04-25-2002, 08:02 PM
There are some interesting Texas Hold'em hand analysis in this post from GRP:
Recently Mr. Garcia wrote a software review on Acespade vs. Wilson Texas Hold'em. I hope he is not connected to Wilson in any way. But his criticism of Acespade is plain wrong. The followings are the explainations of why his
criticism is wrong.
[Criticism 1]:
One problem with the Advice given by the Hint button is that the
action values can contradict what the Advisor suggests. Again, using
the Qc 9c example from Normal/Case play above, I would see a positive
or neutral Call dollar value, but a clearly negative, by whole
dollars, Raise $$ value…. and yet the Advisor would tell me to raise
anyway, even though my hand only have a 30% chance or so of winning.
This makes very little sense and would be very confusing to
new players. They may not get the nuance of taking an action that may
have the worst of it in order to increase their chances of winning…
much less recommending to players that they should take negative
expectation actions as a rule…
[Explain 1]: Experienced player will raise with this hand sometime for many reasons such as stealing the blinds, to carry on some good plays on the flop and thereafter.
[Criticism 2]:
The following are all with the same $3/6 game that I was using
above. Most of the examples were generated with the following table
lineup, in order by seat. I didn't adjust any of the Player settings
that defaulted as listed below:
1. Solid Player- 63% aggressive all streets… 58% tight pre-flop, 55%
on all other streets
2. NoPlayer (i.e. empty seat)
3. Human Player- incredibly expert player, couldn't pin down his
playing style (!)
4. Weak Player- 45% aggressive all streets… 63% tight pre-flop, 58%
on all other streets
5. Tight Player- 63% aggressive all streets… 63% tight pre-flop, 58%
on all other streets
6. Unknown player, replaced every 75 minutes
7. Solid player
8. PlayerType1- set to Solid Player characteristics
9. Weak
10. Caller- 27% aggressive pre-flop, 30% after…40% tight preflop, 32%
after
First example- An Unknown player UTG raised, everyone folds to me
on the button. I re-raise to get the blinds out with my Ah 8d.
Advisor squawks, telling me to fold because remaining in the hand has
negative expectations. Strangely, while my win/loss are at 23/75%,
the UTG player with the #1 strength hand is only 30%/68%. Neither of
the blinds are ranked because neither has acted yet, I guess.
I re-raise anyway, driving out the blinds. Flop comes JQT
rainbow, giving me a two-direction straight draw. UTG checks, Advisor
says to Bet (Check is $10.4, Raise is $10.50) because " I have the
best hand (ed. Note- how do I know that?) and I don't want to give a
free card" .. which should be what I DO mainly want here, unless
there's some chance that the UTG will fold to my semi-bluff. I am
rated to win 50%, Lose 46%… while UTG is the reverse.
I check, seeing a nice, if dangerous 9s on the turn- meaning
that Kx and AK are possible straights, plus a flush draw in spades now
exists to beat my made straight. UTG bets. Advisor says raise with
my best hand, as a 76% winner. I raise, UTG re-raises.
Now, even though I'm still ranked at 76% win, and raising is
worth $3.60 more of the pot expectation than calling, the Advisor
states that "I should have raised back based on the previous hand
readings, but to be cautious, I'll just call in case I misread my
opponent's hand." I check the opponent's hand- he has Ad Td. So,
the win/loss percentages are wrong- I can't lose 16% of the time, I'm
a lock. I have the only straight. If the K comes, I split the pot.
So I cap it, the UTG instantly calls. The pot is $67.00.
The river is the Qs, putting a royal flush, quads and multiple
full houses on board. The Unknown player bets into me- maybe he's an
aggressive player, or thinks I'll fold to one bet after capping on the
turn?
