how has eastbays tool helped out your game?

[johnnybeef]

well...how has it? p.s. eastbay, your reply will be totally ignored

[xPuns1her]

drugs are bad

[johnnybeef]

[ QUOTE ]
drugs are bad

[/ QUOTE ]

shhhh!!!...dont tell irie

[Bigwig]

It's helped me and I don't even own it.

I've been paying attention to the posts about it.

He needs to work out a couple of things before I buy it. At this point, I feel that I can calculate situations better on my own. But he's not far off from having an invaluable tool (if it isn't already).

[Newt_Buggs]

I finally broke down and bought it. I still think that $80 is overpriced since it really isn't that complicated of a program, but I suppose that poker players are willing to pay a very high premium since $80 is very little to a winning player.

so far its done exactly what its designed to do: help give a little bit better feel for when I should be pushing late game. I still don't find it increadibly helpful though since its very tough to get a strong enough read on your opponents in short SnGs to put them on a specific hand range which is needed for borderline plays that I couldn't intuitively figure out. Its still a nice piece of software though.

[Apathy]

Putting opponents on late game hand ranges in essential, if you can't so this you really need to practice. Seat selection at the high limits and experinence can really help you with this while multitabling.

[david050173]

It would take more over 2 hours to write so I am willing to pay eastbay. It needs a little bit better UI which hopefully will happen in future versions.

I don't think you can just plug in your hand and situation into during a game and be a great player. The hard part is figuring out when to apply the math. Do you take advantage of every ev+ situation or do you by pass a couple of the marginal ones. Do you take an EV- situation becuase it is better than waiting to get all you chips in during a worse one? I am sure playing around with this for a while will help develop that feel.

[ilya]

Well, I don't have it yet...but I imagine that when I buy it, it'll make my life a lot easier because instead of fiddling around with dethgrind's webpage and like 4 calculator apps I'll just have his one program to do it all for me automatically.

[Blarg]

I like it, but it really is hard to put people on hand ranges in the 10 + 1's, where I almost never see the same guy twice, and where calling ranges change every level or two, and depend on the stack sizes of both the player and his opponents, and if the player does a lot of folding you don't really get a chance to see what he's raising or call with anyway, and players often seem to play just out of peevish reluctance to give up anything in the blind no matter how crappy, or make spite calls and spite raises, or just think really illogically, or even don't really know how to play at all...and, and, and....

It helps think about the game in general, though. And I'm sure after I get a vastly larger database, its use will seem more directly applicable to each game I'm playing rather than to SNG theory in general. Its beneficial effect will probably be amplified when I'm playing higher levels, too, where people are likely playing less on the basis of emotion and hope or simply playing randomly a lot less, and actually have an idea of a play style and plan that they're sticking to consistently. Putting a numbskull on calling ranges who doesn't really HAVE calling ranges is kind of an exercise in futility.

I'm still glad I bought it, though. Anything that gives me even a tiny bit more insight than I had before is very +EV in the long run. And eventually I'll probably be able to get better use out of it than I can now in the 10's, when people call with (*.*).

[protoverus]

All the above posts are correct, I think, to a least a small degree. But I'll have to say this...the program and accompanying lesson completely changed my UNDERSTANDING of the game. Now, it's certain that I suck(ed) more than most everyone who posts on this board so WHAT I learned might be old hat for most of you. However, the Blind Stealing 101 lesson took the blinders off my eyes and essentially took me from a breakeven/small winning player to someone who has all the standard 'winning numbers' at the $11's for ITM and ROI etc.

If you are trying to understand bubble play or trying to understand how to put newfound ICM knowledge into practical use, then Eastbay's program will help you TREMENDOUSLY. It did for me.

I agree with Blarg about the fact that it's hard to put $11'ers on calling ranges. However, I've also learned that there's quite a few situations that it doesn't matter and it's PUSH BABY! Those were situations I was oblivious to and scared to even consider before.

