# I made a CardRunnerEV "simple" file to quickly analyze the Ed Miller 70% model.

Red Chipper Posts: 18 ✭✭
Hi,

In the One percent series (https://redchippoker.com/pro/playlists/the-one-percent/), I see in the 5th video (value et bluff ratio), it take a lot of time to build a range that reach de 70% model. I decide to automate it!

As SplitSuit says, the frequency has to be set before to fine tune each combo. I tried here to use these logic to build a CardRunner EV (CREV) model for the player in position. I would like to know if you like my approch. I put my model in the zip file attachment.

I use to caliber my model, the same flop that we can see in the 5th video of the series. As you see below, cutoff cbet 70% of the time.

To build the categories, I use these algorithm:

Categorie #1 : Value Bet : Top 23% of the range (sorted from highest equity to the lowest)
Categorie #2 : Check back to Bluff-catch next street : Next 20% of the range
Categorie #3 : Bluff Bet : Next 46% of the range
Categorie #4 : Check back to fold of the next street : Last 10 % percent of the range

Explications :
-The checking range must be egal to 30%. So 20% to bluff-catch the next street plus 10% to fold on the next street. In that way, I can defend 66% of my cheched hands on the next street. (near 70%)
-The bluff/value bet ratio is 2:1 (46%:23%) (46+23=70%)

How to implement it in CREV :
The value hand is easy to set in CREV.
- You choose the special condition named "Top x% of equity"
- For the bluff bet range (3rd step in the algoritm, it's a bit tricky.
You choose the special condition "bttm x% to top y%"
You put 10% and 43% in dialog boxes.

Why 43% ? 43 is the top of the range. To obtain it : 23% of top value bet (Categorie #1) + 20% of check back bluff catcher (Categorie #2)

I hope it's comprehensive... :)

If you like these work, I will share my OOP model, who is harder to implent and understand.

• Red Chipper Posts: 43 ✭✭
Nice! I did this and mentioned in one of Splitsuits 1% vids that this was possible- way back in the winter. Thankfully, not many people understand the power of CREV. :)
• Red Chipper Posts: 18 ✭✭
I'm working on an version 2 of OOP model. I realize yesterday that I have troubles in my logics on turn and river. I will submit here soon to have a review of it. Maybe my assomptions are not accurate.
• Red Chipper Posts: 1,426 ✭✭✭✭
just upgrade to GTO+ and save yourself the time and energy
• Red Chipper Posts: 18 ✭✭
kenaces wrote: »
just upgrade to GTO+ and save yourself the time and energy

I don't like to much use GTO+ because I'm not able to apply a mixed strategy on each hand correctly. The solution is too tough to remember in my opinion. Is it a way to round up a solution given by this solver without sacrifice too much EV?
• Red Chipper Posts: 1,426 ✭✭✭✭
kenaces wrote: »
just upgrade to GTO+ and save yourself the time and energy

I don't like to much use GTO+ because I'm not able to apply a mixed strategy on each hand correctly. The solution is too tough to remember in my opinion. Is it a way to round up a solution given by this solver without sacrifice too much EV?

I don't know, but it is a good question for scylla on his 2+2 thread. He is very responsive.

I agree no one is memorizing grinds but you can learn so much so fast compared to the time it takes to run things in CREV.