At this point, once again the hand strength calculations and
advice contradict one another. My strength, while 1st, is a win/loss
of 58/29% (what is the other 13%- a floor ruling splitting the pot?),
while UTG is 29/58%. Advisor says "I'll raise because I have the best
hand…" where calling is priced at +$45.10 and Raise is $46.90 (a gain
of only $1.80 with a lock hand? I get the $73 pot if he folds and
extra $6 if he calls..)
Also, the possible hands at this point for my opponent,
according to the Advisor- 42% straight or better, 2% top two pair,
53% second pair lower than Queens and Jacks, and 1% Overcard (with 2%
a crack-smoking pure bluffer, I guess). My re-raise results in a
$91.00 pot….
[Explain 2]: Acespade's advise is right on each street in this example.
Before the flop: you should fold Ah 8d after the UTG player raised.
On the flop JQT rainbow: UTG checks, Advisor says to Bet is correct. Your
checking is not bad too.
The Turn card is 9s: UTG bets. Advisor says raise is correct because unless UTG
slowplayed the Flop with AK, you have the best hand. UTG reraised and you
should just call. Here you peeked UTG's card and know you have the best hand,
but the computer does not peek and does not know what cards UTG has and it
makes decisions on what possible hands UTG has.
The River card is Qs: UTG bets, maybe he has the best hand and maybe he is
bluffing. If you make more analysis, it is clear that UTG is not likely to have
quad or full house because if he has triple or two pairs on the flop he would
not checked the dangerous flop after you called his raise before the flop. And
he is not very likely to have Ace high straight bacause with your potential of
full house he would not bet the river. So he is likely bluffing here and
Acespade's advise of raising is correct.
Once again, please be reminded that the computer advisor does not peek and does
not know what hand the other player has. Many of Mr. Garcia's criticisms as in
the following examples are based on the wrong assumption that the opponents'
hand are known.
[Criticism 3]:
Here's a detailed example with various replays: The fourth hand
in the Normal Play series that I'm in, with 9 players at the table,
four players fold into my Ah 9h in late position. Folding is the
preferred play from the Advisor, at $0.00 cost, because calling is
ranked as -$2.00 and Raise at -$2.60. My win/loss is calculated at
23%/73%.
The hands I was facing at this point?
Weak player in cutoff: 3c 2 d
Tight player on Button: Kd 5h
Unknown player in SB: 8h Kc
Solid player in BB: 5d Jc
I raise. All hands fold. I collect $4.00 in blinds. Where's
my negative expectation? Everyone else's hands were crippled. Only
two hearts are accounted for as well…. ??
[Explain 3]: I play this hand in Acespade's Case-play mode and the computer
advise gave positive expectations on both calling and raising, and it advise to
raise with this hand. I hope Mr. Garcia did not make a mistake in this example.
Anyone who has Acespade's Texas Hold'em Pro 2002 can do a Case-play with this
hand and see what the advise is. The Case-play is a great tool to analyse a
paricular hand play. I often use it to exam who is right on the hand
discussions in RGP, 2 + 2 forum, Card Player and Poker Digest.
[Criticism 4]:
Hand #10- Everyone folds to me in the SB with Qd 5c. Advisor says
to call because I don't have the best hand. The only hand left is the
Weak player BB with 6s 3c, which evidently is a better hand heads up
than my Queen. Calling is +$0.10, Raise -$1.2, Win/Loss 34/65%.
Personally, I'm either raising or folding in this spot. Raise gets me
the $9.00 pot and a $3.00 profit.
I replay the hand and call this time. Flop comes Jc 10c 5d. Now I
"suddenly" have the strongest hand, with a reversed win/loss of
63%/35%. Checking is +$3.90, Bet is the current $6 pot. The list of
possible hands for the BB? 2%- 2 pair 10%- Pair of Jacks or better
21%- pair under JJ 32%- Overcard 4%- flush draw. Since it
doesn't say, I assume the other 31% is a 9-high, no pair, no flush or
straight draw hand (if straight draws are even considered). I bet,
profit $3 again.
I replay the hand and check the flop this time. Advisor disagrees,
say that I should bet because "..if I do not bet, no-one will do. I
have the best hand and I do not want to give out free card." (No,
there are no typos by me in that sentence- that is exactly what it
displays). I check anyway. 9d comes, giving me either a nut (from
an /images/glasses.gif or weak (K-high) straight draw. Checking is now worth more of
the pot, $4.30, while betting takes it all. I'm a 72% chance winner,
BB's possible hands are now: 5% for two pair plus, 2% for Jacks or
better, 14% for pair of tens or lower, 27% for Overcard, 7% for flush
draw and 45% for nothing.
We both check to see the river: 3d. Now that the flush is completed,
I have a 92% winning chance (? Based on what, with a possible flush
and straight out there?), where checking is +$5.50- how can I lose
$0.50 in equity with the best hand? Now suddenly the Advisor says
that I should bet because I have the best hand (what changed about
what I know? I'm still the first action in the hand!). Possible BB
hands are 6% two pair, 1% top pair, 24% other pair, 29% flush draw…
and 40% nothing.
I check, the BB bets. My Strength is still 1st, but my win/loss drops
to 85%/15%. Calling is worth $8.40, Raise is almost worth the current
$11 pot. Advisor says "I'll raise because I have the best hand and
raising gives me the highest expectation" (duhhh!). BB hand is 13%
likely to be two pair, 2% to be top or overpair, 45% to be a lower
pair and 19% to be an overcard bluff… with only a 21% chance of a pure
bluff. I raise and the BB calls with his pair of threes, giving me a
$27 pot and $12 profit.
I play it again and bet the river this time. BB calls and I profit $8
on a $17 pot.
[Explain 4]: The advise of calling with Qd 5c in SB against BB is correct, and your choice of raising to steal is correct too. Folding is not bad too because the expectation of calling is close to 0.
Flop cards Jc 10c 5d: You have one pair against checked BB, advise of betting is correct. Your checking is little bit too weak.
Turn card 9d: Mr. Garcia did not mention what the computer advise here, but both players checked.
River card 3d: Here is my analysis, if BB has flush draw on the Turn, he would have bet after I bet on the Flop then check on the Turn. And BB is not likely to have a pair high than 5's otherwise he will bet on the Turn too. BB is very likely bluffing after SB checked. So Acespade's advise of raisng is correct.
[Criticism 5]:
Here's an example from Watch play, where the computer is fully
in control of the play. 4 players just call, including the 2 blinds.
BB has 53 off. Flop comes A45 off. Unknown SB bets, BB calls.
Other two players fold. Turn card is A rainbow (no flush possible).
SB bets.
BB, who supposedly is a Solid player, calls a $6 bet when pot is
only $22. I calculate pot odds at 3.67 to 1, where the BB's draws are
now limited AT BEST to four 3's at 11.5-1, maybe trip 5's at 23-1.
Even the combined drawing odds only gives the BB about a 7.67-1 chance
AT BEST of catching a winning river card, while ignoring full houses
and possible higher straights (it IS the SB, where a 76 suited could
be possible, if doubtful). This is a CLEAR fold based just on current
pot odds. Implied odds aren't much better; either 4.66-1 (SB calls a
river bet with a losing hand) or 5.67-1 (SB bets and calls a raise)
when considering whether to put in this $6 call on the turn.
Regardless, both odds are still lower than catching one of 6 cards in
a perfect, non-counterfeited situation; therefore, once again, BB
should have folded.
Pot now $28. River card is a Jack. SB bets, BB calls (? Does he
think that the SB, which is a Solid player as it turns out, is a
maniac bluffer?) with his weak two pair, Aces and fives. SB's trip
Aces wins
[Explain 5]: No raise before the flop. BB has 53 offsuit.
Flop cards A45 rainbow: SB bets, BB'call is correct.
