QQ here but can also have KQ or AK. he's not creative enough to do this with any other hands.

First we lump these into "we're ahead and "we're behind"

when ahead, he has two outs (two K's) to improve to beat our AA, so we will win 96% of the time.

when behind to KQ we have 8 outs to beat him and when it's KK or QQ we have two. lets say we then have 4 outs on average (1/3 the time he has KQ, the other times he has KK/QQ when we're behind so .33*8+2*.66 = ~4).

so now we sum the ranges and probabilities and add in x for how often we must be ahead to make the call:

EV = EV call and are ahead + EV call and are behind = 0
EV = x((.96)(70BB) + (.04)(-15BB)) + (1-x)((.08)(70BB) + (.92)(-15BB)) = 0
EV = x(67.2 + -.6) + (1-x)(5.6 + -13.8) = 0
EV = x(66.6) + (1-x)(-8.2) = 0
8.2 = 74.8x

x = ~11%

So we need to be ahead here farily rarely to make the call, so we will most likely call.

Ex3: Advanced

We're at the turn with AA and are facing an all-in PSR (pot sized raises, by definition, offer the caller 2:1 to call) on a board of J872 with a flush draw present. we know there are three possible holdings for our opponent:

a set
a straight
a straight and flush draw

moreover, we've forgotten the suits of our cards and can't break our cool table image by re-looking so his draw has either 15 or 14 outs, but on average will have 14.5 outs.

when ahead we have 0 outs over the straight, 2 outs over the set, so on average we'll say 1 out.

how often must he be bluffing for us to call?

now i will do this in an offhand fashion that is easier to do in the head/while at the table:

I'm getting 2:1 so i need 1/3 pot equity. when i'm ahead i have a little better than 2/3 pot equity (he has 15ish outs), when i'm behind i have roughly zero pot equity.

1/3 = x(2/3) 1-x(0)
.333 = .667x
x = 1/2

So he must be making a move on me a little less than (remember our simplifications from before) 50% of the time for me to call here. that means that even if i know i have the best hand here 1/3 of the timer, i do not have odds to call a 2:1 bet. interesting, right?



Problem:

I've raised 5xBB UTG with KK and get two callers, one in the blinds who is good and aggressive.

J/images/graemlins/heart.gif8/images/graemlins/club.gif5/images/graemlins/heart.gif (15)

I bet 15 and the blind checkraises me all-in for a full buyin (80BB more, 95BB total). he will only do this with a straightflush draw or a nutflush draw or a set.

how often does this have to be a draw to make the call?




hope you all enjoyed this, next part is much more fun and will hopefully get you guys to start getting much more aggro with your draws.

fim

jkkkk
07-29-2005, 07:02 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Problem:

I've raised 5xBB UTG with KK and get two callers, one in the blinds who is good and aggressive.

J85 (15)

I bet 15 and the blind checkraises me all-in for a full buyin (80BB more, 95BB total). he will only do this with a straightflush draw or a nutflush draw or a set.

how often does this have to be a draw to make the call?




hope you all enjoyed this, next part is much more fun and will hopefully get you guys to start getting much more aggro with your draws.

fim


[/ QUOTE ]

ok, off the top of my head.

95 total, eh?

you bet 15 + 15 pot + 95 all in = 125

you have to call 80 to win 125.

you only do not have odds when he has a set.

KK vs the OESFD might as well be neutral EV, you are about 4-5% against a set and the nut flush draw is about 34%.

I think rephrasing the question, 'which draws and how many times...'

say he has a OESFD 50% of the time, for arguements sake, he needs to be on a nut flush draw approx 35-40% of the time to be neutral EV.

Do I get a chocolate bar?

BearHustler
07-29-2005, 07:24 AM
Good job fim. I gave your problem a try, but I think my probability assignments could use some refining.

Here we go:

1) he's got straight/flush draw i.e. 6 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 7 /images/graemlins/heart.gif
He's got 15 outs, so I'm 40% to win.

2) he's got nut flush draw, like A /images/graemlins/heart.gif Q /images/graemlins/heart.gif
He has 12 outs, I'm 50% to win.

