The Efficient Frontier of Poker II

Reference:

http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...=327641#327641

I just did some graphing work with the EV charts made available by PokerRoom to try make it a little clearer to new players as to why they should or should not play certain starting hands.

Based on their data, there are 44 starting hands that have an EV of 0 or more. I've extended the following graph to include the 9 hands below that, the lowest of which is the suited one-gapper 97s (EV -0.04). Next below that we get into suited Kings, K6s and below:

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/702...handsevgo6.jpg

What this graph makes abundantly clear is just how valuable our premium hands are (well, duh). But what people might find more interesting is where we start crossing into negative expectations (just) - pocket pairs 44 and under, QT0 and JT0, suited connectors 87s and below, A9o and below, etc. This is not to say that we shouldn't play these hands, but we should be aware of where we're starting to cross the line...

I'll be expanding this thread later.

Comments welcome, as always.

NH warpe, nice to see a senior member (by that I mean, FTR, poker experience and stakes) taking the time to put up quality posts for discussion, that aren't necassarilly beyond the scope of $10NL, $25NL, $50NL players needs.

As for the post, you can almost picture the EP, MP, CO, button hands. With this, you may be able to even have a preflop starting hand chart for 6max and FR. Keeping in mind, especially in 6 max, starting hand charts are about 1/10 the equation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trainer_jyms

As for the post, you can almost picture the EP, MP, CO, button hands. With this, you may be able to even have a preflop starting hand chart for 6max and FR. Keeping in mind, especially in 6 max, starting hand charts are about 1/10 the equation.

---

PokerRoom has a 10-seat chart with EV by position for all hands which I'm just trying to figure out how to graph most effectively and what I need to edit from it. Nothing for 6-max, unfortunately.

tnks for the props, btw.

Just to show where I'm taking this, here's a graph of EV of the top hands as ranked by the data analyzed by position. As you can see, everything plays a little better from the CO/BTN but generally there's not much change in EV, regardless of position - in other words, RAISE THESE PUPPIES, in any position:

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/1056/tophandsni4.jpg

Im sure once you get past AA and KK EV is more a function of how well you play the hands in a No Limit game. Im sure JJ has a negative expectation for a bad enough player. This could certainly be a measure of potential EV though.

Playability (the ease with which you can figure out the best decision postflop) is a huge factor in NL. Thats partly why JJ can be -EV for a terrible player but its also why a hand like 22 is so much better than A9o. Its just so much easier to play 22 correctly in a reasonably soft game. Make sets + get paid.

This being the beginners forum, I'm simply trying to illustrate, simply, the reasons behind why we play some starting hands and why others should be non starters, so, yeah, potential EV is all we're talking about here.

Interesting you should bring up 22...this exercise is making me rethink raising some of the lower pockets in EP. More analyses to come...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warpe

Interesting you should bring up 22...this exercise is making me rethink raising some of the lower pockets in EP.

---

Thats the thing that the EV graph doesnt take into account. (I think) thos graphs are just hot and cold simulations of how various hands perform against each other.

Raising 22 UTG is so much more complicated than saying "22 is an above average hand". You get more action on AA, KK etc. You build a pot to hit a set in. You build a pot to take with a cbet (under the protection of it maybe being AA, KK, AK).

In very loose games where players tend to take lots of weak top pair hands (A5) to showdown the hand values run more closely to those EV graphs and 22 probably isnt a good raising hand preflop.

In tighter, tougher more aggressive games where people will put you to decisions A9o is pretty much trash in most situations.

Playing 0 EV and slightly -EV hands affords you a looser image, increaces variance, is good for metagame reasons and could improve the EV your complete range of hands. If you are a bad player it makes you worse. If you are good it makes you a better player.

Skill is relative. Variance is a factor of winrate.

Oh ya and good post Warpe.

People playing low PPs for sets need to be aware that they will make a set vs AA or KK one time in about 2,000 hands (almost double that at 6max) so they can't rely on this!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by biondino

People playing low PPs for sets need to be aware that they will make a set vs AA or KK one time in about 2,000 hands (almost double that at 6max) so they can't rely on this!

---

Happened to my aces a couple nights ago, not cool :wink:

This is awsome! Great Post WOOT!

Very good post... That chart is an extension of the raw data that Biondino sent my way a few months ago and it has certainly changed how I look at my starting hands.

Irish, love the avatar!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trainer_jyms

Keeping in mind, especially in 6 max, starting hand charts are about 1/10 the equation.

---

I'm adding 6max (which I have never played) to my games I play weekly (right now just $5.50 SnG's at Stars). I'm curious as to what things make up the other 9/10 of the equasion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wooderson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trainer_jyms

Keeping in mind, especially in 6 max, starting hand charts are about 1/10 the equation.