The concerns noted by others, while true, are small compared to the benefits I've received. I imagine that if you are already a good/great player there would be less benefit...

To sum up my $.02. It's a great tool for aiding your understanding of the game, especially blind stealing and bubble play and especially if you, like me, are close to putting your game together but need help to get over that hump.

I chuckle every time I see a post now that says, "..but my tight play leaves me shortstacked by level 4 and I get ground down..." Yeah, I USED to HATE those times, now I relish them.

be well

[schwza]

link?

[KJ o]

Google is your friend. Try "sitngo analyzer eastbay"

[lorinda]

I like it, but it really is hard to put people on hand ranges in the 10 + 1's, where I almost never see the same guy twice

You are looking at it the wrong way.

You see the same guy 75% of the time in 7-8 seats at once.

Lori

[KJ o]

Unfortunately not correct. Yes, they are perhaps equally bad in terms of actual results, but their playing styles vary a lot *more* than in higher limits.

That's a good thing because in most cases variance means deviation from good play, which means more money to me, but in the specific instance of using the Pushometer to put them on a range of hands, that *is* a bad thing.

[dfscott]

You said, "tool."

[GtrHtr]

[ QUOTE ]
You said, "tool."

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't want to have anything to do with eastbays tool.

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately not correct. Yes, they are perhaps equally bad in terms of actual results, but their playing styles vary a lot *more* than in higher limits.

That's a good thing because in most cases variance means deviation from good play, which means more money to me, but in the specific instance of using the Pushometer to put them on a range of hands, that *is* a bad thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. They mostly still suck, but suck in drastically different ways. They're not uniform at all, or even internally consistent in their play.

The practical effect of that is that essentially, the range you have to put a lot of them on is a random one, and you have to let your cards, the stack sizes, and position determine the entirety of your push decisions. Eastbay's calc needs the missing factor of a predictable range of hands on the part of your opponents to nail down your best options. That assumes predictable opponents.

Which the 11's aren't absent of, but I take tons of notes, and rarely join a table where I have notes on anybody. You basically get precious little chance to obtain and use the information needed to make the best use of the calc at these levels.

When the pool of players gets vastly smaller as you rise to the top and you start seeing the same faces far more often, I'm sure Eastbay's tool's value will seem to have application that's more immediate rather than theoretical. It's still a very nice research tool has helped me realize some things that seemed very counter-intuitive to me, and I'm glad I bought it, because it has suggested a play style that is in many ways the opposite of my natural style. But I think it's value will grow much greater as I rise in levels and pinning opponents down on hand ranges becomes more likely.

[LesJ]

Where can I find out more about easybay's "tool". I have searched the archives here as well as google and have been unable to come up with any results for "eastbay's tool."
What does it actually accomplish and how does it accomplish it?
Thanks,
Les

[KJ o]

Google is your friend. Try "sitngo analyzer eastbay".

Another option is reading this thread, where this exact information was already presented. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[LesJ]

<<<Another option is reading this thread, where this exact information was already presented>>>
Since I replied to this thread, one could accurately assume that I have READ this thread. Please don't treat me like I am a moron simply becasue I would be interested in hearing some more details about eastbays "tool."
Thanks again,
Les

[gumpzilla]

KJo is right that Googling "sitngo analyzer" will get you the relevant link, as will going to eastbay's profile. However, there's not too much reason to stumble on the former unless you already know what it's called, in which case you probably wouldn't be asking in this thread.

As to what it does, I believe (I've never used it) that what it does is automate ICM calculations for all-in situations. It's sort of a marriage between PokerStove and an ICM calculator for the purpose of exploring SNG endgames.

[Scuba Chuck]

Frankly, I barely use it. I used it quite a bit at first, but I am not happy about the hand range choices. Perhaps I'm too much of a perfectionist, and I should just trust Eastbay's judgement. I would prefer if I could set my own hand range in the analyzer, and then allow me to select my own ranges. Especially if they could be saved, so I could retrieve them with a button. (if Eastbay is reading)

Furthermore, I wonder how much I'm losing by not doing it long hand. I still very much enjoy doing the math long hand, I continually learn something everytime.

