[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
actually I just corrected the numbers. I was reading hte wrong position. Now they reflect what the EV of UTG position is.
Its a great resource and as it is based on a huge database of hands. The chart is
HERE if u dont want to bother with the calculator. Also intresting is the fact that in a large run of hands KTo is +.06 EV. Very intresting. Its a hand that doesnt fair well against re-raises and out of position-ness.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think this chart is virtually useless. Just based on what they say the EV for 44 is...
UTG, MP, CO, Button
0.16 -0.09 0.27 0.03
The fact that the variance is that high, and that the EV doesn't increase with position, shows that the chart is significantly flawed. This is average for the general population, and not how you "should" be playing.
[/ QUOTE ]
I dont know homie, Ed Miller has used it in a few examples and has stated its a pretty great resource and something he encouraged others using. fact is, its recording every single hand played, whether by good players or bad and getting the average EV, as if u had a massive PT database. What is now, could very well be different in 100-200k+ hands.
[/ QUOTE ]
I just don't know. 44 was the first hand I even saw on the list, and there was a huge discrepency in what "should" be the case. I feel like if I were to look more closely, I would find a ton more...
Heres one more I found rather quickly while looking at the chart:
A6s
SB, BB, UTG, MP, CO, Button
0.16, 0.09, -0.01, -0.10, 0.04, -0.03
Just doesn't make any sense. Hand is worse in MP than UTG, and it is a losing hand from the button? Over an extremely large sample, these things should average out for "correct" play, but obviously, the fact that there are so many idiots that are included in this database, the numbers are skewed so that you don't actually know what they mean.