True or false? (Is Mason crazy?)

[rkiray]

I was just reading the article True or False in Poker Essays II. In it Mason says :

[ QUOTE ]
you are a low-limit player in a typical low limit game and you hold two aces before the flop. How often will your hand take the pot? ... but my guess is that this hand will only win approximately 1/3 of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

This seems like a very bad guess to my. My Paradise database of over 70k games all between 2/4 and 5/10 show AA winning 69% of the time. More than 2/3s. A bunch of us posted win rates in low limit games today and almost everyone was winning with JJ more than 1/2 the time. Why would Mason think this? Or maybe a better question is what drugs was he on when he wrote this? /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[BaronVonCP]

Maybe his idea of a typical low limit game is a lot looser than the ones we play in.

[Trix]

Acording to WLLH, AA should win ~35% of the time vs 8 Randowm hands. I guess he is speaking of a No-Fold´em game.

[JohnShaft]

You bring up a good point Rick.
That being that the great poker literature can give out a skewed perception of results/play/everything.
I made mention a couple of days ago that "the Modern game" is different.

And I fervently believe that too many of the more beginning players tend to read the texts and take everything at face value.

It's the old "XX hand is a limping hand from EP because HPFAP/TOP/the Bible" says it is. Um. No it isn't. It's a limping hand if it's correct for *your* game.

KQo/ATo might be a very good hand UTG. In other games it's absolute tat. One of the biggest distortions seems to be "I play XX UTG live at [Insert Med. High Limit] because it's just +EV", or some variant. Again, I just don't buy because it's +EV for you in your game it's +EV *period*.

Axs might be great UTG in *your* game, but telling someone else it's +EV in their game is a gross generalisation in my book.

Sure, no matter the texture of the game, now or in the future, AA will always be +EV.
But EV depends not on the hand itself, but in the situation it finds itself in.

I know, in some regards, I'm preaching to the choir. But I still see a lot of "you should be playing this hand/you shouldn't be playing that hand" type advice. And I think it's rarely so clear cut.

[Bob T.]

In a low limit B&M game, a lot more players are going to see the flop than in a lowlimit online game. That is where the discrepency occurs.

[fluff]

1/3 of the time is correct if everyone sees the flop, and stays to the river. In most low-limit online play, the PF fold percentage is usually around 40%-60%, and a few more will drop out at the flop, turn, river, significantly improving the chance that the Rockets hold up.

The lowest B&M limits usually play like play money games, so maybe it is true there.

[MaxPower]

We are all running really good. I'm winning 74% of the time with them.

Seriously, I think the answer might be that the games we play in online are not as loose as the one he is assuming. In a game with 6-8 players seeing every flop, his estimate is probably pretty close. His is estimate is probably still wrong, but its not really important to the essay.

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
In most low-limit online play, the PF fold percentage is usually around 40%-60%, and a few more will drop out at the flop, turn, river, significantly improving the chance that the Rockets hold up.


[/ QUOTE ]

The fact that people dropping out after the flop is a misconception in a game like this, since most of the hands that are folding are the ones drawing dead. Sure some runner-runner draws might fold, but this might acount for a couple percent at best of you losses.

[rkiray]

OK, but Mason has also written several times that simulations that assume everyone always go to the river are basically useless and actually dangerous because people just don't play like that. In the same book there is an article "A Few Simulations" discussing that. Here is it's last line :

[ QUOTE ]
It's just that in hold'em poker, this kind of infomation can be very hazaradous to your bankroll.

[/ QUOTE ]

Look's to me that he's making exactly that mistake here.

[rkiray]

I've played in lots of B&M games also but I've never seen one close to having everyone go to the showdown everytime. The closest I've seen are some really crazy Colorado 5/5 games. It's actually rare to see a game where 3 or more people are at showdown more than 1/2 the time. I'm not surprized he's wrong (everyone makes mistakes), but the size of this error is enormous IMO.

[JTG51]

In a low limit B&M game, a lot more players are going to see the flop than in a lowlimit online game. That is where the discrepency occurs.

But even with that being true, 1/3 can't be close. If all 10 players go to a showdown, AA still wins 31% of the time (according to gocee.com). No game is so loose that every player sees every showdown, so in a real game AA will win significantly more than 31% of the time.