Turn card A rainbow: SB bet, BB'call is correct. Here Mr. Garcia uses pot odds to criticise BB's calling. But he does not know the limitation of using pot odds to make a decision in poker. The limitation is that pot odds ingnore what possible hands the other players have. That is why Acespade software use expectation value which considers all factors. SB is very likely having a hand no better than a pair of 4 and bluffing here. Many kinds of players except calling stations do this kind of move.
River card Jack: SB bets, BB'call is a tough decision. It is a very close decision between calling and folding because the pot is big now and SB may still bluffing.
[Criticism 6]:
Here's a series that I ran into during Compete Play: After playing 6 hands, all fold to Unknown Player in seat 6, who raises.
Everyone else folds to me in BB with 8d6d in seat 3. Advice says to
call. Expectation was calculated at +$0.40 for calling, -$0.90 for
raising and $0.00 for folding. The advice, quoted exactly, said "I'll
call because I do not have the best hand and calling gives me the
highest expectation." However, my hand had a calculated Win value
of 29% and Loss of 70%…. which makes sense (if correct percentages),
since the raiser had QdQh !!! I'm pretty sure I'm more than a 3.3-1
dog here and the pot was only $9.90 at the time.
I call because the software said so- that's the ONLY way I would
have called a single player who raised in early position, ESPECIALLY
when I don't know what type of player I'm against. Flop comes 7dAhKs.
Advice is to check , with a Win/Loss of 13%/83% and a -$2.50 Bet
expectation (is that all the Advisor thinks I'll lose with this bet in
a 3-6 game?). QQ bets, advice is to fold. Loss/Win is now 12%/86%,
as if the system is 2% more convinced than before that this hand is a
loser. I fold.
[Explain 6]: Before the flop: BB with 8d6d calling a raise after all others fold is correct. Here again Mr. Garcia peeks and knows the other player has QQ and suggests folding. But the computer advisor, as in a real life, does not peek
and does not know the other player has QQ in his hole cards.
Flop cards 7dAhKs: The Pre-flop raiser bets, BB's folding is correct.
[Conclusion]: Acespade software's advise in not only correct, it is quite smart in many cases.
Recently Mr. Garcia wrote a software review on Acespade vs. Wilson Texas Hold'em. I hope he is not connected to Wilson in any way. But his criticism of Acespade is plain wrong. The followings are the explainations of why his
criticism is wrong.
[Criticism 1]:
One problem with the Advice given by the Hint button is that the
action values can contradict what the Advisor suggests. Again, using
the Qc 9c example from Normal/Case play above, I would see a positive
or neutral Call dollar value, but a clearly negative, by whole
dollars, Raise $$ value…. and yet the Advisor would tell me to raise
anyway, even though my hand only have a 30% chance or so of winning.
This makes very little sense and would be very confusing to
new players. They may not get the nuance of taking an action that may
have the worst of it in order to increase their chances of winning…
much less recommending to players that they should take negative
expectation actions as a rule…
[Explain 1]: Experienced player will raise with this hand sometime for many reasons such as stealing the blinds, to carry on some good plays on the flop and thereafter.
[Criticism 2]:
The following are all with the same $3/6 game that I was using
above. Most of the examples were generated with the following table
lineup, in order by seat. I didn't adjust any of the Player settings
that defaulted as listed below:
1. Solid Player- 63% aggressive all streets… 58% tight pre-flop, 55%
on all other streets
2. NoPlayer (i.e. empty seat)
3. Human Player- incredibly expert player, couldn't pin down his
playing style (!)
4. Weak Player- 45% aggressive all streets… 63% tight pre-flop, 58%
on all other streets
5. Tight Player- 63% aggressive all streets… 63% tight pre-flop, 58%
on all other streets
6. Unknown player, replaced every 75 minutes
7. Solid player
8. PlayerType1- set to Solid Player characteristics
9. Weak
10. Caller- 27% aggressive pre-flop, 30% after…40% tight preflop, 32%
after
First example- An Unknown player UTG raised, everyone folds to me
on the button. I re-raise to get the blinds out with my Ah 8d.
