SNG software

    • iamsloth
      iamsloth
      Bronze
      Joined: 19.11.2008 Posts: 1
      Hi guys,

      I often use the poker elephant for cash games, but have taken SNG's more seriously of late, I was just wondering if there are any similar poker tools which work with SNG's

      Thanks
  • 17 replies
    • evertonroar
      evertonroar
      Bronze
      Joined: 26.06.2009 Posts: 737
      holdem manager and poker tracker
    • Hlynkinn
      Hlynkinn
      Bronze
      Joined: 14.06.2008 Posts: 4,998
      and Holdem Manager is without doubt better..
    • tokyoaces
      tokyoaces
      Bronze
      Joined: 01.04.2009 Posts: 1,883
      PokerTracker is definitely the best for SNGs and tournaments in general.
    • Hlynkinn
      Hlynkinn
      Bronze
      Joined: 14.06.2008 Posts: 4,998
      Originally posted by tokyoaces
      PokerTracker is definitely the best for SNGs and tournaments in general.
      HEM has better HUD
      HEM has connection to SNGWIZ
      HEM has $EV line
      HEM has better filters for sng's
    • stevegold87
      stevegold87
      Bronze
      Joined: 18.06.2009 Posts: 2,640
      Originally posted by Hlynkinn
      Originally posted by tokyoaces
      PokerTracker is definitely the best for SNGs and tournaments in general.
      HEM has better HUD
      HEM has connection to SNGWIZ
      HEM has $EV line
      HEM has better filters for sng's
      Meh, the HUD for PT3 is pretty fine...You can use filtered stats as well.
      I don't know about the connection to SNGWiz, I guess that's a big +
      The EV line on SNGs is sometime not very accurate and just stressful, you don't really need it. Imo it's the only difference between the 2.

      I guess the interface for HEM is better. The main difference I saw (I am a PT3 user) is that it gives you the distribution 1,2,3,4,5,6,7.8.9 places over the number of game you want, from what I know PT3 only give you 1-2-3 and ITM%.
    • savage1981
      savage1981
      Bronze
      Joined: 31.05.2010 Posts: 945
      And you can get the EV line in PT3. It's displayed in chips won per hands played.
    • stevegold87
      stevegold87
      Bronze
      Joined: 18.06.2009 Posts: 2,640
      Originally posted by savage1981
      And you can get the EV line in PT3. It's displayed in chips won per hands played.
      TY good sir I just learned something very useful today :heart:

      I can finally know that I'm UNDER EV for my poker career haha :D
    • Hlynkinn
      Hlynkinn
      Bronze
      Joined: 14.06.2008 Posts: 4,998
      Originally posted by savage1981
      And you can get the EV line in PT3. It's displayed in chips won per hands played.
      That gives you wrong information.. since it doesn't calculate $ev.. only cEV... and tourneys are about $ev not cev
    • savage1981
      savage1981
      Bronze
      Joined: 31.05.2010 Posts: 945
      Fair enough. But it still shows you if you're getting your chips in good or bad. And since I've never used HEM, would you care to explain how it works out your buy-in expectation? E.g. it tells you you're running 5 BIs below the expected line. How can it possibly know your expected winnings from the tourney after going all in with 7 players left. I hope, I'm making myself clear...
    • pzhon
      pzhon
      Bronze
      Joined: 17.06.2010 Posts: 1,151
      HEM uses the ICM to estimate the equity of each outcome when someone is all-in. For example, it might see that you will have 20% of the prize pool if you lose, and 35% equity if you win. If you get all-in with 40% equity, then your average result is 40%x35% + 60%x20% = 26%. Winning is lucky by 9% of the prize pool, while losing is unlucky by 6% of the prize pool.

      HEM also applies these calculations when you are not in the hand, but two of your opponents get all-in. According to the ICM, you gain when the short stack is knocked out, so it is unlucky for you if the short stack doubles up.

      HEM subtracts the all-in luck from your results to get the luck-adjusted results. These converge to your true ROI faster than your results do, particularly for super turbos. Even for normal SNGs, the adjusted results after 500 tournaments may be as reliable as unadjusted results after 1000 tournaments.

      PT3 keeps track of the chips, which tells you about your share of first place, but not your ICM equity. There are losing strategies which place first more than 1/9 of the time or even 14% of the time.
    • tokyoaces
      tokyoaces
      Bronze
      Joined: 01.04.2009 Posts: 1,883
      Originally posted by stevegold87
      I guess the interface for HEM is better. The main difference I saw (I am a PT3 user) is that it gives you the distribution 1,2,3,4,5,6,7.8.9 places over the number of game you want, from what I know PT3 only give you 1-2-3 and ITM%.
      You can add all of these to PT3 they just aren't there by default.