Best example of what I keep learning...

In this thread (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=2332948&page=&view=&s b=5&o=&vc=1) I learned what a huge difference folding meant depending on the actions of a likely BB caller behind me.

Scuba
Who is still appreciative to Eastbay for letting us use his tool.

[dfscott]

[ QUOTE ]
I would prefer if I could set my own hand range in the analyzer, and then allow me to select my own ranges. Especially if they could be saved, so I could retrieve them with a button. (if Eastbay is reading)

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize that you can customize the range for each of the 4 buttons (T,A,L,M), right?

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
You do realize that you can customize the range for each of the 4 buttons (T,A,L,M), right?

[/ QUOTE ]

No I didn't. That would be sweet.

[dfscott]

Right-click the buttons.

[Nottom]

You can also add custom hand lists without assigning them to buttons. Right click on the space where you type in the hands, and you get a little menu.

Also if you have the test version you can right-click on the compute button to generate the full range of hands to push/call with.

Edit: I just realized you could cycle the blinds by right clicking on the stack size. Awesome.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
Frankly, I barely use it. I used it quite a bit at first, but I am not happy about the hand range choices. Perhaps I'm too much of a perfectionist, and I should just trust Eastbay's judgement. I would prefer if I could set my own hand range in the analyzer, and then allow me to select my own ranges. Especially if they could be saved, so I could retrieve them with a button. (if Eastbay is reading)


[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? Customizing the presets as well as defining arbitrarily many of your own hand ranges is not enough? What else do you want to be able to do?

[ QUOTE ]

Furthermore, I wonder how much I'm losing by not doing it long hand.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's silly. No one wins by wasting time on arithmetic.

eastbay

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
Furthermore, I wonder how much I'm losing by not doing it long hand.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



That's silly. No one wins by wasting time on arithmetic.

[/ QUOTE ]

I just spit coke on myself laughing at this.
Scuba

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Furthermore, I wonder how much I'm losing by not doing it long hand.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



That's silly. No one wins by wasting time on arithmetic.

[/ QUOTE ]

I just spit coke on myself laughing at this.
Scuba

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not all that funny. Once you know the method and are doing a problem that is analyzable by the program, you are wasting time to do it by hand. Period.

eastbay

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
It's not all that funny. Once you know the method and are doing a problem that is analyzable by the program, you are wasting time to do it by hand. Period.


[/ QUOTE ]

Did you read the link I posted to? I agree with what you're saying. There's just some little things that I am still learning because I've only done maybe 20-30 in my life.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's not all that funny. Once you know the method and are doing a problem that is analyzable by the program, you are wasting time to do it by hand. Period.


[/ QUOTE ]

Did you read the link I posted to?


[/ QUOTE ]

Sure. It's a nice exercise. But nobody said you have to stop thinking or doing any other kinds of calculations if you use the analyzer for what it does do.

eastbay

[Meatmaw]

[ QUOTE ]
There's just some little things that I am still learning because I've only done maybe 20-30 in my life.

[/ QUOTE ]
I read this as "because I've only done 20-30 to life."

[Slim Pickens]

Well, it's going to allow me to write a Luckometer as soon as I get some free time I'm not using to play. It's also given me a much better understanding of when to push/call with "bad" hands, the kind I might not consider even close enough to think about, but are actually close or clearly against my intuition.

Slim

[Blarg]

That's what I like about it. It makes you think about doing things that are totally non-intuitive, which is especially valuable because those aspects of play are something you'd probably never pursue or even think about pursuing on your own. Since they would just seem, heck, frankly stupid and not worth considering.

[LesJ]

Thanks for all the feedback. I googled from here at home and I found a link that for some reason did not appear when I googled from work yesterday. (strange) I downloaded the demo and will give it a look over maybe later tonight.
Thanks for all the input,
Les