3) he's got a set, I have 2 outs and am 8% to win

if I win, it's +205 if I lose, -15

We'll call the probability that he's on a draw X
if we assign equal probability to both draws, they're both X/2

and this is where it goes wrong:

EV = X/2 * 205 * 0.4 + X/2 * 205 * 0.5 + X/2 * (-15) * 0.6 + X/2 * (-15) * 0.5 + (1-X) * 205 * 0.08 + (1-X) * (-15) * 0.92 = 0

=> X * 84 + (1 - X) * 2.6 = 0

=> X * 86.5 = -2.6

or X = -3 %

This of course makes sense. Giving him 15 and 12 outs on his draws and assigning equal probability to both means that he has 13.5 out on average. 13.5 * 4% = 54%. So even if he's always semi-bluffing, and never ahead, I'm losing on this call.

Edit: twodimes says I got:
1) 43.74%
2) 53.34 %
3) 7.98%

fimbulwinter
07-29-2005, 07:30 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Good job fim. I gave your problem a try, but I think my probability assignments could use some refining.

Here we go:

1) he's got straight/flush draw i.e. 6 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 7 /images/graemlins/heart.gif
He's got 15 outs, so I'm 40% to win.

2) he's got nut flush draw, like A /images/graemlins/heart.gif Q /images/graemlins/heart.gif
He has 12 outs, I'm 50% to win.

3) he's got a set, I have 2 outs and am 8% to win

if I win, it's +205 if I lose, -15

We'll call the probability that he's on a draw X
if we assign equal probability to both draws, they're both X/2

and this is where it goes wrong:

EV = X/2 * 205 * 0.4 + X/2 * 205 * 0.5 + X/2 * (-15) * 0.6 + X/2 * (-15) * 0.5 + (1-X) * 205 * 0.08 + (1-X) * (-15) * 0.92 = 0

=> X * 84 + (1 - X) * 2.6 = 0

=> X * 86.5 = -2.6

or X = -3 %

This of course makes sense. Giving him 15 and 12 outs on his draws and assigning equal probability to both means that he has 13.5 out on average. 13.5 * 4% = 54%. So even if he's always semi-bluffing, and never ahead, I'm losing on this call.

[/ QUOTE ]

right idea but i think your numbers may be off. remember you're not paying even money (getting 1:1) to call. you are calling 80 to win 125, so you're getting something like 1:~1.6 on your call.

try going from here

EV has draw = x(.45)(125) + (1-x)(.55)(-80)

fim

fimbulwinter
07-29-2005, 07:33 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Problem:

I've raised 5xBB UTG with KK and get two callers, one in the blinds who is good and aggressive.

J85 (15)

I bet 15 and the blind checkraises me all-in for a full buyin (80BB more, 95BB total). he will only do this with a straightflush draw or a nutflush draw or a set.

how often does this have to be a draw to make the call?




hope you all enjoyed this, next part is much more fun and will hopefully get you guys to start getting much more aggro with your draws.

fim


[/ QUOTE ]

ok, off the top of my head.

95 total, eh?

you bet 15 + 15 pot + 95 all in = 125

you have to call 80 to win 125.

you only do not have odds when he has a set.

KK vs the OESFD might as well be neutral EV, you are about 4-5% against a set and the nut flush draw is about 34%.

I think rephrasing the question, 'which draws and how many times...'

say he has a OESFD 50% of the time, for arguements sake, he needs to be on a nut flush draw approx 35-40% of the time to be neutral EV.

Do I get a chocolate bar?







[/ QUOTE ]

you're getting there. might wanna check your %'s because NFD is about 50/50 with hero's hand and OESD+FD is a favorite against it...

fim

jkkkk
07-29-2005, 07:47 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Problem:

I've raised 5xBB UTG with KK and get two callers, one in the blinds who is good and aggressive.

J85 (15)

I bet 15 and the blind checkraises me all-in for a full buyin (80BB more, 95BB total). he will only do this with a straightflush draw or a nutflush draw or a set.

how often does this have to be a draw to make the call?




hope you all enjoyed this, next part is much more fun and will hopefully get you guys to start getting much more aggro with your draws.

fim


[/ QUOTE ]

ok, off the top of my head.

95 total, eh?

you bet 15 + 15 pot + 95 all in = 125

you have to call 80 to win 125.

you only do not have odds when he has a set.

KK vs the OESFD might as well be neutral EV, you are about 4-5% against a set and the nut flush draw is about 34%.

I think rephrasing the question, 'which draws and how many times...'

say he has a OESFD 50% of the time, for arguements sake, he needs to be on a nut flush draw approx 35-40% of the time to be neutral EV.

Do I get a chocolate bar?







[/ QUOTE ]

you're getting there. might wanna check your %'s because NFD is about 50/50 with hero's hand and OESD+FD is a favorite against it...

fim

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.. but your putting in 80 to win 125, therefore I call it neutral EV because he is only 3% ahead or so. Forgot about the overcard with the nut flush draw. Wow this is a crappy situation, I fold. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

BearHustler
07-29-2005, 07:47 AM
[ QUOTE ]
right idea but i think your numbers may be off. remember you're not paying even money (getting 1:1) to call. you are calling 80 to win 125, so you're getting something like 1:~1.6 on your call.


[/ QUOTE ]

Oh boy, I screwed up bad.

Let's try again, twodimes says my percentages to win are 44, 53 and 8

(0.44 + 0.53) / 2 = 48.5%

So if he's on either of the two draws, I have a 48.5% chance to win.

EV = X * 125 * 0.485 + X * (-80) * 0.515 + (1-X) * 125 * 0.08 + (1-X) * (-80) * 0.92

=> X * 60 - 63.6 * (1-X) = 0
=> X = 51%

This looks better.

So he should be on a draw at least 51% of the time for you to make a profit on this call.

fimbulwinter
07-29-2005, 08:04 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
right idea but i think your numbers may be off. remember you're not paying even money (getting 1:1) to call. you are calling 80 to win 125, so you're getting something like 1:~1.6 on your call.


[/ QUOTE ]

Oh boy, I screwed up bad.

Let's try again, twodimes says my percentages to win are 44, 53 and 8

(0.44 + 0.53) / 2 = 48.5%

So if he's on either of the two draws, I have a 48.5% chance to win.

EV = X * 125 * 0.485 + X * (-80) * 0.515 + (1-X) * 125 * 0.08 + (1-X) * (-80) * 0.92

=> X * 60 - 63.6 * (1-X) = 0
=> X = 51%

This looks better.

So he should be on a draw at least 51% of the time for you to make a profit on this call.

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmmmm, I get slightly higher than 75% of the time off the top of my head.

math tomorrow.

fim

bkholdem
07-29-2005, 08:12 AM
Thanks a lot for making this post fimbul. After I review your post about 50 times I might have a few questions. lol I really need to incorporate the correct math into my game. I have recognized this as a need for a while but haven't had a framework with examples laid out for me to work off of until now. This is pure gold for me. I play pretty weak tight and know that is not optimal but didn't feel confident to stray far from there as I didn't have an alternative model of solid play to adopt. This is exactly what I need.

Sweet! Thanks a million!

jkkkk
07-29-2005, 08:31 AM
Ok, jk's basic probability attempt #2

Draws (one slightly ahead, one slightly behind) = coinflip for 2-3 odds on money.

Set = 20-1 odds for 2-3 odds on money.

Hypothesis: we need him to have draws 80% of the time

out of 10 trial runs in a perfect world...

He has a set twice, arguments sake he wins -160

other 8 times we win 4 +500

we lose 4 -320

+120 - 160 = -40

Now factor in the times we will beat his set and suckout like a pro, out of 100.. 5 times +625/10 = 62.5

-40 + 62.5 = 22.5

Therefore I conclude that he needs a draw.. roughly 77% of the time.

I'm close.

BearHustler
07-29-2005, 08:38 AM
Yea, I guess my math is no good. Always hated it anyways.

Jocke_F
07-29-2005, 09:39 AM
Ok, here is my go at it.
chance of winning if he has a draw approx 50% on avg.
EV if draw 0.5*125+0.5(-80) = 22.5
EV if set 0.08*(125)+0.92*(-80) = -63.5
X = chance of draw
0 = X(22.5) + (1-X)(-63.5)
63.5 = 86x
x = 63.5/86 approx. 0.74

obviously he most likely has a set more often than this and its a clear fold, unless you have a read that he slowplays very often with this type of table texture.

BearHustler
07-29-2005, 09:41 AM
So it looks like i screwed up the first part of the calculation. I'm gonna take another look at it.

