Effective Stack size constraint in Note Caddy Note

1. ## Effective Stack size constraint in Note Caddy Note

Hi,

I want to write a note definition where a player opens and gets 3bet by a person who is in position and the original player calls. However, I want to restrict it to where the effective stack size between the two players involved is say 90-110 bb.

How do I best do that? I assume that the effective stack size referred to in the Preflop/General section is the effective stack size of every one dealt into the hand preflop, so that does not help me.

In the past I have used the 'Stacks In Big Blinds' field in the Preflop Action sequence, but this is not the Effective stack so it becomes hard to do.

In this particular note, I happen to be interested in what happens post flop, so would it be possible to use the Effective Stack Size fields in the Flop/General section? I assume this refers to the Effective Stack Size for the two players involved on the flop only right? Is it the stack size as the flop comes down or is it the preflop effective stack for the two players that see the flop?

Thanks

2. I moved this to the NC forum as you will get help there for more difficult settings.

Check out this stickied thread for help:

3. Effective stack in pre flop general refers to the effective stack for everyone still in the hand when the first action happens that applies to the action sequence you defined. Effective stack is not a concept that is applied to only some of the players in the hand. Setting it to 90-110 in actions seems to be what you should do. What exactly was the problem with this?

4. So, let's say I want to create a note that sees EP open and Button 3bet and I want to capture EPs actions in response to the 3bet, i.e. what range does he flat and what range does he 4bet. I want the note to refer to situations where EP and Button (just the two of them) are between 90 and 110 bbs effective.

I define the Stack In Big Blinds constraint on both the open raise of EP and the 3bet from the Button in the action sequence to be between 90 and 110 bbs. In a particular hand, EP has 100 big blinds and button has 150. I assume that this hand would not qualify as Button does not meet the stack constraint even though their effective stack is 100 which is within the range.

This is the problem as far as I can tell, but maybe I misunderstand how it work?

5. You have to do a trick for this to work

-action: raise, position EP don't specify had to be the recipient
-action: raise, position BTN
-fold fold blinds actions
-action: call, position EP DO specify had to be note recipient

now use the effective filter in pf general. Remember effective only counts for the first action the note recipient did so this should work fine as btn and ep were the only two left in the hand when he calls

6. Thanks for this. I tried this for a slightly different scenario, but it does not work. I wonder if you could shed some light on why?

I want a note for when EP opens (in 6 handed game), no one calls in position, one of the blinds 3bets, and EP folds. I want this to be restricted to when EP and the blind that 3bets have between 90 and 115 bb effective.

I tried to set-up EP as the raiser without specifying that EP had to be the recipient.
I have a NoCallers action for MP, CO, BN which is set as Player had to NOT be the recipient as per usual (I have specified the Fold action here).
I have 3 bet action from SB/BB as NOT the recipient and with an action of Raise.
Finally I have EP with Note Recipient specified and a Fold action.

In addition I set the effective stack size in preflop general to 90-115.

Questions:
1) The first hand I reviewed was one where CO flatted the EP open. Why would that be since I explicitly excluded them in the action sequence
2) What happens if SB 3bets and BB cold 4bets. Does it count as an opportunity for EP? Obviously, I don't want it to. How can I avoid that?
3) The first hand I reviewed was one where the SB who 3bet only had about 60 bb which obviously is another reason the hand should not be an opportunity.

Thanks

7. I have a NoCallers action for MP, CO, BN which is set as Player had to NOT be the recipient as per usual (I have specified the Fold action here).
No Callers should be exactly as you say it: no callers. To do so select 'call', 'action had not to happen' and 'player had to NOT be note recipient'.

1) The first hand I reviewed was one where CO flatted the EP open. Why would that be since I explicitly excluded them in the action sequence
No you didn't, see above.

2) What happens if SB 3bets and BB cold 4bets. Does it count as an opportunity for EP? Obviously, I don't want it to. How can I avoid that?
No. Is avoided as it is.

3) The first hand I reviewed was one where the SB who 3bet only had about 60 bb which obviously is another reason the hand should not be an opportunity.
No, you made a mistake to possibly include the CO which can have causes this.

8. Ok tried this, it seems to work, but I am curious how do we avoid including hands where an in position player ends up 3betting though (this is what I meant to do... I said no callers, but I meant no one defends IP)?

The reason I used the 'Fold' action for MP/CO/BN was to ensure neither a call nor 3bet had happened. Does doing what you suggested, i.e. Call - not to happen, end up doing the same thing?

9. but I am curious how do we avoid including hands where an in position player ends up 3betting though (this is what I meant to do... I said no callers, but I meant no one defends IP)?
We do so by specifying the position of the 3Better as SB or BB. That's all.

The reason I used the 'Fold' action for MP/CO/BN was to ensure neither a call nor 3bet had happened. Does doing what you suggested, i.e. Call - not to happen, end up doing the same thing?
Yes, because unspecified raises make the sequence void by default.

10. Ah, got it. Thank you, that is very helpful!

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•