The DooDooPoker Experience

Yeah, 33% weak BvB for b70 avg (wide ranges, card removal/sd bias less of a concern) is quite relevant imho. When you find counterintuitive things like this one, do you usually go over a batch of HHs to see what is being bluffed in comparison to the solver?

Interesting find. It makes sense because people like to bluff 3-flush boards with the nut flush blocker and when the flop is 2-tone they will bet hands often with the nut BDFD while on rainbow it's just an A high and more likely to check and not get to the BBB node as often

Yes good point, that is very likely what is happening. I also noticed this from fish as well when OOP in xc-xc-donk line. The 2tone boards are bluffed 6% more when flush complete river compared to rainbow boards. I am assuming because fish XR FD's at a much higher frequency than BDFD, so they have a higher concentration of flushes when the BDFD hits.

Good luck brother, was a matter of time before you made a blog.

It seems like you are on the right path, up your volume and you'll probably skyrocket the stakes on ignition.

Quick 50k hand update.

Going to deep dive a spot soon once I get the data.

Is your SD% unusually high? Mine is 29.3% with 56% win and I feel like I get to SD a lot. Maybe a function of how I play flops and turns, or not bluffcatching as much.

Yes, WTSD is very high and River Call Efficiency very low.

RCE I'm not sure is reliable in DH. PT4 gives me a different value than DH on the same exact sample. Or not sure PT4 is reliable. whichever. I bet if he puts this into PT4 his RCE is around 1.5 (only guessing cause mine is about this much different)

It's correct. You can see this by filtering times you faced a PSB OTR and won the hand. The RCE should be 2

To go from 1 to 1.5 is to go from one extreme to another.
1 is very low, 1.5 is very high.

Only looking at RCE is not ideal, though.
To get a more accurate picture of our "true" river calling efficiency we want to calculate: RCE * River Call%

For example:

Player 1 has a very high RCE of 1.5, but a very low River Call% of 25%: 1.5 * 25% = 37.5% potEV from calling

Player 2 has a very low RCE of 1, but a high River Call% of 42%: 1 * 42% = 42% potEV from calling

Player 3 has medium RCE of 1.25, and medium River Call% of 37%: 1.25 * 37% = 46.3% potEV from calling

Yeah this is why I said I wasn’t sure, just something I noticed. I’ll see if I can find out why pt4 was giving me a different value

TY for the breakdown. This is definitely a leak of mine, I would actually like to hire a coach to do a very in depth analysis of my game and give me exact numbers on my leaks like you are doing. Definitely on the to do list.

I know Patrick Howard does this but I can't justify 4k for a DB review lol.

Yeah I think mine is too high but it might look slightly worse than it should because I do put a lot of people in nodes that I know are overbluffed.

Holy cow, mine is terrible. 0.9 RCE and River Call of 26%

I think it speaks volumes for how much softer Iggy is that I'm able to be a "winning" player, or maybe (holds breath) I'm just good at the other stuff.

Let me know if you find any good methods for fixing this

I wouldn't discount your abilities, you've proven you can win. You are also supposed to call more on Iggy because they overbluff relative to other sites.

Also variance is crazy, whenever I post MDA everyone screams "sample size!" but then people take a 100-200k sample of hands as even close to someone's true winrate. If someone show's a 5bb winrate of 100k hands, most people will say that's pretty good. But that person could be a losing player or an 11bb crusher.

Thought process is the most important thing to me. And you can very easily tell someone's thought process by how they post in a forum.

I actually wanted to make this point and I will once I get the data but people are WAY too confident in poker in general. Especially coaches. I've seen multiple occasions of respected coaches just being dead wrong and I had to be a sleuth to figure it out because it's either an uncommon spot or the advice they give **sounds** reasonable but isn't.

I love Saulo in general but I've caught him giving me bad advice before and I had to use my own data to realize what he was saying wasn't correct. Poker is too complicated to be right all the time, or even the vast majority of the time.

I actually do this sometimes as a social experiment just to see how people will react in the micro stakes forum. I will either use my own HH or make one up that is intentionally a 0 EV spot in a solver and then get the MDA data on it so I know the correct answer. Then ask people what they do and without fail you have people being super confident in their play (and these are the best posters in the forum btw) and they are just not correct.

But yeah Iggy is definitely softer than ACR but there's also fenced in sites that are way softer than Iggy.

This stat has suddenly gotten me very confused. I'm very stationy (34% WTSD, 49% call R&WSD) and aggressive (50% WWSF, 52% AFq) with a break even red line, yet my R call efficiency is 1.6. I've always noticed my WSD was quite high (54%), but never really thought about R call efficiency. According to your formula, I get 1.6*36% = 57.6% potEV from calling. Am I actually folding waaay too much, even with this WTSD, or am I misinterpreting (perhaps my range is too protected)? (Fwiw, 7bb/100 winner at 100/200NL over last 500k hands on Stars, so shouldn't be too bad of a player).

In for the DooDoo experience btw, always enjoy your hands. Don't mean to derail. GL!

You can be going postflop with too strong of a range also.

Anyone using hem2/3 should keep in mind the RCE stat is not calculated correctly in that software.

Btw, I think I made a mistake in the formula above.

I think the correct formula is: (RCE - 1) * River Call%

Example:

1.25 RCE and 37% River Call = (1.25 - 1) * 37% = 9.25% "total river call efficiency"

RCE <1 means you are losing money on your calls.

Example: (0.9 - 1) * 26% = -2.6% "total river call efficiency"

(PotEV% was probably not the right word for it either)

How so?

I use HEM3, so it would be good to know how much it differs...

Just google hem and river call efficiency. It's been calculated incorrectly in that software since inception and they did not fix it in hem3. I did not know this for years either fwiw.

Didn't know the hem guys screwed up with the RCE stat. Just run some filters for different bet sizings you face by the river, and watch how the W$SD goes. E.g. vs a balanced pool facing 1 PSB and you called, it should be a bit higher than 33% but not too much or you're just a nit. 33% or lower, and you're making bad calls.

Actually I think it can be higher than the pot odds if the pool is full of massive nits and they always have the absolute nuts for that sizing, but never lower than 33% because you always need at least that equity to call. For 1 PSB. Then adjust accordingly for the other sizings you face.

What's a normal call river bet % supposed to be?

GTO is somewhere around 35% or so.

Really? I call more than most and mine is this:

Just reading through all this RCE and river calling chat and realizing I am a total noob

Love the blog and I'm following along to learn 😀

What's your Call river bet % over your entire hand sample? I think 35% at GTO is not right.