Advisor squawks, telling me to fold because remaining in the hand has
negative expectations. Strangely, while my win/loss are at 23/75%,
the UTG player with the #1 strength hand is only 30%/68%. Neither of
the blinds are ranked because neither has acted yet, I guess.
I re-raise anyway, driving out the blinds. Flop comes JQT
rainbow, giving me a two-direction straight draw. UTG checks, Advisor
says to Bet (Check is $10.4, Raise is $10.50) because " I have the
best hand (ed. Note- how do I know that?) and I don't want to give a
free card" .. which should be what I DO mainly want here, unless
there's some chance that the UTG will fold to my semi-bluff. I am
rated to win 50%, Lose 46%… while UTG is the reverse.
I check, seeing a nice, if dangerous 9s on the turn- meaning
that Kx and AK are possible straights, plus a flush draw in spades now
exists to beat my made straight. UTG bets. Advisor says raise with
my best hand, as a 76% winner. I raise, UTG re-raises.
Now, even though I'm still ranked at 76% win, and raising is
worth $3.60 more of the pot expectation than calling, the Advisor
states that "I should have raised back based on the previous hand
readings, but to be cautious, I'll just call in case I misread my
opponent's hand." I check the opponent's hand- he has Ad Td. So,
the win/loss percentages are wrong- I can't lose 16% of the time, I'm
a lock. I have the only straight. If the K comes, I split the pot.
So I cap it, the UTG instantly calls. The pot is $67.00.
The river is the Qs, putting a royal flush, quads and multiple
full houses on board. The Unknown player bets into me- maybe he's an
aggressive player, or thinks I'll fold to one bet after capping on the
turn?
At this point, once again the hand strength calculations and
advice contradict one another. My strength, while 1st, is a win/loss
of 58/29% (what is the other 13%- a floor ruling splitting the pot?),
while UTG is 29/58%. Advisor says "I'll raise because I have the best
hand…" where calling is priced at +$45.10 and Raise is $46.90 (a gain
of only $1.80 with a lock hand? I get the $73 pot if he folds and
extra $6 if he calls..)
Also, the possible hands at this point for my opponent,
according to the Advisor- 42% straight or better, 2% top two pair,
53% second pair lower than Queens and Jacks, and 1% Overcard (with 2%
a crack-smoking pure bluffer, I guess). My re-raise results in a
$91.00 pot….
[Explain 2]: Acespade's advise is right on each street in this example.
Before the flop: you should fold Ah 8d after the UTG player raised.
On the flop JQT rainbow: UTG checks, Advisor says to Bet is correct. Your
checking is not bad too.
The Turn card is 9s: UTG bets. Advisor says raise is correct because unless UTG
slowplayed the Flop with AK, you have the best hand. UTG reraised and you
should just call. Here you peeked UTG's card and know you have the best hand,
but the computer does not peek and does not know what cards UTG has and it
makes decisions on what possible hands UTG has.
The River card is Qs: UTG bets, maybe he has the best hand and maybe he is
bluffing. If you make more analysis, it is clear that UTG is not likely to have
quad or full house because if he has triple or two pairs on the flop he would
not checked the dangerous flop after you called his raise before the flop. And
he is not very likely to have Ace high straight bacause with your potential of
full house he would not bet the river. So he is likely bluffing here and
Acespade's advise of raising is correct.
Once again, please be reminded that the computer advisor does not peek and does
not know what hand the other player has. Many of Mr. Garcia's criticisms as in
the following examples are based on the wrong assumption that the opponents'
hand are known.
[Criticism 3]:
Here's a detailed example with various replays: The fourth hand
in the Normal Play series that I'm in, with 9 players at the table,
four players fold into my Ah 9h in late position. Folding is the
preferred play from the Advisor, at $0.00 cost, because calling is
ranked as -$2.00 and Raise at -$2.60. My win/loss is calculated at
23%/73%.
