Terms & Conditions

Internet Magazine

Non–US new players
Get five 2+2 books


Order Books
Book Translations
Forum Login
 
 
Expand All   Collapse All

 Two Plus Two 
2+2 Magazine Forum
Special Sklansky Forum
2+2 Pokercast
About the Forums

 General Poker Discussion 
Beginners Questions
Books and Publications
Televised Poker
News, Views, and Gossip
Brick and Mortar
Home Poker
Beats, Brags, and Variance
Poker Theory
Poker Legislation

 Coaching/Training 
StoxPoker
DeucesCracked

 German Forums 
Poker Allgemein
Strategie: Holdem NL cash
Strategie: Sonstige
Internet/Online
BBV
Small Talk
German Poker News

 French Forums 
Forum francophone
Strategie
BBV (French)

 Limit Texas Hold'em 
High Stakes Limit
Medium Stakes Limit
Small Stakes Limit
Micro Stakes Limit
Mid-High Short-handed
Small Stakes Shorthanded
Limit––>NL

 PL/NL Texas Hold'em 
High Stakes
Medium Stakes
Small Stakes
Micro Stakes
Small-High Full Ring
Micro Full Ring

 Tournament Poker 
Small Stakes MTT
High Stakes MTT
MTT Community
STT Strategy
Tournament Circuit

 Other Poker 
Omaha/8
Omaha High
Stud
Heads Up Poker
Other Poker Games

 General Gambling 
Probability
Psychology
Sports Betting
Other Gambling Games
Entertainment Betting

 Internet Gambling 
Internet Gambling
Internet Bonuses
Affiliates/RakeBack
Software

 2+2 Communities 
Other Other Topics
The Lounge: Discussion+Review
El Diablo's General Discussion
BBV4Life

 Other Topics 
Golf
Sporting Events
Politics
Business, Finance, and Investing
Travel
Science, Math, and Philosophy
Health and Fitness
Student Life
Puzzles and Other Games
Video Games
Laughs or Links!
Computer Technical Help
Sponsored Support Forums
RakebackNetwork
RakeReduction.com
Other Links
Books
Authors
Abbreviations
Calendar
Order Books
Books by Others
Favorite Links
Feedback
Advertising Information
Home
Posting Hints
Privacy Notice
Forum Archives

The 2+2 Forums

Before using this Forum, please refer to the Terms and Conditions (Last modified: 2/26/2006)

Be sure to read the   Two Plus Two Internet Magazine

This is an archive. The main forums are here

These forums are read only.


 
UBB.threads™ Groupee, Inc.

General Poker Discussion >> Poker Theory

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | >> (show all)
Phat Mack
old hand


Reged: 09/02/02
Posts: 791
Loc: People's Republic of Texas
Re: question [Re: karlson]
      #385030 - 10/26/03 07:51 PM

Divide by 2 if you want the ratio of the bet to the dead money.

I think I'm missing something. There's $3 in the pot: in the A8o example, moving in with $70 would be 70/3 the dead money. In a $5-$10 game with $15 dead money, I would move in 70/3 * $15 = $350. Correct?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
karlson
enthusiast


Reged: 09/18/02
Posts: 233
Re: question [Re: Phat Mack]
      #385150 - 10/26/03 09:23 PM

Yeah, that's right.
Just a question of terminology....to me, there's only $2 dead money in the pot and there's a $1 bet to you.
I think you have the idea.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
magic_man
journeyman


Reged: 09/02/02
Posts: 63
Loc: College Park, MD
Improving the System? [Re: David Sklansky]
      #385784 - 10/27/03 01:18 PM

In Mr. Sklansky's articles on "The System" and "Improving the System", he challenges others to improve upon his "groupings" even more...can we use these results to do just that?

~Magic_Man


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Nottom
Carpal \'Tunnel


Reged: 02/10/03
Posts: 4030
Loc: Hokie Country
Re: Improving the System? [Re: magic_man]
      #385799 - 10/27/03 01:26 PM

Does anyone happen to have a link to the articles on "the system"?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
magic_man
journeyman


Reged: 09/02/02
Posts: 63
Loc: College Park, MD
Re: Improving the System? [Re: Nottom]
      #385807 - 10/27/03 01:32 PM

It used to be at the link below, but it's not working now for some reason. Maybe it will come back:

http://www.cardplayer.com/?sec=afeature&art_id=13194

~Magic_Man


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
tewall
veteran


Reged: 01/02/03
Posts: 1206
Loc: midwest
Re: The Sklansky-Chubukov All In No Limit Holdem Rankings [Re: karlson]
      #385883 - 10/27/03 02:27 PM

So shouldn't it be the Sklansky-Chubukov No Limit Rankings? By the way, it's a good thing "karlson" is with a "k" and not a "c"! I'm not sure David could stomach that.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Nottom
Carpal \'Tunnel


Reged: 02/10/03
Posts: 4030
Loc: Hokie Country
Re: Improving the System? [Re: magic_man]
      #385918 - 10/27/03 02:49 PM

I had checked there before I posted and couldn't find it. I also noticed that there were none of Mason or Davids articles from before a couple months ago listed in the archives.

