Stupid "facts" bad hold'em players know

[bdk3clash]

-Q7 is "the computer hand"
-72o is the worst hand in hold'em
-If someone's hands shake it is a "tell" and they have a big hand
-Any pocket pair is a slight favorite over "Big Slick." Many players insist that if "Big Slick" is suited, it is a favorite over a pocket pair. (They are wrong.)
-No limit/pot limit is a "better game" than limit, because you can "protect your hand."
-"Overuse" of "quotation marks" is "incredibly annoying."

[cnfuzzd]

you forgot the two most basic:

Aces NEVER win
You should always play pocket pairs to the end

Followed up by the summation

"I play g00t"

peace

john nickle

[bdk3clash]

-Correct play can be determined based on what cards came out on the board. For example, a player who hits a gutshot on the river should have raised preflop, on the flop, and on the turn.

[Joe826]

As long as they're suited, everything will be O.K.

[bunky9590]

"any 2 cards can win" /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[afk]

Ok I'll bite. I've always heard that 72o is the worst, why is it not the worst? What is the worst?

And that's twice I've seen this Q7 computer hand thing in the last two days, what's the story behind that?

[bdk3clash]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok I'll bite. I've always heard that 72o is the worst, why is it not the worst? What is the worst?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not untrue, it's just something that even the worst of players seems to know.

Also, although it may fare worst against a full table, I'll take 72o heads up against 32o (http://www.twodimes.net/poker/?g=h&b=&d=&h=7h+2d%0D%0A3s+2c) or 32s (http://www.twodimes.net/poker/?g=h&b=&d=&h=7h+2d%0D%0A3s+2s) every time.

[ QUOTE ]
And that's twice I've seen this Q7 computer hand thing in the last two days, what's the story behind that?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know, though I hear it all the time. Anyone out there know?

[chesspain]

"I have to the see flop for [insert price of one small bet]."

[submariner]

According to this website, Q7 (http://www.q7.com/) , it is something used in BASIC programming. Maybe some of the programmers that have been around for a while can verify/elaborate.

[Cry Me A River]

[ QUOTE ]
According to this website, Q7 (http://www.q7.com/) , it is something used in BASIC programming. Maybe some of the programmers that have been around for a while can verify/elaborate.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really don't think that Q7 website has anything to do with poker, just a coincidence, rather:

"there is a story of an early computer simulation in which Q7 was a break-even hand"

From:

http://www.holdemsecrets.com/handnames.htm

See also:

http://www.flashback.se/archive/gambling_faq_poker.html

"More generically, any hand that computer analysis/simulation determines is positive but turns out to
be difficult to play in practice."

[Oblivious]

2-5 spread game, with a single $2 blind. I open raise from the cutoff to $7 total. The $2 blind says... "I have to protect my blind," and calls $5 more.

[Shalara]

Heh, this thread is full of good ones; I got a smile reading it. Here are a few more that I've heard.

"Shouldn't raise pocket aces. They usually get run down; why waste your money?"

"Never ever draw to an inside straight."

"Don't draw for a flush heads-up. Bad idea."

If you're losing, a seat change/deck change/dealer change will fix it.

"All-in always wins!"

[Tosh]

[ QUOTE ]
AK is a better hand than AA, it offers more options

[/ QUOTE ]

[Nick B.]

AKo is a better hand that AKs - Phil Hellmuth

[kem]

[ QUOTE ]
Many players insist that if "Big Slick" is suited, it is a favorite over a pocket pair. (They are wrong.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, YOU are wrong /images/graemlins/smile.gif

As Ks vs 2d 2h is a 49.77% to 49.60% favorite (they tie 0.63% of the time). Check two dimes (http://twodimes.net/poker/?g=h&b=&d=&h=As+Ks%0D%0A2h+2d).

If you meant "ANY pocket pair", then you are correct. But as stated, you are the one who is incorrect.

[Warik]

[ QUOTE ]
AKo is a better hand that AKs - Phil Hellmuth

[/ QUOTE ]

AKo is better than AKs because you have two ways to make a flush instead of just one!

[bdk3clash]

Uh, I obviously meant any except 22. That's, uh, so obvious I didn't, umm, feel the need to even mention it. Yeah, that's the ticket.

[Gildersneeze]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
According to this website, Q7 (http://www.q7.com/) , it is something used in BASIC programming. Maybe some of the programmers that have been around for a while can verify/elaborate.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really don't think that Q7 website has anything to do with poker, just a coincidence, rather:

"there is a story of an early computer simulation in which Q7 was a break-even hand"

[/ QUOTE ]The myth I heard was that "in a computer simulation, Queens and Sevens were the most likely cards to come up on the community board, so logically, Q7 should win frequently."

