Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > Other Poker > Heads Up Poker

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-23-2007, 03:14 PM
jay_shark jay_shark is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,277
Default A SAGE mistake / sng\'s

I noticed a small mistake in the numbers provided from SAGE .
It says that for R=1 ; that is , after the blinds have been taken , and that you're left with 1 big blind , then you should jam with 6-2 suited or better . It should read 6-2 offsuit or better since 6-2 offsuit wins slightly over one-third of the time . This means that you should fold with only two hands ; namely , 2-3 off-suit and 4-2 off-suit .

We're in Nash equilibrium if we're satisfied with our strategy given what the other player has done . We would not be satisfied if we had folded 6-2 off-suit since we're getting 2:1 (Villain calls 100% of the time) and that 6-2 off-suit wins slightly more than 34% of the time .
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-23-2007, 03:17 PM
roggles roggles is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 545
Default Re: A SAGE mistake / sng\'s

According to the table I use we shouldn't even be jamming with 6-2 suited. 62s has 16 points, but we should have 17.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-23-2007, 03:25 PM
jay_shark jay_shark is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,277
Default Re: A SAGE mistake / sng\'s

There have been several mistakes pointed out by others on when you should jam/fold according to their Power Index numbers . There have been many here who have jammed incorrectly according to their number when they should have folded . Your best bet is to memorize the hands superior to the cut-off point or accept the fact that the Power Index numbers can be misleading .
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-23-2007, 03:25 PM
daveT daveT is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: disproving SAGE
Posts: 2,458
Default Re: A SAGE mistake / sng\'s

"A SAGE mistake/sng's"

[ QUOTE ]
using it

[/ QUOTE ]

Edited by daveT.

<------loc.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-24-2007, 11:26 AM
HajiShirazu HajiShirazu is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Writing the shortstack manifesto
Posts: 3,258
Default Re: A SAGE mistake / sng\'s

Why do people follow this when you can easily just use sng wizard quiz and play substantially better?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-24-2007, 03:01 PM
jool jool is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 9
Default Re: A SAGE mistake / sng\'s

I was going to ask the same thing. Seems like ICM is a much better tool than SAGE for exactly the reason people are objecting to SAGE- ability to take reads into account. It is still a "system", perhaps, but one that will much more accurately inform real-game situations. Am I missing something?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-24-2007, 03:13 PM
jay_shark jay_shark is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,277
Default Re: A SAGE mistake / sng\'s

There is no such thing as ICM in heads up sng's .

SAGE is nevertheless very effective towards the end of a game ; especially against a strong opponent . However , with experience , you may learn to deviate slightly from game theory strategy to exploit the mistakes made from your opponent's .
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-24-2007, 03:19 PM
jool jool is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 9
Default Re: A SAGE mistake / sng\'s

it's been years since my days in stt, but isn't icm just assigning chip values based on your opponents range, and seeing how much real $ that makes various actions worth? i can understand how the payout structures would make one facet of that a non-factor, but i don't get how it's not applicable at all. what am i misunderstanding?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-24-2007, 03:29 PM
daveT daveT is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: disproving SAGE
Posts: 2,458
Default Re: A SAGE mistake / sng\'s

On SNG Wizard:

I don't see how it applies to HUSNGs.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-24-2007, 03:40 PM
jool jool is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 9
Default Re: A SAGE mistake / sng\'s

Does sngwiz/sngpt automatically assume 50/30/20 payout? If not couldn't you set a 100/0 payout, put one opponent, and have a much better tool than SAGE?

If not, how hard would it be for someone familiar w/ icm to make a program that adjusts to the 100/0 payout of a headsup sng? I feel like I must be missing something, cuz why didn't someone else notice, but can't think of what it is.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions Inc.