PokerRoad Forums PokerRoad

Go Back   PokerRoad Forums > Poker Discussion > Shadow Forum to Red Pro Discussions

Shadow Forum to Red Pro Discussions The same threads that are in the Red Pro Forum will be copied here for everyone to discuss. No new threads are allowed to be created here.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 01-19-2009, 04:03 PM
The Bear
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Rancho Palos Verdes
Posts: 617
Default REPOST: Shoving mathematics

The way it works in poker, once we believe we are making the correct play, it is hard to convince ourselves that anything other than bad luck is the explanation for the times it doesn't work. And when it does work, we have the positive reinforcement to keep playing incorrectly.

I was listening to Jimmy Fricke mention that Dan Kelly figured out that it is +EV to shove with 22 big blinds with K8 offsuit, when in the small blind and everyone has folded. I have played with both of these gentlemen and they are good players, but I take exception to their application of mathematics here.

As is often the case when I read mathematics applied to poker, the problem is often incorrectly solved and it’s the wrong problem anyway. I will post my top ten reasons that I have objections in this case. Hopefully Dan and Jimmy will have some comments and counterpoints in this thread.

Top Ten Problems with these kinds of shoving calculations (some are related, so I actually have 13 items)

1. I haven’t seen Dan Kelly’s calculations, but I assume he used something like pokerstove, and gave the big blind random hands after taking K8 out of the deck. In a nine-handed game, the big blind is stronger, on average, than it would be in a head up situation, because hands actually get stronger as people fold, since hold’em is a game where high cards are correlated to better hand strength.

2. So these calculations are right for when we are playing head up and we have the button, right? Wrong. There is less in the pot in the way of antes if you are only playing heads up. Players with these incorrect shoving and calling ranges often forget that we don't have eight or nine antes in the pot when we play head up.

3. These calculations and plays are dependent on the ante structure. If someone wanted to run a simulation they should use 1/5 ratio for ante to small blind for online tournaments (that's what PokerStars uses for later stages) or 1/4 ratio for live tournaments (typical for big live tournaments).

4. So except for ante considerations, the calculation is right, isn't it? No. As stated in item 1, our opponent's hands will be stronger than random. As I showed with a simulation, you will get pocket Aces around 1 out of 134 times instead of 1 out of 221 times, if everyone folds to you in the blind in a nine-handed game.
http://barrygreenstein.com/aces.txt
http://barrygreenstein.com/out-aces.htm

This is approximately the number you would get dealing with 4 aces in a deck of between 40 or 41 cards without an Ace instead of the normal 50, which people are using for their pokerstove calculations. So we can use this for a pretty reasonable approximation of the situation and figure out that our opponent will have an Ace in the big blind 4/40.5 + (36/40.5)(3/39.5) instead of 4/50 +( 46/50)(3/49) which is approximately .166 versus .136. So your opponent will wind up with at least one Ace in his hand around more than 20% more often.

5. You may want to avoid pushing all your small edges if there are bigger ones available because your opponents are weaker players than you are. Don’t bet your whole tournament on this small edge.

6. These are all chip equity considerations which are fine for side games, but in a tournament, chips are worth more per unit when you are the shorter stack. They are two very different problems when we are the one with 20 BB versus when our opponent is and we have him well covered, not just mathematically but also psychologically. You can shove any two cards against many opponents when they are the shorter stack and be +EV when you have them well covered because people are averse to going busted.

7. So how should you play this hand? Against normal passive opponents, ones that you may be able to shove any two cards profitably with under 20BB and who won't shove against you with unexpected hands if you make your normal raise, I think it is more +EV to make your normal raise and fold to a shove.

8. However, right before the tournament bubble or a large pay jump, you may want to shove as the bigger stack but if you are the shorter stack it may be right to fold.

9. Another benefit to folding is that you are about to get six or seven hands where you don't have to put blinds in and the first few, you will have good position.

10. There are some opponents who will almost always raise if I limp there as the shorter stack. I will make more off them by limping and shoving after they raise.

11. The times you shove when effectively playing for 20BB, you should do it for poker reasons. If you are against a tough aggressive opponent who is on the shorter stack, and one who may shove on us with Ax with a small kicker if we make a normal raise, but will fold this hand out of fear of domination or facing a middle pair, then we can profitably shove because of the hands we will bluff out.

12. Similarly, another poker situation where shoving may be correct: If your opponent isn't aware that you are shoving this light he will play incorrectly against you. But you probably shouldn't shove against players who are aware of your tactics and won’t throw away a weak Ace.

13. Many of us move all in with less than 10BB, except when we have a big pair. Against strong opponents who are familiar with our game we keep them off balance by betting different hands similarly. Therefore we look for ways to balance these strong hands where we don’t shove with weaker ones. It will often look stronger in the flow that has been established if you make a normal raise with K8 instead of shoving.

Barry
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on FacebookReddit!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 01-19-2009, 09:41 PM
Beginning Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2
Default

Though provoking post Bear.

Somewhat off-topic:what C compiler do you use? GCC?
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on FacebookReddit!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 01-19-2009, 10:20 PM
Major Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 134
Default

Nice OP Barry.