[joker122]

Yeah, I heard the same. It doesn't make a bit of sense though.

[Blarg]

I've never read Helmuth and don't know the context of what he said, of if there even is one, but I think Helmuth might be misunderstood in this instance.

My win rate is 4 1/2% higher with suited AK than non-suited, but I'm making well over 50% more in dollar terms with AK offsuit. Maybe that's what he means?

I think it's because you usually do not hit a flush, but you might find plenty of reasons to try -- staying in and spending money, especially if you hit your Ace or King on the flop or turn. Most flush draws come up dry, but you often have the pot odds to call and then lose with them.

With an AK offsuit you're more likely to get out cheap if the flop or the turn come up junk, or if it's just clear that you're beat and you have no nut flush as an escape hatch to rescue you. It's a lot easier and clearer a decision to fold a pair of aces when you don't have a nut flush backing it up.

So you get your money with your winners with AK offsuit but get out more cheaply when you lose. Maybe a lot of others, including Phil, notice the same thing I did -- you win more with AK suited, but for all the extra winning (4 1/2% more for me), you also have to factor in many hands you took to the turn or the river, and maybe for many bets in very active pots, and then lost. That can all definitely add up.

Anyway, just a thought, but I wouldn't be surprised if some other people find the same thing as I do -- more wins with AK suited but less or even far less money than with AK offsuit. Making AK offsuit a much bigger winner over time.

Just some thoughts, I'm not saying everyone's stats are like mine or that I know what stats really should be. But looking through mine, it came up as a reasoanble explanation for what Helmuth said.

[Nick B.]

http://cardplayer.com/poker_magazine/archives/?a_id=13374

[ QUOTE ]
I lost $1,000 to Matusow after betting that A-K offsuit was a favorite over A-K suited. I hear you laughing over that one, and it does seem counterintuitive, but I was going on a “fact” I’d heard a few months earlier. The “fact” was wrong and I lost.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Blarg]

I wonder if he means against. And how any conclusion was arrived at. Again, even if AK suited does win more hands, that doesn't negate it perhaps winning less actual money, for the reasons I pointed out.

Also, I don't know that you could work it out mathematically very easily at all in the first place. The two hands play very differently, and I wonder if you could really program in the variability in something like Turbo Texas Hold'em or whatever. It's not at all like comparing playing AK offsuit versus AQ offsuit, for instance.

[BaronVonCP]

On some WPT show Sexton said that Q7 is the mean of all holdem hands. Some computer figured that out back in the day.

I have no opinion on the validity of that statement.

[Oblivious]

AKs earns more per hand. AKo earns more over all because you get it more often than AKs. For every time you get AKs youll get AKo about 3 times.

[Dov]

"Diamonds are the easiest flush to make."

"I have a 50-50 chance to make my draw. Either I get there, or I don't!"

[MaxPower]

[ QUOTE ]
I've never read Helmuth and don't know the context of what he said, of if there even is one, but I think Helmuth might be misunderstood in this instance.

My win rate is 4 1/2% higher with suited AK than non-suited, but I'm making well over 50% more in dollar terms with AK offsuit. Maybe that's what he means?


[/ QUOTE ]

The reason you will win more money with AKo than AKs is that there are 12 ways to get AKo and 4 ways to get AKs. So you get dealt AKo a lot more often. It is as simple as that.

AKs is clearly a better hand.

[Tosh]

I remember Jesse May interpreting someone saying that you win more with AKo, to mean that in an all in race its better to have AKo. Mind you he has less poker knowledge than a mildly retarded cactus.

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]
It's not untrue...

[/ QUOTE ]

You mean it's true? Don't do what Johnny Don't does?

[sfer]

Yeah, I heard about the same. I don't know if that means that in a 10-handed no-fold 'em simulation it's the break even EV hand or what, but that's how I would think to interpret it.

A couple of weeks ago I heard a guy authoritively state that Sklansky ran computer simulations and discovered that Q7s was the winningest hand in hold 'em. I nodded sagely.

[bdk3clash]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's not untrue...

[/ QUOTE ]

You mean it's true? Don't do what Johnny Don't does?

[/ QUOTE ]

Donny Don't. (Obscure Simpsons references rule, as does the rare opportunity to correct SFer.)

[sfer]

Every dumb line from Rounders.

[junkmail3]

"This post used to be fun." (Until there was serious poker strategy discussed on it)