The hands I was facing at this point?
Weak player in cutoff: 3c 2 d
Tight player on Button: Kd 5h
Unknown player in SB: 8h Kc
Solid player in BB: 5d Jc
I raise. All hands fold. I collect $4.00 in blinds. Where's
my negative expectation? Everyone else's hands were crippled. Only
two hearts are accounted for as well…. ??
[Explain 3]: I play this hand in Acespade's Case-play mode and the computer
advise gave positive expectations on both calling and raising, and it advise to
raise with this hand. I hope Mr. Garcia did not make a mistake in this example.
Anyone who has Acespade's Texas Hold'em Pro 2002 can do a Case-play with this
hand and see what the advise is. The Case-play is a great tool to analyse a
paricular hand play. I often use it to exam who is right on the hand
discussions in RGP, 2 + 2 forum, Card Player and Poker Digest.
[Criticism 4]:
Hand #10- Everyone folds to me in the SB with Qd 5c. Advisor says
to call because I don't have the best hand. The only hand left is the
Weak player BB with 6s 3c, which evidently is a better hand heads up
than my Queen. Calling is +$0.10, Raise -$1.2, Win/Loss 34/65%.
Personally, I'm either raising or folding in this spot. Raise gets me
the $9.00 pot and a $3.00 profit.
I replay the hand and call this time. Flop comes Jc 10c 5d. Now I
"suddenly" have the strongest hand, with a reversed win/loss of
63%/35%. Checking is +$3.90, Bet is the current $6 pot. The list of
possible hands for the BB? 2%- 2 pair 10%- Pair of Jacks or better
21%- pair under JJ 32%- Overcard 4%- flush draw. Since it
doesn't say, I assume the other 31% is a 9-high, no pair, no flush or
straight draw hand (if straight draws are even considered). I bet,
profit $3 again.
I replay the hand and check the flop this time. Advisor disagrees,
say that I should bet because "..if I do not bet, no-one will do. I
have the best hand and I do not want to give out free card." (No,
there are no typos by me in that sentence- that is exactly what it
displays). I check anyway. 9d comes, giving me either a nut (from
an /images/glasses.gif or weak (K-high) straight draw. Checking is now worth more of
the pot, $4.30, while betting takes it all. I'm a 72% chance winner,
BB's possible hands are now: 5% for two pair plus, 2% for Jacks or
better, 14% for pair of tens or lower, 27% for Overcard, 7% for flush
draw and 45% for nothing.
We both check to see the river: 3d. Now that the flush is completed,
I have a 92% winning chance (? Based on what, with a possible flush
and straight out there?), where checking is +$5.50- how can I lose
$0.50 in equity with the best hand? Now suddenly the Advisor says
that I should bet because I have the best hand (what changed about
what I know? I'm still the first action in the hand!). Possible BB
hands are 6% two pair, 1% top pair, 24% other pair, 29% flush draw…
and 40% nothing.
I check, the BB bets. My Strength is still 1st, but my win/loss drops
to 85%/15%. Calling is worth $8.40, Raise is almost worth the current
$11 pot. Advisor says "I'll raise because I have the best hand and
raising gives me the highest expectation" (duhhh!). BB hand is 13%
likely to be two pair, 2% to be top or overpair, 45% to be a lower
pair and 19% to be an overcard bluff… with only a 21% chance of a pure
bluff. I raise and the BB calls with his pair of threes, giving me a
$27 pot and $12 profit.
I play it again and bet the river this time. BB calls and I profit $8
on a $17 pot.
[Explain 4]: The advise of calling with Qd 5c in SB against BB is correct, and your choice of raising to steal is correct too. Folding is not bad too because the expectation of calling is close to 0.
Flop cards Jc 10c 5d: You have one pair against checked BB, advise of betting is correct. Your checking is little bit too weak.
Turn card 9d: Mr. Garcia did not mention what the computer advise here, but both players checked.
