EV in not all in situations

[Patvs]

Many (possibly most of) advanced HM2 customers consider EV-Hero-allin-street is more accurate for Hero in multiway pots in comparison with existing EV-method. And they show examples of hands, where a shortstack-hero goes allin preflop and its called by two bigstacks, which then play postflop...

So please explain - why not to add (in parallel with existing EV) - one more also (EV-Hero-allin-street)?
Then any customer will have a choice: which one to use in reports and graphs.

You're absolutely right the current method is flawed:

When the short stack wins at least a piece of the main pot, the main and side pots are reported separately.
When short stack loses, the main and side pots are combined into a single pot and ALL three players are considered as going AI on the same street - and therein lies the problem.

Whenever players are AI on different streets, always calculate main pot and side pot(s) separately - don't combine them.

We have a bugticket on this issue is HM-6112. I've added your email address to the bug ticket, so you'll be automatically notified when it is fixed

[albertovn]

Hi,

In long term both converge to the same value: the actual winnings (in long term there is no luck). So thinking only in long term none EV would be necessary. Nevertheless, in short terms I really think the EV by street would be much more accurate (despite not being perfect).

I too think that giving the user the possibility to use any of the EVs (the current one or by street) would be the best (he would know the meanning and limitations of each one, so let him decide which one to show).

I'm sorry for my grammar, I'm not english. Because of that I'm not sure about the current state of this. Will it be implemented? Is it under consideration?

Thank you very much and best regards

[Patvs]

Read post #4.
It is more accurate if you look at 1 hand which goes to showdown.

But Street by street EV can't be implemented because it can only show you when you were unlucky.
It can't compensate for this (because the compensation-hands don't go to showdown).
"It's precisely because EV by street does nothing to your adjusted-graph on hands where the opponent just folded that it is wrong".

[albertovn]

OK, I know, but there are several cases when the opponent wouldn't had folded. For example, in a real hand I had KK from pre-flop against A2o. The board where rainbow, low cards, non paired. In the river I had 4bb left on a pot of almost 100bb (SPR on the river less than 0.05!!). If the river would have been X, the opponent would have called the 4bb left with A high in a rainbow, non paired board for sure, but the river where the A and I lost with EV=-50.

I'm just thinking, could it be possible to compensate the hands folded with the folding equity? If the opponent folds the river the 60%, instead of an EV=winnings could be EV=winnings*0.6 (or something similar...). It's a tricky situation, I see the problem... Thank you very much nevertheless.

[udbrky]

Fold equity can only ever be estimated, it is not an exact science.

[Patvs]

OK, I know, but there are several cases when the opponent wouldn't had folded.

Read post #4 from this thread, the section on 'But what if your opponent never folds? '.
Also read post #7 and #8.

[Patvs]

Showdown EV is still WAY more superior to all-in EV. All-in EV is by no means "most fair" as showdown EV takes into account a FAR LARGER sample and breaks it down to street-by-street EV.

It will still not be implemented as it only shows accurate EV for 1 hand.

It makes no sense to show a graph with only showdown hands with 'street by street EV'.

I'll give an extreme example:
-1a Good player raises with AK preflop.
Bad player calls with a crappy suited cards hand.
Flop comes Axx. (bad player flops a flush draw)
Good player bets POT--> bad player calls.
Turn is a blank.
Good player bets POT--> bad player calls.
River: the bad player hits his flush.
Good player bets---> bad player calls and wins the hand.

Street by street EV will show you the most accurate EV for this hand: true
In fact... this hand isn't used at all with All-in EV, as no 'all-in' takes place.
Street by street EV will show you how unlucky you were... since you committed most chips with the best hand
(preflop, on the flop and turn)


1b Opposite hand occurs.
Bad player has AK. Good player calls with TJs.
Flop comes Axx.
Bad player bets POT--> Good player calls. (or folds)
Turn is a blank.
Bad player bets POT--> Good player FOLDS.
(a good player won't call two pot sized bets with his draw, and won't see a river)

1c Another opposite hand is:
Good player raises with AK preflop.
Bad player calls with a crappy suited cards hand.
Flop comes Axx. (bad player flops a flush draw)
Good player bets POT--> bad player calls.
Turn is a blank.
Good player bets POT--> bad player calls.
River: the bad player DOES NOT HIT HIS FLUSH (!)
Good player bets---> bad player folds.


If you filter for 'showdown hands' with street-by-street EV, you'll get a ton of these 1a hands, all showing you how unlucky you are.
But you're not being unlucky. Hand 1c (bad player not hitting his flush, you winning the hand) are more common.
That bad player also deserved street bv street EV preflop with his suited cards, and on the flop and turn when he had his flush draw.

So only showing type 1a hands in a graph is a useless graph.
(whereas showing all All-in EV hands is not.... sure some hands will 'screw' up the graph, but that will even out in the long run)