Very well written post, kudos to you.
I think you did think in binary terms - "So the key to not tilting is to remove your expectations" - that's why I used the rather strong zero :)
Regarding the pain level, there is an image from the Vikings TV Series of one of the fiercest ones, Loki, enduring a water-drop torture. It broke him, although pain must have been 0.001/10.
I would say rather than try to avoid tilt which is I think we agree impossible, it's best to try to mitigate its negative effects by taking a break for example, or to engineer situations where tilt is unlikely to occur in the first place, i.e. playing properly rolled.
Sept. 30, 2019 | 11:53 p.m.
I don't think it's realistic for the human psyche to have zero expectations especially when effort has been invested.
Moreover, there is running bad and running bad. I am pretty interested in the reaction of a non-tilting guy after 35BI downswing.
Sept. 28, 2019 | 1:13 a.m.
In my experience, loss aversion is much more a part of bankroll management. I doubt that somebody would be fearful if they had 200BI for the level they are playing at.
IMO poker is a hard game because you never truly know if you are actually playing well or not. Sure, we have models and GTO solvers and what not but in the end of the day, we are not 100% sure we did the correct thing.
Sept. 12, 2019 | 1:12 p.m.
Thanks for editing your post. I appreciate your new insight.
July 20, 2019 | 3:40 a.m.
Thanks I guess, but the question wasn't regarding so much the 4bet and the validity of the ranges. More interesting to me was range distribution and how it affects betting frequencies.
July 19, 2019 | 6:36 p.m.
I rerun the sim with 66% OOP flop bet (clearly not a block bet) and now it bets even more often - 87%.
Some other analogies maybe?
Another point is that if OOP is forced to check, IP bets only 5% for the block 1/4 size which puzzled me too.
July 19, 2019 | 2 p.m.
Credit should go to Kevin Wang who made the conversion.
I glanced at the scientific paper because of the mismatch between results and ... results -> they have found a method AIVAT that can give you your "true winrate" based on a smaller sample but with a certain margin of error. So the true winrate is something like 4.8bb/100 when they have used this special methodology but within a margin of error of 1.3bb or something (cant remember exact numbers).
July 19, 2019 | 1:56 p.m.
I stumbled upon something today while playing: I 4bet OOP (COvsBTN) and the flop comes JJTr.
I did cbet almost out of habit 1/4 pot, however, this seems like a flop that certainly favor the IP 4bet cold-caller.
With the following PIO tree parameters: equity runs almost 50-50% but with very clear nut advantage for IP, both proportionally and as given hands.
However, PIO is still wanting to bet 75%! for the 1/4 sizing OOP.
Does anybody have an explanation?
July 19, 2019 | 12:38 a.m.
July 18, 2019 | 5:07 p.m.
On a runout of 3478 after bet-call, OOP has 36% equity and still PIO recommends betting almost half the time for a all-in jam.
When OOP is checking, IP has 70% Equity and PIO would only bet 15% of the time.
Does somebody have an explanation?
July 17, 2019 | 12:31 a.m.
If we want to have a shoving range ott what are we bluffing with if not with this? Blockers to KJs and QJs and slowplayed QQ and KK (even if unlikely), overs to Jx and pocket pairs + OESD. Seems like a total no-brainer.