Edit: Yay, I'm not stupid after all.

EV = X * 125 * 0.485 + X * (-80) * 0.515 + (1-X) * 125 * 0.08 + (1-X) * (-80) * 0.92
was correct, I just counted wrong from there on

I now get 76%

dtbog
07-29-2005, 10:46 AM
[ QUOTE ]

hope you all enjoyed this, next part is much more fun and will hopefully get you guys to start getting much more aggro with your draws.

fim

[/ QUOTE ]

Very nice post! Important concept, well explained, good examples. You pwn.

Ghazban
07-29-2005, 10:55 AM
This is good stuff-- ever think about writing something in this vein for the internet magazine? I think a lot of people would benefit from being walked through these types of calculations.

Grunch
07-29-2005, 11:07 AM
[ QUOTE ]
so we will win 34.4% of the time and lose the rest. we are paying 15BB to win a final pot of 75BB in which we will have 35% equity. we're paying 1/5 on a 1/3 shot, so even intuitively we can see we're making money here.

[/ QUOTE ]

But, at the moment when the action is on us and we are deciding whether or not to call the push, we are in fact getting 15:60, not 15:75, aren't we? There's 60 in the pot, and the bet to us is 15. Aren't we actually paying 1/4?

It doesn't affect the outcome in this case I don't think, but it is a very important distinction.

nycplayer
07-29-2005, 12:20 PM
Still trying to grasp all the details, but I have a question:
Does it matter that there are:
9 ways he could have a set
10 ways to have the nut flush draw
2 ways to have the OESD/flush draw
It seems the draw where he is ahead is much less likely than the draw where he is slightly behind, should this be factored in?

Mackerel
07-29-2005, 12:24 PM
Great post fim!

I get ~ 76% you need to be ahead when you call to make this EV neutral.

I did a lot of this sort of thing years ago for limit games, but I really need to work through a lot of these scenarios to understand NL better. Thanks for the kickstart! I'm sure this post will help a lot of players here improve their game, not the least of all me. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

TheWorstPlayer
07-29-2005, 12:28 PM
Yes it should, but not the a priori probabilities based on hand combinations but really the a posteriori probabilities which combine hand combinations with the likelihood that he would make this move given his holding using Bayes formula.

Grunch
07-29-2005, 12:31 PM
This post is fantastic. Thanks, fim.

Ok, here's how I figured it out.

On average we are ahead of about 12 outs, or behind with 2 outs. The intersting thing is that if we are ahead on the flop, we're actually still a slight dog to win.

EV ahead =
We'll win 125 about (12 * 4) 48% of the time, or about +62 on average.
We'll lose 80 about (100-48) 52% of the time, or about -40 on average.

Net average when we are ahead is around +22.

EV behind =
We will win 125 about 8% of the time, or about +11 on average
We will lose 80 about 92% of the time, or about -73 on average.

Net average when we are behind = +11-73 = -62

So...
We'll win 22 when we're ahead, and lose 62 when we're behind on average. If x is how often we're ahead (in fractional form), then in order to make the 80:175 a call...

(x)(+22) + (1-x)(-62) = 0
22x = 62 - 62x
84x = 62
x = 84/62 = 42/31 ~4/3


Edit: per TWP's correction, changed 'win' from 175 to 125, which changed all the math. It turns out that we need to be ahead of a draw 133% of the time in order to make the call profitable, which of course is impossible. So this is a fold?

TheWorstPlayer
07-29-2005, 12:33 PM
We are only winning 125, not 175.

Mackerel
07-29-2005, 01:56 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Yes it should, but not the a priori probabilities based on hand combinations but really the a posteriori probabilities which combine hand combinations with the likelihood that he would make this move given his holding using Bayes formula.

[/ QUOTE ]

True, but interestingly, IF you assume that he will make this move 100% of the time with any of these three holdings, but only with these three holdings (not a perfect assumption, but interesting nonetheless), this allows you to just use simple combinatorics and avoid Bayes theorem entirely, and I come up with an EV of ~ +$18 on the call.*

* - Disclaimer: I'm supposed to be working here /images/graemlins/wink.gif and I just did this really fast, and I haven't rechecked these results.

bkholdem
07-29-2005, 03:37 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Yes it should, but not the a priori probabilities based on hand combinations but really the a posteriori probabilities which combine hand combinations with the likelihood that he would make this move given his holding using Bayes formula.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you explain this to me like I'm a 4 year old, because...basically..I am one lol

TheWorstPlayer
07-29-2005, 03:42 PM
I could, but it would really be easier if you just pick up an intro to stats textbook or google Bayes formula. If people on here don't know what Bayes formula is and how to, at least intuitively, apply it to poker situations there is a big problem.

