Pocket pair, flop set, odds to fullhouse??

[Izaak_Walton]

Playing TX holdem:

Book Im reading says "at least 1/3 chance of drawing to fullhouse or quads" in above-mentioned scenario. Is this true?? I arrive at a different number by counting outs???? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] Thanks for help!!

[BruceZ]

[ QUOTE ]
Playing TX holdem:

Book Im reading says "at least 1/3 chance of drawing to fullhouse or quads" in above-mentioned scenario. Is this true?? I arrive at a different number by counting outs???? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] Thanks for help!!

[/ QUOTE ]

7/47 + (40/47)*(10/46) =~ 33.4%

You have 7 outs on the flop, then with probability 40/47 you miss on the turn and pick up 3 more outs for 10 outs on the river.

[Izaak_Walton]

I don't understand the part of picking up 3 more outs on the river--what outs?? Thanks

Also--I would figure it as 7/48 + 7/47 = 29.5%. Why is this wrong? thanks

[BruceZ]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand the part of picking up 3 more outs on the river--what outs?? Thanks

[/ QUOTE ]

3 outs for the river to pair the turn card to make full house.

[ QUOTE ]
Also--I would figure it as 7/48 + 7/47 = 29.5%. Why is this wrong? thanks

[/ QUOTE ]

There are 47 unseen cards on the flop, and 46 on the turn. You have 10 outs on the river, but you only count these if you miss on the turn, which has probability 40/47. This problem has been solved many times on this forum.

[Izaak_Walton]

I got it--Thank you.

As an aside, I'm sure that most questions asked on this forum have been asked before. I decided to ask it again, though, for 2 reasons: (1) it's quicker and easier; and (2) I'm providing you with an opportunity to feel better about yourself by putting me down for asking. A truly symbiotic relationship--we both win!! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
As an aside, I'm sure that most questions asked on this forum have been asked before. I decided to ask it again, though, for 2 reasons: (1) it's quicker and easier;

[/ QUOTE ]
It is quicker and easier for you. It shows no respect for people inclined to be helpful. You are saying that your time is more important than someone else's, and perhaps of multiple people.

I would much rather see BruceZ's comments on a new topic, and there are plenty of new topics here.

[ QUOTE ]
and (2) I'm providing you with an opportunity to feel better about yourself by putting me down for asking.

[/ QUOTE ]
That is directly insulting. BruceZ didn't put you down at all, and I can't recall him showing any inclination to do so. I think you should retract your comment and apologize.

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
(2) I'm providing you with an opportunity to feel better about yourself by putting me down for asking.

[/ QUOTE ]

He didn't put you down at all. He simply pointed out that it had been asked before. You'll have to toughen up, if you are viewing something like that as an insult, especially on these forums.

BruceZ is a great asset to 2+2, and he actually bothered to answerer your question. It would be nice if you didn't repay him by dumping your insecurities on him.

The last thing I want to point out is that a lot of the rugular posters do there best to help everyone out. This is one of the reasons they get a little annoyed by seeing the same question asked every week. Take the time to do a search. These people have posted answers many times before, and they are all there waiting for you in the archives. You will understand some of the frustration about repeat posts once (if) you become a regular contributer here.

I think BruceZ handled you with a lot more respect than some others would. [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

[schroedy]

I also have asked a commonly asked question (in this forum) this week. I realize my mistake, but maybe FAQ should address the search function (and functionality -- how effective IS search anyway?). I don't really like this BB format (spend a LOT of time on Yahoo! so there's seems most natural to me), and there is a LOT of information here so for a newbie it is hard to sort.

Someone else has already mentioned that perhaps a PINNED forum should be established and maintained where questions like this that get asked and re-asked can be put.

Having said all that, I think Bruce is the greatest on these Q's of raw statistics and probability.