I've read quite a lot of books on poker, among them Kill Everyone, Mathematics of Poker (well part of it) and the FullTilt Strategy guide. They all deal with the jam-or-fold issue for two players, and they all apply it both to heads-up and SB-BB (at a full table) situations.

But one thing that always bothered me regarding SB-BB play was the sentence that I read in your "Ace on the River": that the BB is much more likely to hold AA. Interestingly, none of these books dealt with card removal effects or folded cards.
So I asked about it on 2+2 and got answers from Jerrod Ankenman (MoP) and Tysen Streib (KE). They both said it doesn't make a significant difference so they ignored it in their calculations.

So here's my question: Have you ever tried to calculate those pushing ranges for yourself? Or do you have an estimate of how big the effect really is?

Thanks!
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on FacebookReddit!
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 01-19-2009, 10:31 PM
99 Problems's Avatar
PokerRoad Sage
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Nor Cal
Posts: 4,736
Default

#1 & #5 = Nail on the head.

Well done Barry.
__________________
"That's the thing about the internet, it's always on. Don't they ever have to reboot the internet? Seriously though, it goes forever. What do you know that goes on forever? The internet never stops. TV stations usually have to shut down, the picture goes out, solar flares.I'm just thinking I've been on the internet every day for the last 10 years. I should probably quit the internet. I'm waiting for it to go out so I can just be like, 'Ah yeah, no more internet for a while.'-Haralabos Voulgaris
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on FacebookReddit!
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 01-20-2009, 01:57 AM
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 254
Default

wow, Im just stunned...
and in general, this forum is so constructive, glad to be a member
Hats off to you, Barry, you must have devoted a lot of effort to this post!!!!
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on FacebookReddit!
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 01-20-2009, 08:13 AM
The Bear
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Rancho Palos Verdes
Posts: 617
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhyBroWhy View Post
So here's my question: Have you ever tried to calculate those pushing ranges for yourself? Or do you have an estimate of how big the effect really is?
I haven't bothered because it's not important. In many instances, these guys are fooling themselves thinking that it is. The players who do well are good players who make good judgments and have good betsizing. The EV they generate from figuring out these ranges is small and not necessarily positive. The poker considerations override whatever they may come up with.

This is nothing new. Back in the day, I knew a lot of players who did well over some period of time and then would present mathematical explanations for why it happened. Sometimes, only variance was responsible, but usually they were just playing better than their opponents.

Barry
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on FacebookReddit!
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 01-20-2009, 08:18 AM
The Bear
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Rancho Palos Verdes
Posts: 617
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esoteric View Post
Somewhat off-topic:what C compiler do you use? GCC?
Each time I get a new computer, it's difficult to for me to install the compiler and debugging software. I haven't done it since I got a new computer. I think I used Borland software the last time I did it.

It's a shame, since I can program this kind of stuff in my sleep, no matter how much time I take off.

Barry
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on FacebookReddit!
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 01-20-2009, 09:17 AM
99 Problems's Avatar
PokerRoad Sage
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Nor Cal
Posts: 4,736
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry Greenstein View Post
The EV they generate from figuring out these ranges is small and not necessarily positive. The poker considerations override whatever they may come up with.

This is also a great point. Any SLIGHT mathematical edge that you may have/perceive is relatively insignificant to the information/tendencies that you know about your opponent.

You cannot tell me that the same range is +EV against Gus Hansen as it is against the Chainsaw. It seems too often that many players rely on the mathmatics (whether they solved the correct problem or not) as opposed to the read of the situation & player.

There is a reason every answer to every poker question is "it depends".
__________________
"That's the thing about the internet, it's always on. Don't they ever have to reboot the internet? Seriously though, it goes forever. What do you know that goes on forever? The internet never stops. TV stations usually have to shut down, the picture goes out, solar flares.I'm just thinking I've been on the internet every day for the last 10 years. I should probably quit the internet. I'm waiting for it to go out so I can just be like, 'Ah yeah, no more internet for a while.'-Haralabos Voulgaris
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on FacebookReddit!
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 01-20-2009, 03:31 PM
Major Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 488
Default

I will be honest, the only reason I study and follow the math trends is soley so I can get a grasp of what a seemingly solid unknown player is thinking.

Hand values change even against the same player. Even if you play someone HU for years straight, what was an expected profitable play yesterday may not be for this hand. And like is being demonstrated, even if it is for that particular play, it's so insignificant you will never reap the reward for the times you are lucky and justify it as math correct. It could even be argued that the super small EV you may obtain by trying to play this way is negated simply by discussing the concept to the world.
__________________
You should make amends with you. If only for better health. But if you really want to live, why not try and make yourself? - Incubus
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on FacebookReddit!
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2009, 03:28 AM
Beginning Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 22
Default

In the newest Bluff magazine or CardPlayer (I dont remember) there was an article by Greg Raymer regarding this issue. I have to see if I can find it and I'll post it.
__________________
phrankerCO.com
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on FacebookReddit!
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
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:41 AM.