River card 3d: Here is my analysis, if BB has flush draw on the Turn, he would have bet after I bet on the Flop then check on the Turn. And BB is not likely to have a pair high than 5's otherwise he will bet on the Turn too. BB is very likely bluffing after SB checked. So Acespade's advise of raisng is correct.
[Criticism 5]:
Here's an example from Watch play, where the computer is fully
in control of the play. 4 players just call, including the 2 blinds.
BB has 53 off. Flop comes A45 off. Unknown SB bets, BB calls.
Other two players fold. Turn card is A rainbow (no flush possible).
SB bets.
BB, who supposedly is a Solid player, calls a $6 bet when pot is
only $22. I calculate pot odds at 3.67 to 1, where the BB's draws are
now limited AT BEST to four 3's at 11.5-1, maybe trip 5's at 23-1.
Even the combined drawing odds only gives the BB about a 7.67-1 chance
AT BEST of catching a winning river card, while ignoring full houses
and possible higher straights (it IS the SB, where a 76 suited could
be possible, if doubtful). This is a CLEAR fold based just on current
pot odds. Implied odds aren't much better; either 4.66-1 (SB calls a
river bet with a losing hand) or 5.67-1 (SB bets and calls a raise)
when considering whether to put in this $6 call on the turn.
Regardless, both odds are still lower than catching one of 6 cards in
a perfect, non-counterfeited situation; therefore, once again, BB
should have folded.
Pot now $28. River card is a Jack. SB bets, BB calls (? Does he
think that the SB, which is a Solid player as it turns out, is a
maniac bluffer?) with his weak two pair, Aces and fives. SB's trip
Aces wins
[Explain 5]: No raise before the flop. BB has 53 offsuit.
Flop cards A45 rainbow: SB bets, BB'call is correct.
Turn card A rainbow: SB bet, BB'call is correct. Here Mr. Garcia uses pot odds to criticise BB's calling. But he does not know the limitation of using pot odds to make a decision in poker. The limitation is that pot odds ingnore what possible hands the other players have. That is why Acespade software use expectation value which considers all factors. SB is very likely having a hand no better than a pair of 4 and bluffing here. Many kinds of players except calling stations do this kind of move.
River card Jack: SB bets, BB'call is a tough decision. It is a very close decision between calling and folding because the pot is big now and SB may still bluffing.
[Criticism 6]:
Here's a series that I ran into during Compete Play: After playing 6 hands, all fold to Unknown Player in seat 6, who raises.
Everyone else folds to me in BB with 8d6d in seat 3. Advice says to
call. Expectation was calculated at +$0.40 for calling, -$0.90 for
raising and $0.00 for folding. The advice, quoted exactly, said "I'll
call because I do not have the best hand and calling gives me the
highest expectation." However, my hand had a calculated Win value
of 29% and Loss of 70%…. which makes sense (if correct percentages),
since the raiser had QdQh !!! I'm pretty sure I'm more than a 3.3-1
dog here and the pot was only $9.90 at the time.
I call because the software said so- that's the ONLY way I would
have called a single player who raised in early position, ESPECIALLY
when I don't know what type of player I'm against. Flop comes 7dAhKs.
Advice is to check , with a Win/Loss of 13%/83% and a -$2.50 Bet
expectation (is that all the Advisor thinks I'll lose with this bet in
a 3-6 game?). QQ bets, advice is to fold. Loss/Win is now 12%/86%,
as if the system is 2% more convinced than before that this hand is a
loser. I fold.
[Explain 6]: Before the flop: BB with 8d6d calling a raise after all others fold is correct. Here again Mr. Garcia peeks and knows the other player has QQ and suggests folding. But the computer advisor, as in a real life, does not peek
and does not know the other player has QQ in his hole cards.
Flop cards 7dAhKs: The Pre-flop raiser bets, BB's folding is correct.
[Conclusion]: Acespade software's advise in not only correct, it is quite smart in many cases.