TPFAP says 32 is not a big dog against any two. What gives?

[ebaudry]

Can someone walk me thru:

"...32o... only wins 32% of the time against a random hand"

as stated page 75 of Tournament Poker for Advanced Players?

How is 32o doing so well? I thought connectedness was of marginal importance in determining the strenght of a hand?
Wouldn't the best case be two, non-consequtive overcards, like J4 or something, and isn't that already way ahead?

Help!!!

[ZBTHorton]

sigh.

[xxx]

Pokerstove.

[TheTROLL]

[ QUOTE ]
Pokerstove.

[/ QUOTE ]

To be fair, he asked HOW it's doing so well, not WHETHER it's doing so well... I find the number - if correct - counterintuitive too. So - why's 32o 30% against a random hand?

[spentrent]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Pokerstove.

[/ QUOTE ]

To be fair, he asked HOW it's doing so well, not WHETHER it's doing so well... I find the number - if correct - counterintuitive too. So - why's 32o 30% against a random hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why does 1 + 1 = 2?

[ldavidjm]

http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_odds/

You might want to mess around with that odds calculator. Mostly you will be against two overcards (meaning everything except Pocket Pairs where you will win somewhere in the range of 30-40ish percent of the time. As long as the other hand doesn't hit a card, you just need a single pair against any random hand to win. Obviously you're not a favorite but you're not doomed.

[lorinda]

You make a pair half the time with your two cards.

Your opponent misses the pair with their two cards half the time.

Therefore you hit a pair and they don't once in four. From this starter you can add bells and whistles for extra little bits.

Lori

[microbet]

Big is relative.

When your 32o beats someone's AKo and they rant about how PP is rigged, I imagine they aren't thinking that you had a 35% chance of winning.