Beat/Vent Thread

[bennymacca]

LOL

What the hell has that discussion got to do with this one????

All I asked for was proof of your maths that says you should shove there with K9.....

and i am saying that i am not sure i should bother because i dont think change your mind anyway, so whats the point.

if you really want to know i might do it tomorrow

[JMACK007]

benny the cunt, up until now I have treated you with the utmost respect. But really, what results in the game of poker do you have to back up your "ultimate knowledge"?? Ok, you won 1 state final, but do I really need to remind you how lucky you got to win that??? Please know that there are many more than 1 (your way) way to play the game....

I have never insulted you by saying that you only win against "soft" opponents, so please refrain from doing the same to me, particularly when it also insults the league we are so proud of....

[bennymacca]

benny the cunt, up until now I have treated you with the utmost respect. But really, what results in the game of poker do you have to back up your "ultimate knowledge"?? Ok, you won 1 state final, but do I really need to remind you how lucky you got to win that??? Please know that there are many more than 1 (your way) way to play the game....

I have never insulted you by saying that you only win against "soft" opponents, so please refrain from doing the same to me, particularly when it also insults the league we are so proud of....

i have sent you a PM because i dont want this to turn into a big argument, but there is really no need for this above.

[JMACK007]

Replied to your PM benny the cunt, but I have no problem keeping this public....

[JMACK007]

Seriously, I keep butting my head up against a wall on this site! I have purposely refrained from hand dicussion for exactly that reason, until Harps put this hand up for discussion.

I have come to the conclusion that I am a luckbox.....it is the only explaination for my consistant results!!....

[Garth Kay]

In this hand that you are both arguing/debating about ICM is a huge factor in deciding what we should do with our hands and our stacks. Whilst I won't run through the math on here I will post some images for you so you can see shipping hand ranges and such. Bear in mind I have assigned a bubble factor of 1.2 (I am correct in assuming we are two spots from the money?)

This is where ICM comes into play; I would suggest that Harps is limping with 12 - 25% of hands and will call a reship with 7.5% of hands. Do not be results orientated here (we all know he had AQ), but you need to ask yourself what RANGE of hands would Harps be limping here. And if I reship what percentage of hands is he calling with.

PLEASE NOTE: in the below spreadsheet I have assigned Harps a 7.5% calling range, the further we move this range out the more +EV it is to ship in this spot.

This spreadsheet is for cEV calcs. And shows that reshipping against Haprs and Larx is +EV with ATC.

cev calc joHarps.png (130.29 KiB) Viewed 758 times

It is +cEV here to reship with ATC, what this means is that there is long term value in shoving with ATC against Harps calling range as we will generally win more chips in the long term. And it isn't even that marginal as we will generally win 7% more chips over a long period of time, even with the worst hand,7,2.

Here we involve the Bubble Factor and calculate our ICM equity and whether it is +EV to re ship in this spit

ICM calc joHarps.png (135.39 KiB) Viewed 758 times

In the above spreadsheet we calculate whether it is long term +EV to reship here via ICM. In this method we Independant Chip Modelling and the bubble factor is taken into consideration.

As you can see, once again it is long term +EV to reship ATC against a limped range.

In the above scenarios/spreadsheets though it does not take into consideration two callers to the pot, and therefore does not include the inflated pot size. Even with this information in hand we know that more chips in the middle make it even more +EV to reship here, especially with an effective stack size of 9BB's.

I hope the above helps, but breaking down the math for cEV, ICM and Bubble factor calculations will not be prudent as it is long and involved but I will make some brief explanations.

BUBBLE FACTOR = is basically a ratio of pain to win ratio if you lose a hand at that stage, considering we are two spots from the money and the short stack the pain wont be that great to lose here.

cEV = equates to how much equity we have with out chips and standing in the tournament and how that increases and decreases with our stack sizes.

ICM = uses cEV to decide whether calling, shipping, stealing with our stack is +EV and whether it is even worthwhile to risk our ships when we know we win the majority of the time.

I understand completely why you got frustrated in this discussion Jo, and I hope the above plays some small part in helping bridge the gap between what benny the cunt was trying to explain and what you were hoping to see.

I don't know how better to explain it all without breaking down to a very mathematical level. And show all the steps in calculations.

[bennymacca]

Thankyou for that Garth, you just explained it better than I ever could

[JMACK007]

Thanks Garth, great explaination, will take it on board.

[Garth Kay]

Thanks Garth, great explaination, will take it on board.

ICM and cEV calcs are like advanced pot odds, but you are taking your tournament position into consideration as well
It's one of the very intriguing mathematical areas when it comes to poker strategy.

Also - has anyone checked out the Final Table for the WPT five diamond? OMG!
And also Vanessa Rouso as the chip leader! Hotness!

[Stubbyholder]

In this hand that you are both arguing/debating about ICM is a huge factor in deciding what we should do with our hands and our stacks. Whilst I won't run through the math on here I will post some images for you so you can see shipping hand ranges and such. Bear in mind I have assigned a bubble factor of 1.2 (I am correct in assuming we are two spots from the money?)

This is where ICM comes into play; I would suggest that Harps is limping with 12 - 25% of hands and will call a reship with 7.5% of hands. Do not be results orientated here (we all know he had AQ), but you need to ask yourself what RANGE of hands would Harps be limping here. And if I reship what percentage of hands is he calling with.

PLEASE NOTE: in the below spreadsheet I have assigned Harps a 7.5% calling range, the further we move this range out the more +EV it is to ship in this spot.

cev calc joHarps.png

It is +cEV here to reship with ATC, what this means is that there is long term value in shoving with ATC against Harps calling range as we will generally win more chips in the long term. And it isn't even that marginal as we will generally win 7% more chips over a long period of time, even with the worst hand,7,2.

ICM calc joHarps.png

In the above spreadsheet we calculate whether it is long term +EV to reship here via ICM. In this method we Independant Chip Modelling and the bubble factor is taken into consideration.

As you can see, once again it is long term +EV to reship ATC against a limped range.

In the above scenarios/spreadsheets though it does not take into consideration two callers to the pot, and therefore does not include the inflated pot size. Even with this information in hand we know that more chips in the middle make it even more +EV to reship here, especially with an effective stack size of 9BB's.

I hope the above helps, but breaking down the math for cEV, ICM and Bubble factor calculations will not be prudent as it is long and involved but I will make some brief explanations.

BUBBLE FACTOR = is basically a ratio of pain to win ratio if you lose a hand at that stage, considering we are two spots from the money and the short stack the pain wont be that great to lose here.

cEV = equates to how much equity we have with out chips and standing in the tournament and how that increases and decreases with our stack sizes.

ICM = uses cEV to decide whether calling, shipping, stealing with our stack is +EV and whether it is even worthwhile to risk our ships when we know we win the majority of the time.

I understand completely why you got frustrated in this discussion Jo, and I hope the above plays some small part in helping bridge the gap between what benny the cunt was trying to explain and what you were hoping to see.

I don't know how better to explain it all without breaking down to a very mathematical level. And show all the steps in calculations.

I know Iam a level 1 player as you pros call it...........but who can actually calculate tis in their head in the 20 seconds u have to play the hand........ JMACK as I have said before as the son of a engineer oonce u say u r wrong to them dont expect to win the argument against a engineer........nice hand Harps :,D