      Originally posted by Hlynkinn
      HEM has better HUD
      HEM has better filters for sng's
      If you believe this ... you have never used PT3.
    • Navrark
      Navrark
      Bronze
      Joined: 27.01.2010 Posts: 313
      Originally posted by Hlynkinn
      Originally posted by tokyoaces
      PokerTracker is definitely the best for SNGs and tournaments in general.
      HEM has better HUD
      HEM has connection to SNGWIZ
      HEM has $EV line
      HEM has better filters for sng's
      PT3 runs much better on my computer. HEM was always slow and flunky. But, I had a look at HEM today again and there is a lot that I like. My trial is expired but I saw some video about it. And when you consider all of these add-ons I am leaning toward HEM also once my PT3 trial expires. But I am going to take all 3:

      Elephant, HEM and PT3 for a spin one last time on a fresh windows install just to decide once and for all. What I thought was kind of dirty is how PT3 costs $49.99 for the low stakes version while HEM costs $54.99. But, when you look close you see that HEM plays up to the $22 buy-in SNGs while PT3 low stakes only plays up to the $11 SNGs. Either pay the full price for PT3 to play $22 SNGs or pay $54.99 for HEM. Kind of hard to beat.

      But there is lots I like about PT3...
    • Navrark
      Navrark
      Bronze
      Joined: 27.01.2010 Posts: 313
      Originally posted by pzhon
      HEM subtracts the all-in luck from your results to get the luck-adjusted results. These converge to your true ROI faster than your results do, particularly for super turbos. Even for normal SNGs, the adjusted results after 500 tournaments may be as reliable as unadjusted results after 1000 tournaments.

      PT3 keeps track of the chips, which tells you about your share of first place, but not your ICM equity. There are losing strategies which place first more than 1/9 of the time or even 14% of the time.
      The information you speak of is what I need from HEM right now. I'm going out of my mind because I am about even on the chips - according to PT3 - but I sure feel like I am getting sucked out on at worse times than I suck out on others. Also, I feel like buddy always has a big hand waiting, even when I make the proper push according to SNGWiz.
    • Navrark
      Navrark
      Bronze
      Joined: 27.01.2010 Posts: 313
      Hello,

      I'm kind of lost by your math, but if I could ask one question...

      Does HEM calculate the ICM of whether or not you or your opponent should have made the Push/Call to begin with? Or does HEM not take that into account and just compare the number of chips with the quality of hand?

      The reason I ask is because I have been looking at my losing hands in HEM and I see one suckout after another, as well as me pushing with a good hand and running into a better hand. Yes, I have made some dumb plays also, but not a lot in comparison.

      HEM is currently showing me at a negative adjusted $EV ROI in some games and so I would like clarification, if possible.

      Thanks!


      Originally posted by pzhon
      HEM uses the ICM to estimate the equity of each outcome when someone is all-in. For example, it might see that you will have 20% of the prize pool if you lose, and 35% equity if you win. If you get all-in with 40% equity, then your average result is 40%x35% + 60%x20% = 26%. Winning is lucky by 9% of the prize pool, while losing is unlucky by 6% of the prize pool.

      HEM also applies these calculations when you are not in the hand, but two of your opponents get all-in. According to the ICM, you gain when the short stack is knocked out, so it is unlucky for you if the short stack doubles up.

      HEM subtracts the all-in luck from your results to get the luck-adjusted results. These converge to your true ROI faster than your results do, particularly for super turbos. Even for normal SNGs, the adjusted results after 500 tournaments may be as reliable as unadjusted results after 1000 tournaments.

      PT3 keeps track of the chips, which tells you about your share of first place, but not your ICM equity. There are losing strategies which place first more than 1/9 of the time or even 14% of the time.
    • pzhon
      pzhon
      Bronze
      Joined: 17.06.2010 Posts: 1,151
      HEM doesn't try to do any calculation of what should have happened. HEM only sees what winning chances you had when you got all-in (or that two other players had when they got all-in), and estimates the amount of luck that happened after you got all-in.

      If there is a cooler, say you push KK and run into AA, HEM assumes you did that intentionally. HEM does not factor out the part of luck that says it is unlucky to get dealt KK when someone else has AA. The red line is not perfect. It's just more accurate than the green line. If you play winning poker, your red line will sometimes go up and sometimes go down, but the overall trend should reflect your advantage better than the green line does. Your red line after 500 games might be as accurate as your green line after 1000 games.

      The green line, by itself, is unbiased. The red line, by itself, is unbiased. However, one you know the green line, the red line tends to be biased toward the actual result. When you have been lucky early in tournaments, you tend to have more of a chance to show your skill advantage. And of course, if you get dealt AA while someone else has KK, it is likely that your green line will go up just as your red line does. So, if you have a losing week, but your red line is flat, this should be encouraging. Typically, when a winning player has a losing week, the red line ends somewhere between the player's long run average and the green line.
    • redhot007
      redhot007
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.09.2010 Posts: 6
      Bat I have noticed that the green line is much swingier than the red line what that indicates?
    • pzhon
      pzhon
      Bronze
      Joined: 17.06.2010 Posts: 1,151
      Originally posted by redhot007
      Bat I have noticed that the green line is much swingier than the red line what that indicates?
      That indicates the variance reduction is working, that some of the luck is being factored out.

      Think of the green line as reflecting your skill plus the result of 10 coin flips, and the red line as reflecting your skill plus only 5 out of 10 of those coin flips, since HEM detects and cancels out the other 5.