What is the best software for sit and go's??

[ronster71]

starting to focus more on sit and go's for bankroll development...what is the best software to have??? I have pokertracker and Poker Ace Hud already...thanks in advance

[Tonding]

SNGPT

[jukofyork]

[ QUOTE ]
SNGPT

[/ QUOTE ]
You could also try SNG Wizard (it has a 30 day free trial to test it out).

Their also used to be a freeware version of SNGPT going about called SNGEGT, but I think sadly he's started charging for what was free before (perhaps if you know somebody who downloaded it while it was still freeware you could get it from them).

Juk [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Whalewang]

Check out this thread:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...age=5&vc=1

Either sngpt or sng wiz is mandatory, I prefer sngwiz.

[curious123]

SnGWiz would be great if he'd ever fix the inability to exclude the top % of a range. It's bad enough that it relies on a set ordering when defining distributions, but not having the ability to exclude top portions makes analyzing limpers to you, etc. worse than useless.

For whatever reason the proprietor thinks this effect is negligible. I encourage all those in search of a complete SnG analysis tool to continue pushing for this fix, as this is in no way a negligible oversight.

[braminc]

does sng wiz or sngpt work on mac?

does anyone know any other such softwares that are mac compatible? thanks

[jukofyork]

[ QUOTE ]
SnGWiz would be great if he'd ever fix the inability to exclude the top % of a range. It's bad enough that it relies on a set ordering when defining distributions, but not having the ability to exclude top portions makes analyzing limpers to you, etc. worse than useless.

For whatever reason the proprietor thinks this effect is negligible. I encourage all those in search of a complete SnG analysis tool to continue pushing for this fix, as this is in no way a negligible oversight.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yep, this is a very good point. It's very unrealistic expecting a limper to have limped with the top N% of hands (they surely are more likely to limp the middle N%, or even middle N% and a few monsters, etc), and this needs fixing to be of any real use.

Juk [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[SitNGo Wizard]

While I agree this feature would be nice to have, to say not having it makes analyzing limpers “worse than useless” is a bit harsh. At worst, the results are slightly conservative. You could compensate by increasing the opponent’s limping hand range.

For the technical reason why I have not implemented this feature yet, click here.

I do plan to add this feature if/when I find a workable solution.

[jukofyork]

[ QUOTE ]
While I agree this feature would be nice to have, to say not having it makes analyzing limpers “worse than useless” is a bit harsh. At worst, the results are slightly conservative. You could compensate by increasing the opponent’s limping hand range.

[/ QUOTE ]
Just wondered if you have found any good "rules of thumb" to help with this yet?

For example say, you observe a passive player limp about 25% of his hands (and you know he's limping some monsters too), how would you scale the range to best reduce the bias from the "top N%" problem?

<u>Ideas:</u>

I guess you could just leave it at 25% and be pessimistic, as at least this will never underestimate his holdings.

Another idea would be to add his observed % raise/push frequencies to the observed limp % (or even a proportion of this, eg: Limp% + 0.5*[raise%+push%])?

The only other thing I can think of is scaling the limp% by a fixed scalar such as 1.25 etc?

Any other helpful ideas?

Juk [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[SitNGo Wizard]

This is just a guess, but I would increase his limp range by the same percentage of top hands you don't think he would limp with. For example, if you don't think he would limp with the top 10% of hands, just add 10% to the limp range. This is just an idea off the top of my head; I don't have any analysis to back it up.