cEV calc practice

    • conall88
      conall88
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.01.2009 Posts: 1,715
      So it's been a while since I have played tourneys, and I feel like i have forgotten a lot as a result.

      Ive been reconstructing my ranges for SnGs and MTSNGs, and decided to try and solidify it a bit more by trying to find break even points for certain ranges as a good memory tool.

      Did I calc this correctly?:

      (Assume it never goes multiway )

      Example hand:
      10bb stack

      I'm on btn, sb and bb call ~ 11% of the time.

      I'm shoving a range of 35% by default from btn.

      Villains fold around 40% of time.

      outcomes:
      -villains fold and I win 150 chips (40% of time)
      - someone calls and on average I win +400 but lose -600 = -200 chips.

      played 10 times:
      villain folds and I win blinds = 150/100 x 40 = 60chips each time ( +600 played 10 times).

      villain calls and I win 40% of time = +4600 (played 10 times)
      villain calls and I lose 60% of time = -6000 (" " )

      winnings = 4600+ 600 = 5200
      net loss per play = 800/10 = 80 chips each hand.

      sound about right? so this would be a spot where we would fold before antes, but get it in with antes
  • 8 replies
    • phantommm92
      phantommm92
      Bronze
      Joined: 14.05.2010 Posts: 1,464
      assuming you are btn and shove 10bb 35% and both sb and bb call 11% range, then they both fold 79.21% of the times, so when you shove and they fold on average you win 0.7921*1.5bb=1.188bb

      when called you have 39% equity, so you loose 10-20.75*0.39(average pot when bb or sb calls)=-1.91bb

      so you loose 1.91-1.188=0.72bb each time you shove

      that's without both of them calling

      and now assuming they still call 11% our equity vs their calling range should be
      10-20.75*X=0
      X=10/20.75
      X=48.2%
      so we need to shove just about 12%, which looks retarded :D

      someone correct me if i'm wrong
    • conall88
      conall88
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.01.2009 Posts: 1,715
      lol at my lack of realisation it would be 79% of time. brainfart :( .

      btw


      what is this part representing?: "10-20.75"


      10bb - 10bb effx2 opponents + blinds or something?
    • phantommm92
      phantommm92
      Bronze
      Joined: 14.05.2010 Posts: 1,464
      20,75 is total pot when one of them calls, 50% of the time it will be 21bb, and 50% it will be 20.5, so total is 20.75

      it should just prob be 20.75*0.39-10, how many bb we win/lose
    • conall88
      conall88
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.01.2009 Posts: 1,715
      cheers big ears :tongue:
    • Kruppe
      Kruppe
      Black
      Joined: 20.02.2008 Posts: 2,145
      if, for example, shoving 35% range is profitable, then it's still possible that with hands near the bottom of that 35% range our equity when called is so bad that shoving that particular hand is -EV.
      so wouldn't it be worth looking at which hands are +EV?

      maybe i'm missing something really obvious here :D
    • conall88
      conall88
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.01.2009 Posts: 1,715
      indeed, Ive been segmenting my ranges a bit more (eg Ax grouped into A5o and below, and A6o+ and so on).

      Unfortunately my work has been so intense this week, my brain can't handle numbers right now :O .

      its now 8pm and i'm finally sitting down to relax, when I should actually be studying instead ( [x] lame)
    • phantommm92
      phantommm92
      Bronze
      Joined: 14.05.2010 Posts: 1,464
      Originally posted by Kruppe
      if, for example, shoving 35% range is profitable, then it's still possible that with hands near the bottom of that 35% range our equity when called is so bad that shoving that particular hand is -EV.
      so wouldn't it be worth looking at which hands are +EV?

      maybe i'm missing something really obvious here :D
      that's totally true, some hands might be slightly -ev, as with 10bb we can prob take it
    • conall88
      conall88
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.01.2009 Posts: 1,715
      We really shouldn't have -ev shoves at all in an optimal strategy though.

      Reason being, if we ensure you bluffs are at least breakeven, we will increase our overall EV. Am gonna have to address this asap.

      reminds me of 3bet/4bet/5bet dynamics in cash. Diff reasons, same principal..