What are the odds of 4 of a kind beating 4 of a kind?

[Tiltaniac]

Given that you are playing HU LHE and that both you are your opponents starts off with a PP:

what are the odds that both of you flop a set, the weaker set turns quads and the other player rivers a higher 4 of a kind?

Tiltaniac

[mosquito]

Ahh, the old jackpot question. Looking
forward to an answer, too.

[fnord_too]

If you both start with a pair, there are 44 boards (independant of the order they show up in) that will give you each quads. There are C(48,5) possible boards, so 44/c(48,5).

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]
If you both start with a pair, there are 44 boards (independant of the order they show up in) that will give you each quads. There are C(48,5) possible boards, so 44/c(48,5).

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct. That comes out to about 1 in 39K.

Of course, it is much harder to win the jackpot than that. Because both of you have to start with a PP first, and then you both have to see it thru to the river.

[DrPublo]

More than that even, you both need to start with a PP 88 or higher.

Although you'll need to compensate for the times one player makes open quads with a playing kicker, ie A8 v 99 when the board is 99888.

The Doc

[KubrickFan]

So the overlay's great enough that if you're going to play limit on Party Poker you have a positive expectation playing the BB tables as opposed to the regular ones?

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]
So the overlay's great enough that if you're going to play limit on Party Poker you have a positive expectation playing the BB tables as opposed to the regular ones?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. How did you draw that conclusion?

The only reason to play the BB tables is for the softer competition. As a bet in and of itself, it is terrible. As was pointed out, the odds of winning are much worse than the calculations made in this thread -- which assume that both players already have PP 88 or higher.

[Pokerscott]

At some point the size of the bad beat payoff becomes large enough that it is a positive expected value to play there. I haven't calculated the breakeven point however...(curse work!)

pokerscott

[Piz0wn0reD!!!!!!]

In my enire poker career i have seen this once. I won w/ 6666 vs 3333. It was awsome.

[radek2166]

So what at what point does it become+EV?

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]
At some point the size of the bad beat payoff becomes large enough that it is a positive expected value to play there. I haven't calculated the breakeven point however...(curse work!)

[/ QUOTE ]

Theoretically, yes. Practically, I don't thinks so. There are many threads that discuss estimating the odds of winning -- it is not a simple problem, and there is no exact answer b/c it depends on how people play. IIRC, the conclusion is always that it is a bad bet, even when it gets over 500K.

[BarronVangorToth]

>start bad beat story -- move along, whining is coming<

If you're talking about a year ago at Foxwoods -- VERY likely because I flopped quads, another guy turned quads, and somehow the other guy stayed in during the course of all of our jacking the pot to river his royal.

And the best part is ... no jackpot at Foxwoods. Yay me!

>end bad beat story<

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[Tiltaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
If you both start with a pair, there are 44 boards (independant of the order they show up in) that will give you each quads. There are C(48,5) possible boards, so 44/c(48,5).

[/ QUOTE ]

how did you come up with 44 independent boards?
ty

[elitegimp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you both start with a pair, there are 44 boards (independant of the order they show up in) that will give you each quads. There are C(48,5) possible boards, so 44/c(48,5).

[/ QUOTE ]

how did you come up with 44 independent boards?
ty

[/ QUOTE ]

you have xx
opp has yy

the board has to be xxyyz (where z is any of the remaining 44 cards after 4 xs and 4 ys have shown up).

[KuQuAT]

[ QUOTE ]
At some point the size of the bad beat payoff becomes large enough that it is a positive expected value to play there.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dislike this thinking. Unless you're planning on a VERY long poker career (or perhaps you are a bot, playing 100000 hands per hour), EV is a poor way to measure whether or not a jackpot is worth it.

First, the value of the jackpot is non-linear in weird ways (there's economic-psychology at work here). For example, would you really care that much if you won (say) $30M vs. $60M? I wouldn't - to me, both are sufficient "FU" money for the rest of my days (note: your particular dollar values may be different - this is just an example). So the value of the second $30M is nowhere near the same as the first $30M. For jackpots, it's even weirder, because you're in a range where the second half of the money might sometimes be worth more under certain conditions (for example, a $10K jackpot is very nice, but a $20K jackpot lets you replace your car, which is of great value to you).

Moreover, the additional (<- key word) EV is only a few nanobets per hand at best. Compare that with the EV of playing a soft game in the first place, which is at least a few centibets per hand. That is, the extra value of the jackpot is noise, even when positive, compared with the game itself. If you were playing for matchsticks, that wouldn't be true, but you aren't.

There are good reasons (and bad reasons) to play jackpot games, but to me, positive EV isn't one of 'em. Negative EV may be a reason to avoid a jackpot game, because it can be as much as centibets and thus not noise.

For the same reason, people who only play the lotto when it goes +EV can be missing the point. You have a very small chance of winning no matter the jackpot, so as long as it's "big enough", you can play. Plus you get to spend a week with a piece of paper in your wallet dreaming about all the jerks in your life that you're gonna list in a newspaper ad when you win... Ooops - time for my anger management class.

[Token]

I wonder if there are those cooperating against Party for this jackpot. You would need ten players with everyone folding to the blind unless there were at least two players with wired 8s or better and no one else at the table held a card of the same rank. They each call the BB and check it down. They could get in 300 hands/hr and might get lucky before the rake evaporated their bankrolls.

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]
I wonder if there are those cooperating against Party for this jackpot. You would need ten players with everyone folding to the blind unless there were at least two players with wired 8s or better and no one else at the table held a card of the same rank. They each call the BB and check it down. They could get in 300 hands/hr and might get lucky before the rake evaporated their bankrolls.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I think some people from this board were doing this, in fact. Seems silly, as Party reserves the right to reverse it if they think the rules are being violated. And this might easily count as breaking the rules, tho I'm not sure.

[BradleyT]

We (2+2'ers) have done it a few times before.

Only limp if you have PP 8's or higher or 2 suited cards that can make a straight flush. Some people were also playing any two cards 8 or above (8T on 88876 properly suited board could win...). No flop bets allowed, no turn bets allowed and you could only bet on the river if you had a JP hand.

Although I do agree it could be against party terms since no hands were being raked and no hands were having a jackpot cut taken out of them.

[mosdef]

i agree with your statement, but does it actually answer the question? you've given the chance of quads over quads, but he asked for the odds of a specific subset of these events, namely set vs. set on flop followed by turn quads followed by river quads. i think the odds of this are way lower.

[chunk]

[quoteI dislike this thinking. Unless you're planning on a VERY long poker career (or perhaps you are a bot, playing 100000 hands per hour), EV is a poor way to measure whether or not a jackpot is worth it.


[/ QUOTE ]

At what dollar value is powerball +EV?

[stigmata]

In my enire poker career i have also seen this once. My 3333 got rivered by AAAA. It got capped on every street. It sucked.