James. Pio Analysis Done 3 Ways On QT7.

Pio analysis is only as good as the ranges assumed. In this video Gareth James looks at the same QT7 board, but breaks down the solver solutions for three different assumed ranges. Please leave your comments and questions on this video below.
Moderation In Moderation


  • The MuleThe Mule Red Chipper Posts: 779 ✭✭✭
    Thanks for another interesting video @Gazellig .

    A few questions/comments:
    - How did you come up with the bet sizes/game tree design ? Are these just your standard, or have these been calibrated to the stack depth ?
    - Are you advocating we should be using multiple bet sizes on the flop ? Or is this more for demonstration ?
    - How do you account for "tournament life" in interpreting the Solver results ? As I understand it, the Solver will solve for chip EV (or possibly for ICM EV ?), which will not necessarily give the same results as "tournament chip value".

    I am interested to see more videos showing Solver work for tournament situations. I'm also interested to see videos on bet sizing for tournaments, both from a theory and a practical perspective.

  • GazelligGazellig RCP Coach Posts: 74 ✭✭
    edited November 2018
    Thanks for your questions @The Mule ! I used 30% and 70% in order for PIO to show whether it prefers a 'small' sizing or a 'big' sizing or a mix of both. Whether you choose 25% or 35% for a small sizing and 65% or 80% as a big sizing won't make too much difference. Janda talks about bet sizing in his book 'No-Limit Holdem For Advanced Players': "...while there may be a big difference between betting 1/4 the pot as opposed to twice the pot, the difference between 2/3 the pot and 3/4 the pot will matter little if at all in most situations."

    So the key idea here is to get an idea of what boards we can use a small sizing with a lot (if not all) of our range, which boards we should use a mix of sizings and which boards we benefit from using a large sizing. Generally speaking the smaller we bet the more frequently we can bet. Similarly, if we want to choose a big sizing we will check more often. There are of course boards where we can bet big with our range too!

    I'm definitely advocating for at least giving yourself the option of using two cbet sizes on the flop. Some strong and vulnerable hands benefit from protection with a bigger bet as they want to deny equity sooner and build a bigger pot. Good, but not super strong hands can use a smaller sizing where as they want to deny equity, but also don't want to make the pot too big just yet. Super strong hands like top set will usually use a smaller sizing when they block your opponent's continues.

    Your last question is a great one. When there are two options that are similar in EV (when there's a mixed strategy like betting and checking = the same EV) then I've heard it argued that in tournaments you should take the line that puts the fewer chips into the pot since each chip you lose is worth more than each chip you win. I'm not sure about that argument, since if you start deviating from a mixed strategy you can be exploited, but how many players in the games we play will actually do that? PIO now has an ICM function where you can run the simulations with 18 players or fewer remaining, which is a pretty neat feature.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file