I did however find this thread on these boards.

Summary of Davids Bellagio Seminar


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rockoon
journeyman


Reged: 12/03/02
Posts: 74
Re: $200 Stipend to Expand A8 Result [Re: David Sklansky]
      #389069 - 10/29/03 08:02 PM

Quote:

With a one and two dollar blind we now know that A8offsuit in the SB, is better off moving in up to about 70 dollars more (even if the big blind saw his cards) than he would be folding. If we thus say A8 has a rating of 70 or so, what are the ratings for all other hands?

To make sure you understand, notice that 32 has a rating of one while slightly better hands have a rating of two. Thats because you are getting 3-1 if you put in one and 4-2 if you put in two.(Obviously the big blind would always call in this case). Fairly poor hands would be rated three, getting 5-3 odds. At the other extreme, two kings would have a rating of about 1000. Since it will pick up the pot unless the big blind has kings or aces and will win some of those hands too.

If someone can tell me the "rating" for all hands (I would assume with the help of a computer program), I'll send them $200 and give them credit whenever I write about those results.




It is interresting to note that the "optimal" (maximizing EV) all-in amount is different from the "maximum" (break-even) all-in amount and that the two functions are not linear to each other. Considering the pocket pairs:

(all values in units of the big blind)

22 - 3.1, 24.6
33 - 3.4, 33.3
44 - 3.8, 41.5
55 - 5.0, 49.9 <- the "opimtal" amount peaks here at 5*BB
66 - 4.8, 58.2
77 - 3.6, 68.0
88 - 3.5, 80.2
99 - 3.2, 96.3
TT - 3.4, 120.3 <- smaller peak here, TT kills str8s
JJ - 3.0, 160.2
QQ - 3.0, 239.6
KK - 3.0, 477.5
AA - INF, INF

While the "maximum" amount keeps rising, the "optimal" amount rises then falls and does a dance near the end. The values for pocket aces are undefined. Aces EV is the money in the pot.

These values were derived from the A8o puzzle where the small blind hold's one of these pocket pairs instead.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JonCooke
newbie


Reged: 12/19/02
Posts: 34
Loc: UK
Re: $200 Stipend to Expand A8 Result [Re: David Sklansky]
      #389976 - 10/30/03 03:53 PM

Next job, David.
And this is even more crucial for the heads up stage of one table satellites.

With a stack size of n, blinds 1-2.

Lets constrain betting to fold or all-in.

For various values of n:
What range of hands should go all in?
Given that range of hands going all in, what should the opponent call with?

This is a game theory excercise. I've got some approximations for n=20 using TTH. Does anyone have a spreadsheet with Hand A/Hand B/Odds that they could send me? Then I'll tackle the whole problem.

At what value of n is the allin or fold strategy no longer optimal?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
bigpooch
old hand


Reged: 09/17/03
Posts: 759
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Re: The Sklansky-Karlson All In No Limit Holdem Rankings [Re: David Sklansky]
      #391997 - 11/01/03 05:14 AM

David:

Karlson's numbers don't seem correct. Consider KK:
The number quoted is 1290+ but look at this calculation:

Assume (with a benefit to the KK!) that KK wins about
19% of the time vs AA:

There are 50C2 = 1225 possible hands:

AA (6): EV = (x+2)(0.19)-x(0.81)
KK (1): EV = (+3)(1/2)
other (1218): EV = +3

Thus, for the EV to be >0,

6((x+2)(0.19) - x(0.81)) + 1(1.5) + 1218 (+3) > 0
solving yields x as approximately 983. It should
be a tiny bit less since KK doesn't quite win 19%
of the share of pots versus AA.

Cheers,

"bigpooch" a.k.a. "mangler"


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | >> (show all)



Extra information
0 registered and 4 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Mat Sklansky 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Rating:
Topic views: 3879

Rate this topic

Jump to

Contact Us 2+2 Publishing

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5


Message Boards and Forums Directory Message Boards and Forums Directory