Reading Hands article, Math question

[oreogod]

From Drews Article (a very good one by the way) -- What Im concerned with is in BOLD:

[ QUOTE ]
One limper to me and I raised in middle position with

KQ

The player to my immediate left 3-bet. My stats on this opponent were 25/9, meaning that he plays too many hands, but his raising standards are a little too tight. Both blinds folded, and the initial limper and I called. Three of us saw the flop, which came

KQ4

The limper and I checked, Villain bet. The limper folded, and I check-raised. Villain made it three bets and I capped. With 9.25 BBs in the pot, the turn was the A and now my situation had changed. What course of action should I take for the rest of the hand?

I talked to several winning players about this hand, and got a few different comments: "Bet and call down a raise," "Bet and fold to a raise," "Check-call down," "Check-fold," "Well, I have two pair, I'm not folding." Take a moment to think about what line you would take before reading on.

With Villain's pre-flop raising standards, I thought it most likely his 3-bet meant AA-JJ, AKs-AQs, and AK-AQ, with a much smaller likelihood of TT-99, AJs, KQs, or something else he was feeling frisky with at the moment. I'm behind (with very little chance of catching up) against AA, KK, QQ, AKs, and AQs. I can only hope to be ahead of AJs and JJ-99 or chopping with KQ -- which considering how the action has gone down seems pretty unlikely. So if we say Villain has one of the former hands 90 percent of the time and one of the latter hands 10 percent of the time (which I think is very generous on behalf of the weaker hands), I have 11.2 percent equity in this pot. So I would need 7.9-to-1 odds to call down. In fact, I'm only getting 11.25-to-2, or 5.6-to-1. A check-fold is in order.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay so I know of Bayes Theorem, but I dont know how to use it appropriatly (meaning I think Im doing something wrong with the numbers). But I dont have a copy of Sklansky's Getting the Best of it...so I dont have an idea how to fit this problem into math form. Well, I have a general idea...but is there anyway someone could just show me how to CRUNCH these numbers accurately? Or at least point me in the way of a fundamental 2+2 post Im missing.

My figure is off, probably because Im doing the calculations wrong.

Thanks.

PS. I think I would have to have a decent amount of practice to be able to do this at the table. But Im sure it becomes much easier over time.

[imported_Reaction]

This is the way I did it and came up with the same numbers as in the article. I used poker stove to come up with the following numbers:
---
528 games 0.005 secs 105,600 games/sec

Board: 4s Kh Qd Ah
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) / tie (%)

Hand 1: 03.0303 % [ 00.03 00.00 ] { KsQs }
Hand 2: 96.9697 % [ 00.97 00.00 ] { AA-QQ, AKs-AQs, AKo }

---
968 games 0.005 secs 193,600 games/sec

Board: 4s Kh Qd Ah
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) / tie (%)

Hand 1: 85.3306 % [ 00.83 00.02 ] { KsQs }
Hand 2: 14.6694 % [ 00.12 00.02 ] { JJ-99, AJs, KQs }

So 90% of the time hero has 3.03% Equity and 10% of the time 85.3% Equity.

90%(3.03%)+10%(85.3%)=11.26% Equity

and 100%-11.2%=88.8%

88.8%:11.2% = 7.9:1

[oreogod]

Yeah my Pstove numbers were off. Thanks for the help.

Now if I could only do this at the table on the fly that would rock.

[The Dude]

[ QUOTE ]
Now if I could only do this at the table on the fly that would rock.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, obviously nobody is going to be able to do calculations like this while they're at the table, but you really don't need to be exact. A good estimation of where you're at is almost always good enough.

The more you do these calculations away from the table, and the more you force yourself to think like this during a hand, the better you'll get at estimating where you're at.

[oreogod]

You're in washinton now, nice. I live in Portland. U make it to La Center much?

[The Dude]

Negative, Ghost Rider. (But I'll let you know if I do.)