AA at a NL table. How many callers do you want?

[Bozeman]

Yeah, you are right. For 10 players, 10M trials gives better than 3 significant figures. It helps to do AA, because there is less variance among win prob. depending on what it faces, since it dominates everything; other hands have moe than twice the uncertainty for this simulation.

Craig

[Nottom]

I'd like to see a similar situation with the change that instead of random hands they are randomly selected from playable hands (or at least stuff people think are playable).

Basically any pair, any unsuited connector, any straight-flush combo, Ax, or any two broadway cards. This should give a slightly more realistic output since even the biggest fishies aren't going to be calling big preflop bets with 36o.

[Bozeman]

Against 9 random hands, AA wins 31.1%, while against 9 Group 5 or better hands, AA wins 18.8%. However, you are very unlikely to ever face this many decent hands. Poker calculator allows you to pick ranges for hands, and is overall quite a nice simulator/enumerator.

Craig

[ZeeJustin]

Where would one find this alleged poker calculator you speak of?

[ZeeJustin]

[ QUOTE ]
Against 9 random hands, AA wins 31.1%, while against 9 Group 5 or better hands, AA wins 18.8%.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have a suspicion that the reason why the difference here is so big, is because your aces are likely to be taken by another hand, rather than remaining in the deck.

The reason I didn't mind asking for random hands for this example was because I figured that an overpair is an overpair. 54s and 98s have almost the same odds against AA. 22 and KK have almost the same odds against AA.

[Bozeman]

This is a large part of it. Against 8 Sklansky 1-8 hands, AA wins about 16%, but against 8 Sklansky 1-8 hands that contain no aces, it wins ~30%. The remaining 5% is from pairs, flushes, and straights.