---

I'm adding 6max (which I have never played) to my games I play weekly (right now just $5.50 SnG's at Stars). I'm curious as to what things make up the other 9/10 of the equasion.

---

Position, bet sizing, position, hand reading, position, aggression, aggresion, positon, table selection.

I've seen this same graph before. I want to say it's from Small Stakes Hold'em? I think yours is more comprehensive, but I can't remember exactly. Just be careful to give credit where it's due.

It's so important that the graph is viewed in context. As Pelion said, these EV calculations are simply a hot/cold comparison of starting hands. Hands that are -EV on the graph can become +EV dependent upon a multitude of different variables. Similarly, the vast majority of the hands listed as +EV are going to show a negative expectation when facing a raise.

Again, as Pelion already alluded to, aside from the top few hands, the majority of starting hands run fairly close. The important thing for beginners to get from this graph is the importance of playing tight. I'm not trying to belittle your effort, but beyond illustrating the importance of tight play, the graph doesn't say anything. In practice, this graph is going to vary from player to player and to situation to situation. A highly skilled player is going to be able to play more hands profitably than this graph predicts. In comparison, the graph of a poor player is going to be shifted to the left.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaNutsInYoEye

I've seen this same graph before. I want to say it's from Small Stakes Hold'em? I think yours is more comprehensive, but I can't remember exactly. Just be careful to give credit where it's due.

---

I imported the PokerRoom database into Excel and then graphed the data. Not surprising that a similar if not identical result would be arrived at by others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaNutsInYoEye

...The important thing for beginners to get from this graph is the importance of playing tight. I'm not trying to belittle your effort, but beyond illustrating the importance of tight play, the graph doesn't say anything...

---

This being the beginners forum, that's one of the main reasons I posted it. Beginners hear conflicting advice all the time about what hands they should be playing. What this graph shows is basically just what their baseline of starting hands should be, and the relative starting strength of these hands in relation to each other along the spectrum. I'll be doing some more work with the position analysis shortly.

Same dataset, now graphing pocket pairs. Of interest to me is the negative expectation we have playing baby pairs in early position and the fact that only 88+ have a positive expectation in all positions.

http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/3308/ppszw4.jpg

Suited connectors:

http://img174.imageshack.us/img174/461/scsts1.jpg

Just some notes on the data I'm using. Quote: "The statistics are based on 122,031,244 pair of pocket cards dealt in the real money tables. The unit for EV is average profit in big bets."

http://www.pokerroom.com/poker/poker...ortOrder=value

I have seen those stats before and the problem with them is that they are for the limit games.
Implied odds go through the roof for PPs in NL games, including 22-55.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silly String

I have seen those stats before and the problem with them is that they are for the limit games.
Implied odds go through the roof for PPs in NL games, including 22-55.

---

These valuations are way wrong for NLHE and position is much more important as well. Also, they are for typical players. Stronger players with reads can play a little deeper down the slope or are giving up very little by doing so.

"People playing low PPs for sets need to be aware that they will make a set vs AA or KK one time in about 2,000 hands (almost double that at 6max) so they can't rely on this!"

Wow, is this accurate? I've been playing low pp's for sets if I can limp, and sometimes I'll call small raises with them. Each time I was thinking I had better odds than this...

You get a PP 1 time in 16; you get your set 1 time in 8.5; when you make a set an opponent will have AA or KK one time in 12 or so at FR. The 1/2000 figures are rough but they're accurate to within 20% or so.

Of course if you make a set, your odds against other good hands - two pair, TPTK etc - are still excellent, and they're a lot more common; I was just referring to the constant mantra that a set vs AA is the platonic ideal, when you win the villain's stack - it's by and large true but it doesn't happen that often!

Can someone confirm that the OP dataset is entirely based on LIMIT hands, thus rendering it useless for NLH?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kamachos

Can someone confirm that the OP dataset is entirely based on LIMIT hands, thus rendering it useless for NLH?

---

It's like 7 years old, it's useless for No limit even if it was for no limit at the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kamachos

Can someone confirm that the OP dataset is entirely based on LIMIT hands, thus rendering it useless for NLH?

---

if you'd bothered to read the thread you would have come to post 22 which states[QUOTE]I have seen those stats before and the problem with them is that they are for the limit games.
Implied odds go through the roof for PPs in NL games, including 22-55.[/QUOTE]

I have read the thread and the statement you quote. However, I do not consider this a conclusive statement that the data set is entirely LIMIT as opposed to a mix of LIMIT and NLH holdem games. Not sure where your absolute certainty stems from.

probably because those comments were made years ago when the data set was available and there may well have been more discussion at the source. If you read the comments why ask the question when its impossible for anyone to give you the answer that you want with any certainty.