Adapting 6-handed online to 9-handed live ranges

AkashicAkashic Red Chipper Posts: 98 ✭✭
As the title suggests, I am trying to convert a 6-handed online frequency range into a 9-handed live frequency range. I am seeking help in identifying factors that would suggest raising or lowering frequencies when converting.

As an example, I will be extracting ed miller's "The Course" ranges that are openly available to any who visit this site and use those frequencies to compare against. I am also planning on separating out UTG and MP frequencies.

As a base, I will be focusing on the "loose" frequencies(also assuming that tight/loose % are built-in exploits). I'll ignore blinds for now and work on that another time. Ok, so using flopzilla and separating out the frequencies depending on the position, I got the following frequencies from ed's range:

ohoevrjtgh80.jpg

These are the frequencies that I've gathered from ed's 9-handed range. Within the CORE program, under the pre-flop section (level 1), W34Z3L goes over 6-handed frequencies, but I'll avoid posting those numbers here.

The differences in opening frequencies make sense, apart from the drastic differences in BTN's %, then again, The Course is targeted towards newer players so it is understandable why. I 'm assuming that the UTG and MP position have a lower overall opening % because there are more players to act behind us, thus resulting in us wanting a tighter range by default. However, once we hit the CO and BTN, shouldn't we use nearly an identical opening % when compared to a 6-handed range? How much of an impact do the extra hands that are dealt in 9-handed vs 6-handed have on the later positions?

When looking at calling 2-bets, the frequencies in The Course are higher than W34Z3L's 6-handed frequencies. I'm assuming that reason that Ed's % are higher is because it may have a more exploitative goal and because we will be in a "early" position more times than in a 6-handed game. Should I dial back those % a bit as a pure default (adjustments can be made at the table)?

The main reason for breaking down opening and 2-bet scenarios is because I noticed that the 3-bet frequencies were very similar. So this lead to this comparison.

Thanks for any help!




Comments

  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 3,535 -
    Bet size and game texture likely wash out differences and confuse similarities. We're currently overhauling how we present this info for 2020. The game evolves.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • LeChiffreLeChiffre NetherlandsRed Chipper Posts: 641 ✭✭✭
    edited March 5
    Akashic wrote: »
    I 'm assuming that the UTG and MP position have a lower overall opening % because there are more players to act behind us, thus resulting in us wanting a tighter range by default. However, once we hit the CO and BTN, shouldn't we use nearly an identical opening % when compared to a 6-handed range? How much of an impact do the extra hands that are dealt in 9-handed vs 6-handed have on the later positions?

    Couple of things:
    1) There shouldn't be a difference between a BTN opening range 6-max and a BTN opening range full ring. In full ring, you could argue that since more people have folded to you, the fewer crappy combos are still available to SB and BB, and so their hand strength is on average stronger. I believe I read somewhere this effect is pretty much negligible.

    2) There is a correlation between your opening range and the size that you should use. Larger sizes require tighter opens and vice versa, and since you will likely make a larger open in a live environment than online, you should open tighter.

    3) All positions are relative to the button. UTG in 6-max is not the same as UTG full ring. 6-max only has six positions: LJ/UTG, HJ/MP, CO, BTN, SB and BB. These positions translate directly to the four latest positions in full ring and the two blinds. Full ring just happens to have 3 extra positions which require tighter opening ranges -- to stress again: not the same as 6-max UTG opening ranges.

    Theoretically there shouldn't be any reason to deviate from your online strategy in terms of opening ranges and sizes (aside from the effect of rake), but in a live environment people tend to call too wide to larger opens, so exploitatively we open larger (and hence tighter).
  • AkashicAkashic Red Chipper Posts: 98 ✭✭
    edited March 5
    Thanks for input. I neglected to take bet sizing into account. That explains a lot. I do raise on the larger side when playing live.

    Brainstorming at 1 in the morning would explain my oversight.
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper Posts: 4,300 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Your 1 am brainstorming leads to your best thinking. But I'll ask you, if Ed hadn't been there to take a crack at it, how would you have determined the ranges in the first place?

    Imagine you couldn't grab any range charts and Range Convertor or whatever was seized by the Sanders Administration - how would you create a rational range from scratch?

    This came up recently in some other thread, and of course was ignored. More humorously, there was a video on construction here by B Lampman where he solved it by just grabbing some ranges from somewhere, which was hilarious. But for you the player, if you can't answer this, how do you proceed forward on anything without the ground crumbling beneath you?
  • AkashicAkashic Red Chipper Posts: 98 ✭✭
    edited March 5
    I was thinking about this driving home today. I came up with the idea to use some type of "solver", like GTO+. The problem is that I have no experience on how to run this or what/how to even begin to solve this.

    I'm not using Ed's charts, but I am attempting to understand the reasons those frequencies were selected so that I can build one from scratch. I am still using it as a crutch, however. The problem is how do I even start this.

    Lets stop beating around this bush. What I would do, is watch how often other people are doing this. record it. Attempt to create some sort of record. Then I'd think about how to exploit that. That is where I would start to construct some range. Test it, record data, repeat.

    Before all of that, I would actually try to obtain as many DB as I could and learn about Hand2Note. Import the database and see whats going on. No real need to manually do this when I can save time. There is also the added bonus that I save some money from having to do trial and error from scratch.

    Funny enough, I haven't played poker in 5 months, but I am currently doing a hard brush up on fundamentals. Specifically, the why and how to adjust to errors that are common in player pools. I'll randomly ask myself "I notice opponent is doing X thing, how do I exploit?" While doing this brush up, I've noticed that I've glossed over several reasons to review, so it is enjoyable that I found these holes in my understanding.

    What would you recommend? I'll also check out that vid
    *edit* check out the video series...
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper Posts: 4,300 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Lets stop beating around this bush. What I would do, is watch how often other people are doing this. record it. Attempt to create some sort of record. Then I'd think about how to exploit that. That is where I would start to construct some range. Test it, record data, repeat.

    So, two ways for you that you mention - observing the pool, testing what they do, and using that info to beat them. Fair. That's the live version of what sophisticated mass-data guys are doing for online.

    The other thing that you mentioned, looking a solver, would involve 1) doing preflop solves (not GTO+ at present) or 2) purchasing the vetted, simplified results of these solvers, either through online sites or books (i guess i should say "book") that uses them.

    Both of these have flaws, but are reasonable ways forward. So I guess the last thing I want to say is to notice that neither of them really employ logic to find baselines for actual play, being either reactions to the market or taking from situations calculated for specific scenarios by the solver. This means so much of what we do with ranges derived this way is sort of inauthentic, and thus calls into question most of the community's strategy and leaves a lot of room for improvement moving forward even these days.

    GL.

Leave a Comment

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