Select Page
Poker Forum
Over 1,291,000 Posts!
Poker ForumAll Other Poker/Live Poker

Interesting or Tough Sets for POFC Simulator?

Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1

    Question Interesting or Tough Sets for POFC Simulator?

    Let's use this thread to post sets that aren't very obvious and would be interesting to run through a simulator. We will pick the top 5 or so and with the help of Nikolai (@ivan_bezdomny), get run some numbers.

    All sets will be heads up and assume hero is out of position.
    Last edited by givememyleg; 10-01-2014 at 02:06 AM.
  2. #2
    Here are some I thought of:

    1. A K Q 2 8
    2. Q Q K K A
    3. Q Q K K 3
    4. J J J K K
    5. A A K Q J
    6. A 2 2 2 5
    Last edited by givememyleg; 10-01-2014 at 02:12 AM.
  3. #3
    Another hard one I recently had was Ks, Qs, Js, Qh, 9h. Set the Qs up top or go for the double straight flush draw?
  4. #4
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    I know the simulator says to put 2-pair on the bottom utg. What about in position?


    Suppose our opponent sets Q / 3 4 / 7 8 and we have 2 2 3 3 K on the button?


    What if our opponent sets Q / 2 3 / 7 8 and we have 2 2 3 3 K on the button?
  5. #5
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    Come on you guys, this is your chance to run some interesting hands through the simulator. I know everyone has some cool situations to study - let's add more hands to this thread.
  6. #6
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    utg: A K 2 2 Q
  7. #7
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    Time for us to give some of these to Nikolai. I'll give him some today and we can add more later.
  8. #8
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    Sent Nikolai 3 situations:
    1. Ac Kc Qc 2d 8h utg (from Carl (givememyleg) in the forum thread)


    If there is no flush draw then Ace mid and Queen top is strong. King would go either mid or top but I'm not sure which. In this case I'm guessing that we put the royal flush draw down bottom so that it is something like X / 2d 8h / Ac Kc Qc.


    2. Our opponent sets Qc / 3d 4h / 7s 8s and we have 2c 2d 3h 3s Kd on bottom (from me in the forum thread)


    I think the simulator says to never split pairs utg (they go on bottom). In this case there is only one trey left in the deck. What if it is reversed such that our opponent has 2h instead of 3d? In other words, when do we split pairs and put one of them mid?



    3. We have: Qh / 5s 3d Kd / Jc 2c 4c, villain has Qs / Kh As 3s / 8c 8d 6x (we're utg on our 2nd draw. First discard was 6d. from a new bot we're looking at)


    The bot was not aggressive: 4s top, Tc bottom, Qd discarded
    I thought it would be better to be more aggressive: Qd top, Tc still bottom, 4s discard

  9. #9
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    Nikolai ran the sim for #3. The bot made a mistake by making the conservative play (Q4 top) instead of the gamble (QQ top).

    Abridged Sim output below. In short, Tc-bottom, 4-top comes out to EV
    -2.0pts. Playing the Q up top is almost two points better at EV
    -0.2pt.

    It does show that the volatility of results is much higher for the
    Q-top move, as you'd expect.

    Interestingly enough, my AI (the quick-play version, not the full
    simulator) also backs off from the gamble move here. Which makes
    sense, as it's not exactly trivial to compute that going for it here
    is worth it. It might not be, against a bad hand that we could scoop,
    or against an opponent that's fouling.

    To a human, it's easy to see that Q-up is the move here. but a bit
    harder to calculate by formula.

    Also, the real mistake here was probably playing K-middle earlier in
    the hand. You should be entering this move with KQ on top, and 35 in
    the middle. Which make going for it that much easier. (Since we can no
    play a live pair in the middle next move.) Assuming that the 3 & 5
    came first, I never put a King in the middle in that spot.
  10. #10
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    Nikolai ran the #2 hand and it is really interesting.
    Code:
    Opponent hand: Qc/3d 4h/7s 8s
    My hand: 2c 2d 3h 3s Kd
    Card to play: above
    Known dead cards: just the 5 our opponent is showing above
    
    We'd like to know our best top/middle/bottom set.
    D. Outside the box: K-top, 2233 middle!
    For sim sample size 10601: Mean: 1.83