BearHustler
07-29-2005, 03:44 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I could, but it would really be easier if you just pick up an intro to stats textbook or google Bayes formula. If people on here don't know what Bayes formula is and how to, at least intuitively, apply it to poker situations there is a big problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

Everyone who doesn't have a clue what Bayes formula is, raise your hand.

<---- * Raises hand *

BearHustler
07-29-2005, 03:47 PM
Wikipedia:

[ QUOTE ]
Bayes' theorem is a result in probability theory, which gives the conditional probability distribution of a random variable A given (1) information about another variable B in terms of the conditional probability distribution of B given A and (2) the marginal probability distribution of A alone.


[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, now I get it. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Mackerel
07-29-2005, 04:05 PM
Take a look at this link:

web page (http://yudkowsky.net/bayes/bayes.html)

A friend of mine found it when he was having trouble understanding this subject, and he said it really helped him get it.

BearHustler
07-29-2005, 04:08 PM
Thank you sir.

fimbulwinter
07-29-2005, 04:09 PM
oops, you are correct, sorry about that.

fim

fimbulwinter
07-30-2005, 03:27 AM
we are calling 80 to win 125, so we're getting about 1.6:1 on our money.

if he has a draw, he has 12 or 11 outs with the NFD or 46% equity. he has 14-15 outs with SD+FD or 58% equity there. we can estimate his draw equity around 50%, giving him a NFD twice as often as SD+FD.

with a set we have 8% equity.

we need 39% equity.

.39 = .08x +(1-x)(.5)
.11 = .42x
x = ~25% he must have a set to make this a fold. in other words he can have a draw up to 3/4 of the time and we still need to fold.

part two coming soon. will be much more labor intensive, so we'll see how long it takes.

fim

FreakDaddy
07-30-2005, 04:34 AM
Math is something I need to work at too. I have a question about the formula that fim is using and I PM'd him, but I thought I'd share it here as well.

I've been in search of using a simple formula for calculating EV at the table. The forumla above becomes more skewed though to the more outs you add the equation. I realize of course that it's real tough to have a cimple equation here and be real accurate. So, my question is, does anyone have a solid forumla that they use, and if so what is it? I've been trying to apply Solomons forumla, which is in HOH2, but I fear I'm not understanding one line in the paragrap on page 201. He states, "then subtract the excess of the outs above eight to get an approximate winning percentage." Well, I'm not grasping what he means by excess. Excess from what?

His example for those of whom don't have the book is based on a 15 outer. A open ended straight draw, with a nut flush draw. His calcualtion is as follows:
((15) outs x (4) multipler) - ((15) outs - 8) = 53%

With the posted(by fim) simple forumla, it would come out to 60%, which is a fairly substantial difference.

pokerjoker
08-06-2005, 11:55 AM
Man...that was a fun way to spend some time on sunday night. I ended up getting X= somewhere around 75%.

I assumed it was equally likely he was on a Straight flush draw as the nut flush draw. It seems like that was a necessary assumption right?

Normally I suppose you could adjust this based on your knowledge of the player and if you had the Kh. Anyway great post.

MaddHatter
01-06-2006, 10:36 AM
My question is how to apply this at the table. Obviously I can't bust out an algebraic formula and try to solve for when I should call and when I shouldn't. I know the 2/4 model and use it frequently - so what's the next step afterwards of "head math" to figure if it's a call or not?

mikechops
01-06-2006, 11:51 AM
This probably repeats what everybody else has said. I haven't read the other replies yet.

Nut flush draw 12 outs
Straight flush draw 17 outs

There are 10 nut flush draws and 2 possible straight flush draws so on average a draw has around 13 outs? This gives the villain around 52% equity for a draw so we have around 48%

If he has a set, we have 2 outs so 8%.

We need 39% equity, so if x is prob of draw,

(1-x)*8 + 48*x = 39
40x = 31

So he needs to have draw 76% of the time.

There are 9 possible set combos and 12 draws, so if the villain plays these hands the same way every time, we should fold.

Edit...

Looked at teacher's reply. Oops only 15 outs for a straight flush draw. Also he takes off 1/2 an out for the case where we have K /images/graemlins/heart.gif and winds up with 50% equity for a draw. Still pretty close though /images/graemlins/smile.gif

samster
01-06-2006, 11:54 AM
[ QUOTE ]

J/images/graemlins/heart.gif8/images/graemlins/club.gif5/images/graemlins/heart.gif (15)

I bet 15 and the blind checkraises me all-in for a full buyin (80BB more, 95BB total). he will only do this with a straightflush draw or a nutflush draw or a set.
fim

[/ QUOTE ]

Straightflush draw meaning straight AND flush draw, correct?

mikechops
01-06-2006, 11:54 AM
[ QUOTE ]
My question is how to apply this at the table. Obviously I can't bust out an algebraic formula and try to solve for when I should call and when I shouldn't. I know the 2/4 model and use it frequently - so what's the next step afterwards of "head math" to figure if it's a call or not?

[/ QUOTE ]

I fairly sure nobody playing online poker does this at the table. I think the point of these examples is that if you do enough of them offline, you'll have a better feel for what to do real-time.

samster
01-06-2006, 11:57 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My question is how to apply this at the table. Obviously I can't bust out an algebraic formula and try to solve for when I should call and when I shouldn't. I know the 2/4 model and use it frequently - so what's the next step afterwards of "head math" to figure if it's a call or not?

[/ QUOTE ]

I fairly sure nobody playing online poker does this at the table. I think the point of these examples is that if you do enough of them offline, you'll have a better feel for what to do real-time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly; Harrington discusses this in a chapter of HOH2.

samster
01-06-2006, 12:54 PM
Given the only hands opponent can hold are JJ, 88, 55, Ax/images/graemlins/heart.gif and 65/images/graemlins/heart.gif and he bluffs 3% of the time where we are a 85% favorite over two random holdings:

We hold K/images/graemlins/club.gifK/images/graemlins/heart.gif...

There are...
six ways to get a set of jacks,
six for a set of eights,
six for a set of fives,
two ways to get 65/images/graemlins/heart.gif,
and 18 ways to get Ax/images/graemlins/heart.gif if we have K/images/graemlins/heart.gif (which was not specified),
For a total of 38 hands the opponent can hold.

This means 15% for a set of jacks, 15% for eights, 15% for fives; 5% chance of 65/images/graemlins/heart.gif and 47% of Ax/images/graemlins/heart.gif, plus 3% wiggle room for bluffing;

Since there are multiple formula here, I'll do them seperately and then add them up at the end of the post:

jacks, eights, fives, respectively:
-> .15[(125)(.1222)+(-80)(.8778)] = -8.242
-> .15[(125)(.1253)+(-80)(.8747)] = -8.147
-> .15[(125)(.1285)+(-80)(.8717)] = -8.051

65/images/graemlins/heart.gif
-> .05[(125)(.4838)+(-80)(.5162)] = .959

Ax/images/graemlins/heart.gif, but not counting king, since we hold it:
-> .47[(125)(.5556)+(-80)(.4444)] = 15.932

bluff (so numbers are even):
-> .03[(125)(.85)+(-80)(.15)] = 2.8

Adding up each expectation:

EV=-8.242-8.147-8.051+.959+15.932+2.8 = -4.749

So if opponent only does what OP says, then we fold, because we lose an expected ~4.75 bets each time we call.

Some of these numbers might be off, but you get the idea. You can't put an opponent on a range of hands and then neglect to calculate the probability that he holds one if he will do the exact same action with each hand. Well... you can, but if you're going to crunch numbers you might as well do it right.

If anyone could check my work, that'd be nice.

Saborion
01-06-2006, 01:03 PM
[ QUOTE ]
EV = (-xBB)(.65) + (45BB+x)(.35) = 0 (equivalent to folding, this is the breakoff point)

[/ QUOTE ]
Just to make sure I'm following, shouldn't this be
(-xBB)(.65) + (45BB+xBB)(.35) = 0?