I was all in against two opponents and I don't see my equity, what happened?
When you are all-in and called and a player who called you later folds his hand, PT3 will not calculate your equity at the time of the all-in because we do not know all of the cards you are against in the hand.How often does this happen?
Our tests have shown this setup occurs in tournaments about 2.5% of the time, and less often in cash games. Individual results may vary depending on your specific game type.Why can't you just show the equity against the cards that I was shown?
The results would be very inaccurate. We believe that showing no equity is more accurate than showing very wrong numbers. Here is an example that shows how far off the numbers can be:
Imagine you get all in on the turn with the A
against two opponents who still have money left to bet. The board reads: J
. The river is the 2
, one opponent bets and the other opponent folds. At showdown you lose to 8
who rivered his flush.
If we calculate our equity on the turn with our pair of aces against his hand alone, we find we would have 61.4% equity. But we weren't against his hand alone, and – most importantly - the specific river card we saw changed what hand was shown down. If the river was instead the 2
, the hand might have ended very differently. Instead let us say the other opponent bets and the player with 8
folds. Now we get shown the J
. Again we are unlucky – now we lost when we had 68.2% equity.
Neither of these numbers (61.4% and 68.2%) correspond to your real equity. With both hands known we can calculate your equity against 8
– you really
had 33.3% equity.
The actual river card that was dealt is influencing which of the two hands you are going to show down against. If the river is mostly innocuous, you're going to likely see the showdown with all of your opponents - and at least in the example, likely win. If the river improves an opponent considerably, he is likely to bet and his opponent will often fold. Then you only see the showdown against the hand that improved. But both players had the chance to improve
, so you cannot ignore the player who in fact did not improve because of how the board fell after you got all-in. Doing so defeats the purpose of using All-in EV.How far off would the other calculation method be in our example?
Let us assume that if either of the two players improves, he bets, and the other player folds. We can now figure out exactly how far off the numbers would be if we calculated equity based on the cards we saw. 35.72% of the time 8
improves and bets. In this case the other calculation method gives us 61.36% equity instead of 33.33% equity. 30.95% of the time J
improves and bets. In this case the other calculation method gives us 68.18% equity. The other 33.33% of the time our real 33.33% equity is used. Averaging these numbers together, the other calculation method would give you 54.13% equity in the long run. This is almost twice
as much equity as you are due (33.33%).
We can only calculate this though because we know all of the cards. In a real world example, we do not know all of the cards, and so have no way of knowing how far off the numbers will be.
When PokerTracker does not know all cards that were in the hand at the time of the all-in, it will not calculate EV for that hand, precisely to avoid the inaccuracies mentioned above. When PokerTracker calculates your equity, it is 100% accurate. We do not accept being accurate 97.5% of the time and inaccurate 2.5%.