    A. Default K-top 2233 bottom.
    For sim sample size 7101: Mean: 3.06

    B. Perhaps K-middle (2233 bottom) is better here? Since we less likely
    to fill up, and can’t make middle two pair.
    For sim sample size 5901: Mean: 4.10
    Much better than K-top. Which makes sense, right? KK middle here would
    be great. Easy free roll for QQ top, or JJ, TT, etc.
    C. Split pairs. K/33/22 bottom (since Deuce are 100% live)
    For sim sample size 5401: Mean: 3.93
    This matches K-middle, though does not exceed it.
    Here is what Nikolai said in summary:
    I. Despite what looks like good hand for your opponent (Q-up, 78ss
    back), your hand is at significant advantage, no matter how you play
    it.

    II. Splitting the pair is fine, and comes out to same value as
    (empty)/K/two pair. This is because both are good moves.

    It's easy to under-estimate the value of two pair in the back, and
    this demonstrates why. Even a low, semi-dead two pair is +4.0pt
    against what looks like a solid opening set by your opponent.

    Here, the hand you want to make is really clear. Two pair back, AA or
    KK middle, and QQ, JJ, TT up top. That's a nice hand.... and the bonus
    kicker of the back full house, which can still come it.

    Under very favorable circumstance (K beats Q on top, etc), splitting
    the pair is fine here. But's not generally a strategy to look for. Not
    because it leads to a bad hand... but because even a low, semi-dead
    two pair in the back is a very good hand.
  11. #11
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    A J T 6 6 utg might be good to see
  12. #12
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    Nikolai ran Carl's hand and the 3 to the royal flush on bottom set beats the KQ / A / X type fl set.

    It is an interesting tradeoff. I like the fact that the simulator shows why the extra fl opportunity of KQ / A / X isn't worth it because of the increased foul percentage.

    Opponent hand: unknown because we're setting utg.
    My hand: A K Q 2 8
    Card to play: above
    Known dead cards: none

    The answer is pretty obvious. No reason not to just play A K Q on the bottom and 82 off suit in the middle.

    However, with my new breakdown, it’s more interesting to see why.

    p1=/28/AKQ

    For sim sample size 3601: Mean: 1.50 [1.09, 1.90]; STDEV: 12.34
    For sim sample size 3601: Foul: 13.6% ptsNoFoul: 3.3 gotoFL: 7.7% Scoop: 31.8% Scoop'd: 20.4% BothFoul: 1.9%
    Time spent: 0:04:39:34.83


    This move only goes to FL 8% of the time, but it also only fouls 14%, while scooping 32% of the time, and winning, on average +3.3 points when it doesn’t foul. Not an amazing spot, but solidly above-average move.

    Now compare this to the second-best move, which aggressively goes for Fantasyland.

    p1=KQ/A2/8

    For sim sample size 801: Mean: -0.31 [-1.25, 0.63]; STDEV: 13.57
    For sim sample size 801: Foul: 33.8% ptsNoFoul: 3.9 gotoFL: 21.2% Scoop: 22.0% Scoop'd: 35.3% BothFoul: 7.7%
    Time spent: 0:00:59:10.37


    I didn’t need to run it long to see the difference. You’re fouling 34% of the time, which is pretty high. For that price, you go to FL 21% of the time… which averages out to a slightly better hand when you make it. But you are not adequately compensated for doubling your foul rate.

    I’m tracking a lot more numbers alongside, but only outputting a few at the end, so as not to confuse myself too much. Some of these stats are a lot more clear, for later in the hand spots. Where you’re more directly trading off Fantasyland, scooping, getting scooped, and foul risk.

    Hope this is interesting.
  13. #13
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,322
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    I like the way the stats are presented, but it could use a note as to the Confidence Interval (CI) in use that is implied by the [min max] after the mean. The CI is a vital piece of info which tells you the "weight" on an error range; the error bars are meaningless without a CI.

    He's given us enough info to sus it out. It's a 95% CI. (using a normal dist. w/ mean, stdev and number of trials given)

    This guy seems to be my kind of guy.

    ***
    I wonder how the bot is playing as pertains to early draws and setting a flush vs waiting for a royal.

    Does the bot ever abandon a flush draw for a pair based hand?
    If so, what drives that decision?
  14. #14
    Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,458
    Location
    California, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    Does the bot ever abandon a flush draw for a pair based hand?
    If so, what drives that decision?
    Good questions, I don't know.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •