Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Tournament Poker > One-table Tournaments
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-03-2005, 01:29 PM
bigt439 bigt439 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 134
Default Re: SNGPT says to push this

I'm unsure of what the right answer is (although I've given my opinion), but if this is a fold as many of you are advocating, where does the discrepancy between your desired action and the sngpt results come from?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-03-2005, 01:30 PM
schwza schwza is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 113
Default Re: SNGPT says to push this

[ QUOTE ]
I'm unsure of what the right answer is (although I've given my opinion), but if this is a fold as many of you are advocating, where does the discrepancy between your desired action and the sngpt results come from?

[/ QUOTE ]

it might be because sngpt is not the all-knowing oracle.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-03-2005, 01:32 PM
DMACM DMACM is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 362
Default Re: SNGPT says to push this

Hes not saying that it is. I have the same question he does.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-03-2005, 01:35 PM
bigt439 bigt439 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 134
Default Re: SNGPT says to push this

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm unsure of what the right answer is (although I've given my opinion), but if this is a fold as many of you are advocating, where does the discrepancy between your desired action and the sngpt results come from?

[/ QUOTE ]

it might be because sngpt is not the all-knowing oracle.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize there would still be a reason it "is not the all-knowing orcale" and improperly computed this situation.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-03-2005, 01:43 PM
Apathy Apathy is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 11
Default Re: SNGPT says to push this

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm unsure of what the right answer is (although I've given my opinion), but if this is a fold as many of you are advocating, where does the discrepancy between your desired action and the sngpt results come from?

[/ QUOTE ]

it might be because sngpt is not the all-knowing oracle.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize there would still be a reason it "is not the all-knowing orcale" and improperly computed this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Give me a call today and I'll explain it to you. Basically the problem lies in the trouble ICM has when stacks are very short compared to the blinds.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-03-2005, 01:51 PM
schwza schwza is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 113
Default Re: SNGPT says to push this

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm unsure of what the right answer is (although I've given my opinion), but if this is a fold as many of you are advocating, where does the discrepancy between your desired action and the sngpt results come from?

[/ QUOTE ]

it might be because sngpt is not the all-knowing oracle.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize there would still be a reason it "is not the all-knowing orcale" and improperly computed this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Give me a call today and I'll explain it to you. Basically the problem lies in the trouble ICM has when stacks are very short compared to the blinds.

[/ QUOTE ]

wanna fill the rest of us in too?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-03-2005, 02:00 PM
Apathy Apathy is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 11
Default Re: SNGPT says to push this

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm unsure of what the right answer is (although I've given my opinion), but if this is a fold as many of you are advocating, where does the discrepancy between your desired action and the sngpt results come from?

[/ QUOTE ]

it might be because sngpt is not the all-knowing oracle.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize there would still be a reason it "is not the all-knowing orcale" and improperly computed this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Give me a call today and I'll explain it to you. Basically the problem lies in the trouble ICM has when stacks are very short compared to the blinds.

[/ QUOTE ]

wanna fill the rest of us in too?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well it's more that I just didn't want to type it out rather then keeping a secret or something.

Does SNGPT consider the order of blind movement around the table and factor that into their stack equity? I didn't think it did but I could be wrong, that alone would easily be enough to make my point.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-03-2005, 02:05 PM
DMACM DMACM is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 362
Default Re: SNGPT says to push this

My suspicion wass that in this case it has to do with the size of the blind in relation to the stacks rather than its order around the table. I.e SNGPT gives the same answer whether 300 chips is 1 bb or 5 bbs. Is this correct?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-03-2005, 02:12 PM
raptor517 raptor517 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 7
Default Re: SNGPT says to push this

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm unsure of what the right answer is (although I've given my opinion), but if this is a fold as many of you are advocating, where does the discrepancy between your desired action and the sngpt results come from?

[/ QUOTE ]

it might be because sngpt is not the all-knowing oracle.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize there would still be a reason it "is not the all-knowing orcale" and improperly computed this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Give me a call today and I'll explain it to you. Basically the problem lies in the trouble ICM has when stacks are very short compared to the blinds.

[/ QUOTE ]

wanna fill the rest of us in too?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well it's more that I just didn't want to type it out rather then keeping a secret or something.

Does SNGPT consider the order of blind movement around the table and factor that into their stack equity? I didn't think it did but I could be wrong, that alone would easily be enough to make my point.

[/ QUOTE ]

im pretty certain it doesnt.. it takes the current situation and has no concept of future blind movement, etc. and yes, that alone should make yer point. holla
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-03-2005, 02:33 PM
pooh74 pooh74 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 316
Default Re: SNGPT says to push this

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm unsure of what the right answer is (although I've given my opinion), but if this is a fold as many of you are advocating, where does the discrepancy between your desired action and the sngpt results come from?

[/ QUOTE ]

it might be because sngpt is not the all-knowing oracle.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize there would still be a reason it "is not the all-knowing orcale" and improperly computed this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Give me a call today and I'll explain it to you. Basically the problem lies in the trouble ICM has when stacks are very short compared to the blinds.

[/ QUOTE ]

wanna fill the rest of us in too?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well it's more that I just didn't want to type it out rather then keeping a secret or something.

Does SNGPT consider the order of blind movement around the table and factor that into their stack equity? I didn't think it did but I could be wrong, that alone would easily be enough to make my point.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah...good point. It doesnt. When blinds are this high, I like to think of equity going around the table like a "wave". You are at the crest when you are UTG...meaning your cash equity is a little higher. ICM calcs dont see this distortion.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.