BlueBear
05-27-2004, 07:18 PM
This article refers is from the Cardplayer magazine/website, Vol. 17/No. 7 by Michael Weisenberg.
Next, everyone folded to Holder666, on the button, who of course opened for a raise. ThePhantom, who was running low on chips, reraised from the small blind. JoeBtfsplk333 folded his big blind. Holder666 capped. This left ThePhantom with $4. ThePhantom drew one card and Holder666 took three. ThePhantom bet and Holder666 raised. ThePhantom called his last $2 and Holder666 showed a full house, three sevens and two deuces. He had capped the betting before the draw with two sevens (most likely, although it easily could have been the deuces), and had gotten very lucky, because ThePhantom showed his cards before leaving the table: three sixes, an ace, and a deuce. He had attempted to disguise his holding by drawing one card, instead of giving himself the maximum chance to improve. The disguise was wasted, because Holder666 was going to draw three cards no matter what. Had ThePhantom drawn two cards, he either would have caught a 7 among his two cards, which would have prevented Holder666 from filling up, or he would have caught two deuces. If Holder666 had started instead with two deuces, ThePhantom would have caught either a 7 or a deuce, also preventing Holder666 from filling up. That is, had ThePhantom taken two cards, he could not have lost the pot. He would have $16 and been able to play for a while.
Ok, wait a minute here, this analysis is flawed because in on-line poker, the random number generator does not behave the same way as cards being dealt in real life. We can't assume that the order of cards being drawn is pre-determined (unless of course, we have the actual dealing code).
As a matter of fact, for the purpose of this analysis, the fact that ThePhantom could have drawn 2 cards to possibly save himself/herself is irrelevant because for every card drawn, we cannot assume any predetermined order of cards.
For example, let's say this.
Let's say you hold pocket 2's in last position, your two opponents hold AK and AQ, the flop is A K Q, the opponent with AK bets, and AQ calls, you fold. The next is a 2.
If you had stayed on, you would have turned a set, is folding pockets 2's a mistake? If I were to use the method of analysis as suggested in the above article, folding pocket 2's is a mistake due to a "predetermined order of cards assumption".
I hope someone gets my point here. Comments please and is much appreciated.
Next, everyone folded to Holder666, on the button, who of course opened for a raise. ThePhantom, who was running low on chips, reraised from the small blind. JoeBtfsplk333 folded his big blind. Holder666 capped. This left ThePhantom with $4. ThePhantom drew one card and Holder666 took three. ThePhantom bet and Holder666 raised. ThePhantom called his last $2 and Holder666 showed a full house, three sevens and two deuces. He had capped the betting before the draw with two sevens (most likely, although it easily could have been the deuces), and had gotten very lucky, because ThePhantom showed his cards before leaving the table: three sixes, an ace, and a deuce. He had attempted to disguise his holding by drawing one card, instead of giving himself the maximum chance to improve. The disguise was wasted, because Holder666 was going to draw three cards no matter what. Had ThePhantom drawn two cards, he either would have caught a 7 among his two cards, which would have prevented Holder666 from filling up, or he would have caught two deuces. If Holder666 had started instead with two deuces, ThePhantom would have caught either a 7 or a deuce, also preventing Holder666 from filling up. That is, had ThePhantom taken two cards, he could not have lost the pot. He would have $16 and been able to play for a while.
Ok, wait a minute here, this analysis is flawed because in on-line poker, the random number generator does not behave the same way as cards being dealt in real life. We can't assume that the order of cards being drawn is pre-determined (unless of course, we have the actual dealing code).
As a matter of fact, for the purpose of this analysis, the fact that ThePhantom could have drawn 2 cards to possibly save himself/herself is irrelevant because for every card drawn, we cannot assume any predetermined order of cards.
For example, let's say this.
Let's say you hold pocket 2's in last position, your two opponents hold AK and AQ, the flop is A K Q, the opponent with AK bets, and AQ calls, you fold. The next is a 2.
If you had stayed on, you would have turned a set, is folding pockets 2's a mistake? If I were to use the method of analysis as suggested in the above article, folding pocket 2's is a mistake due to a "predetermined order of cards assumption".
I hope someone gets my point here. Comments please and is much appreciated.