PokerTracker

In this hand I raise the button pre. The SB goes all-in with his small stack. The BB flats the all-in. I jam and the BB folds. We're "all-in" and I'm 58% verses KT suited. In PT4 though it's giving me ZERO EQUITY for the hand.

Here's a screen shot showing my zero equity in the hand (bottom hand):

https://gyazo.com/2c5847a3f825fa5b2f3360fa9b9b8a7f

Here's what the replayer looks like in PT4:

https://gyazo.com/f6412d62fc7e42a6d1e6e58f9a30c3b5

It clearly shows the BB has folded. In my opinion this a glitch in how equity is calculated in these situations. I should be getting some equity in this hand.



Here is the hand history:

PokerStars Hand #158048459957: Tournament #1659034323, $28.20+$1.80 USD Hold'em No Limit - Level III (20/40) - 2016/09/01 23:39:07 PT [2016/09/02 2:39:07 ET]
Table '1659034323 1' 3-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 1: AAnythingKK (166 in chips)
Seat 2: gasto32 (670 in chips)
Seat 3: Andrew23122 (664 in chips)
AAnythingKK: posts small blind 20
gasto32: posts big blind 40
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Andrew23122 [As Qd]
Andrew23122: raises 40 to 80
AAnythingKK: raises 86 to 166 and is all-in
gasto32: calls 126
Andrew23122: raises 498 to 664 and is all-in
gasto32: folds
Uncalled bet (498) returned to Andrew23122
*** FLOP *** [2h 2c Jd]
*** TURN *** [2h 2c Jd] [Qh]
*** RIVER *** [2h 2c Jd Qh] [Ah]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
AAnythingKK: shows [Kc Tc] (a straight, Ten to Ace)
Andrew23122: shows [As Qd] (two pair, Aces and Queens)
AAnythingKK collected 498 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 498 | Rake 0
Board [2h 2c Jd Qh Ah]
Seat 1: AAnythingKK (small blind) showed [Kc Tc] and won (498) with a straight, Ten to Ace
Seat 2: gasto32 (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 3: Andrew23122 (button) showed [As Qd] and lost with two pair, Aces and Queens

We do not calculate adjusted equity in any situations where a player called an all-in raise and later folded. To do so would introduce a systemic bias against you in these statistics.

I don't understand. How am I getting straight up the result of the hand for equity. I was ahead pre heads up and 58%. I should technically be getting 58% of the pot. How is this not the case?

If I'm in the BB and elect to fold then I lose those chips 100%. Simple math. In this situation the small blind and I are now flipping for the entire pot which includes the BBs chips. I'll do the math for you:

I invested 166 chips into the pot. Total pot is 498. I have approx. 58% equity.

498*.58 = 288.84
equity = 288.84-166
all-in adjusted = +122.84

NOT MINUS 166

Sorry, I should be using the equity calculator.

https://gyazo.com/2bcc770b1cef9c68c2b75f2691844f4c

498*.5833 (depending on how many decimal places you guys use) = 290.4834

adjusted equity = 290.4834 - 166

= +124.4834

Your adjusted equity = -166.00

For what it's worth I have calculated 5 other random hands and they all add up correctly (a little off, but again that depends on how many decimal places used). The main thing here is that the Big Blinds cards were not even shown. It's straight up simplistic mathematics.

It's not the case because someone called the first all-in and we do not know his cards. Pretending hands that called the all-in and later folded do not count in the hand at all ends up introducing a bias. I agree it's less obvious in this case but a more obvious case is this: Imagine A goes all in and B and C both call. The flop comes. B bets and C folds. In this case if we calculate A vs B's equity preflop it's discounting the equity C had but gave up after seeing the flop. For more detail on these calculations see this guide.

I understand this is not intuitive but we have consulted the top mathematical poker minds and were advised that even in the case you have shown, calculating adjusted equity would result in a long term introduction of error.

kraada wrote:It's not the case because someone called the first all-in and we do not know his cards. Pretending hands that called the all-in and later folded do not count in the hand at all ends up introducing a bias. I agree it's less obvious in this case but a more obvious case is this: Imagine A goes all in and B and C both call. The flop comes. B bets and C folds. In this case if we calculate A vs B's equity preflop it's discounting the equity C had but gave up after seeing the flop. For more detail on these calculations see this guide.

I understand this is not intuitive but we have consulted the top mathematical poker minds and were advised that even in the case you have shown, calculating adjusted equity would result in a long term introduction of error.

I'd like to speak with these mathematical poker minds. I understand the Bias if it's Post WITH CARDS SHOWN but it's not Biased if it's all-in pre-flop. Even then unless I fold post I still have 100% or 0% equity in the hand. It just doesn't make sense. If we have 100% lost those chips how is it biased?

Lets say it's a live game. I'll use your example. I'm going post 3-ways. I later then elect to fold. Technically I lost those chips 100%. I am not 99% and have a possibility of winning, I lost those chips and can't ever get them back. Now let's say it's all-in on the turn and I'm 58% but end up losing the flip. You guys are saying I should get 0% as played? I don't understand this math at all.

I am going through an essay all about All-in EV by Jeff Hwang. It goes into detail about the problems with calculating All-in EV in multi-way pots.

https://www.pokertracker.com/blog/2011/10/the-problem-with-all-in-ev-all-in-equity

Problems Accounting for Multi-Way Pots
The problem that both Hold’em Manager and PokerTracker 3 have with accounting for multi-way pots has to do with unknown holecards. In order to make an accurate “EV” (results-oriented) calculation, the software must know the holecards of all players in the hand at the time Hero went all-in — even the holecards of the hands that were folded.

Why must the software know the whole cards when someone has folded and lost their chips in the pot 100%. So at the time the Hero went all-in it was 3-ways still. The Big Blind cold called. I raised all-in and the Big Blind folded. We are now showing our cards!!!! We are heads up for the pot. Big Blind 100% loses his chips. His card holding is irrelevant since he folded. He could have AA and fold pre. His equity with AA is 0% now because he folded.

PokerTracker 3, on the other hand, does the opposite and does not account for this hand at all for the purposes of calculating All-In EV, and instead only makes the “EV” adjustment when all holecards of callers are known. Unfortunately, this method is not quite optimal either, as accounting for multi-way pots in which all cards are known without accounting for multi-way pots in which hands are folded should result in a smaller bias in the other direction (i.e., the user should theoretically appear slightly lucky rather than very unlucky), but a bias nonetheless.

This is the kind of bias they are speaking of. Problem is that there is no bias in my hand since its just me and the small stack heads up.

Summary: 1) It’s not EV, and 2) Unless you only play heads up, the stat doesn’t work — no matter what software you use.

In my hand we are all-in heads up going to the flop. See my point??


I really feel strongly like this is a mistake in calculating EV in my specific situation. I understand the Bias that can occur in other situations both ways, but in the example in the article the 99 hand has the option to fold as does the KK. Luck happens and if it does get in on a 9 turn as played then technically Villain B should get 91.616% equity. Yes, he got lucky, but then how do we account for all lucky situations?? We don't and we shouldn't. We should just play our best and keep improving. Using bias reasons to make such calculations is a very inaccurate way of calculating EV.