|
|
|
|
#1
10-07-2005, 01:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Negreanu says....
Daniel in his latest Card Player article politely disagrees with Howard Lederers assesment of the way Ted Forest played a hand against Daniel. It seems that the latter two were involved in a hand in which another player was all in. It was the final table of a tournament. Daniel held A,Q and Forest held A,A. The board on the river was A,6,8,6,6. Daniel checked the river after betting the turn. Ted checked behind him. Howard claimed that Ted didn't bet because he thought that it was 50/50 that Daniel had the case 6 or case A. Daniel did not like this assessment. He referred to Howard as a "math type" ---ooh---yuck! He said that Howard like that Sklansky fellow and other "math types" oooh--yuck--take math much too seriously when it comes to poker.
Daniel chided "math types"....oooh--yuck--- especially Howard for using "static probability" when making a decision instead of using Daniel's tried and proven use of "conditional probability" as a decision making tool. We, the in between's, the guys that use math only as a tool to tie our shoe laces with must listen to the boy wonder. Daniel after all is a poker genius and Lederer, Sklansky and other math types--oooh ---yuck-- may be geniuseseses but only in math. pffff! So since I thought Daniel was very perceptive and cute to say the least I pose this question to you "math types" oooh-- yuck-- Do you feel enlightened? How about you David, you self procalimed king of "static" probability? Are you going to let that little Agassi look alike talk to you like that? I'll tell you how I feel. I know not what probability others may use but as for me give me "conditional probablity" or give me death! Vince 
|
|
#2
10-07-2005, 01:49 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Negreanu says....
Yeah, howard is wrong here, at least the way he stated it. Of course, probabilistically, there are as many 1 card ace combos out as there are one card six combos, but thats a very poor way to read hands unless you are sure that daniel is just as likely to play the ace or the six.
I don't know the whole hand, but in most spots, most players tend to play non pair hands with an ace more often than non pair hands with a six.
|
|
#3
10-07-2005, 04:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Negreanu says....
Hi Vincent,
I just read Daniel article. I think its excellent.
|
|
#4
10-07-2005, 06:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Negreanu says....
[ QUOTE ]
I just read Daniel article. I think its excellent. [/ QUOTE ] Really? Do you truly believe that Howard Lederrer or other "math types" do not know how to do hand analysis? Isn't that what Daniel is saying by mentioning Howard and "other math types" when describing what he considers "Ted Forests" wrong play of this hand?? Why did Daniel find it necessary to use Howard Lederrer as a scapegoat in his "excellant" article? Give me a break. Vince
|
|
#7
10-07-2005, 03:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Negreanu says....
[ QUOTE ]
DN likes to play a lot of junk hands, so you could argue he would be as likely to hold a six as an ace. [/ QUOTE ] Since the 6's came on the turn and river this is obviously not true.
|
|
#8
10-10-2005, 05:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Negreanu says....
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] DN likes to play a lot of junk hands, so you could argue he would be as likely to hold a six as an ace. [/ QUOTE ] Since the 6's came on the turn and river this is obviously not true. [/ QUOTE ] how does the run of cards on one hand have any relevance to what cards a player is likely to play, _generally_?
|
|
#9
10-07-2005, 10:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Negreanu says....
[ QUOTE ]
Daniel was very perceptive and cute to say the least [/ QUOTE ] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]
|
|
#10
10-07-2005, 06:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Negreanu says....
Daniel a self proclaimed "people" poker player gave us his learned opinion of the difference between what he refers to as "static vs condiditonal" probability.
I thought that was either perceptive or cute. I'm sure other descriptions fit also. Like ...presumptious maybe. Vince
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
