Sage System

[Sprayed]

Anyone know or use this?
http://www.cardplayer.com/magazine/article/15250

[Da GOAT]

i use SNGPT HU tutorial.

ill look at your link in abit.

[Sprayed]

i use SNGPT HU tutorial.

ill look at your link in abit.

It's similar. The link shows a way to make quick calculations at the table in order to know when to push or call.

[gingerwizard]

Well.

Its an interesting theory. My main concern is that Minimax may not be the best method for finding equilibrium and that their SAGE system may not accurately depict the equilibrium method. I wonder if there is a proof of it anywhere?

From a practical perspective: Is it the opinion of the good players on here that once one of the stacks is <10xBB then play push/fold poker??

[Da GOAT]

im in work now so cant really read and take in the article.

but HU maybe doesnt need to be so exact to the point we do a little math every hand. you need not push/fold every hand, mix it up too.

well you cant mix up calling shoves obviously but folding marginals against a poor opp isnt that much of a mistake.

[Reidak]

Upper hand is aggression, plain and simple. Often in SNG's your M's are so low SAGE is pointless. in MTT's it can help, but by then you sohuld know your opponent well enough to outplay him.

[gingerwizard]

Upper hand is aggression, plain and simple. Often in SNG's your M's are so low SAGE is pointless. in MTT's it can help, but by then you sohuld know your opponent well enough to outplay him.

Doesnt sage only work if your M is low???

[Sprayed]

Upper hand is aggression, plain and simple. Often in SNG's your M's are so low SAGE is pointless. in MTT's it can help, but by then you sohuld know your opponent well enough to outplay him.

Doesnt sage only work if your M is low???

Yes, and the acronym SAGE stands for "Sit And Go Endgame System". It's primarily used for when you are playing an SNG and two people are left. Normally, at this point in an SNG the blinds are fairly high. But it will work for any tourney where you and your opponent have shorter stacks in relation to the bb.

For those of you who are tl; dr:

The system does not work:

2. When the stacks are still large compared to the blinds. This is an important point. For instance, if you are in the final event of the World Series of Poker, the stack to blind ratios will be so large that SAGE does you no good. You will just have to (as the pundits are fond of saying) "play good poker."

Why it works:

The SAGE System is based on what mathematicians call an "equilibrium strategy," which is a strategy that cannot be "beaten" in the following sense: If either player deviates from the equilibrium, his expectation will go down (and thus, in a two-player game, his opponent's expectation must go up). Studies have shown that for short-stacked, heads-up no-limit hold'em, using an equilibrium strategy makes the outcome of the tournament nearly a coin toss (weighted by the players' relative stack sizes, of course). To put it another way, if you find yourself facing Chris Ferguson heads up, this system will prevent him from using his (presumably) greater poker expertise to get an advantage over you.

[Da GOAT]

Upper hand is aggression, plain and simple. Often in SNG's your M's are so low SAGE is pointless. in MTT's it can help, but by then you sohuld know your opponent well enough to outplay him.

Doesnt sage only work if your M is low???

Yes, and the acronym SAGE stands for "Sit And Go Endgame System". It's primarily used for when you are playing an SNG and two people are left. Normally, at this point in an SNG the blinds are fairly high. But it will work for any tourney where you and your opponent have shorter stacks in relation to the bb.

For those of you who are tl; dr:

The system does not work:

2. When the stacks are still large compared to the blinds. This is an important point. For instance, if you are in the final event of the World Series of Poker, the stack to blind ratios will be so large that SAGE does you no good. You will just have to (as the pundits are fond of saying) "play good poker."

Why it works:

The SAGE System is based on what mathematicians call an "equilibrium strategy," which is a strategy that cannot be "beaten" in the following sense: If either player deviates from the equilibrium, his expectation will go down (and thus, in a two-player game, his opponent's expectation must go up). Studies have shown that for short-stacked, heads-up no-limit hold'em, using an equilibrium strategy makes the outcome of the tournament nearly a coin toss (weighted by the players' relative stack sizes, of course). To put it another way, if you find yourself facing Chris Ferguson heads up, this system will prevent him from using his (presumably) greater poker expertise to get an advantage over you.

sorry i havent got a chance still to read the link.

but interesting tho, isnt NE based on the same assumption of when your opp isnt playing optimally then you gain by using the system.

but its not to be strictly adhered to so your opp knows what your doing ie mix in some limps, limp/RR etc.

do you feel there are some differences between SAGE and NE?

[gingerwizard]

no if they have in fact found 'equilibrium strategy' then it is never optimal to deviate. If your opponent is playing optimally also then you deviating will make him money.

Having said that and before anyone goes running off and implementing SAGE. The authors have only worked out equilibrium BASED ON THE ASSUMPTIONS.

What that means is if you are going to push/fold your SB this is the optimal way to do it. Conversely if opp is playing push fold then this is the only optimal way to play.

If you believe that opp is going to let you see a lot of pots and enable you to steal post flop that is different. They have not even considered a strategy in this case.