Does this seem counterintuitive to anyone else?

[Ulysses]

Using twodimes,

Ah3h vs. Qh9h on a 5h4hQd board, Ah3h wins 49.6% of the time

pokenum -h ah 3h - qh 9h -- 5h 4h qd
Holdem Hi: 990 enumerated boards containing Qd 5h 4h
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
Ah 3h 491 49.60 499 50.40 0 0.00 0.496
Qh 9h 499 50.40 491 49.60 0 0.00 0.504

However, when I add KcKs into the mix, Ah3h wins 50.2% of the time.

pokenum -h ah 3h - qh 9h - kc ks -- 5h 4h qd
Holdem Hi: 903 enumerated boards containing Qd 5h 4h
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
Ah 3h 453 50.17 450 49.83 0 0.00 0.502
Qh 9h 127 14.06 776 85.94 0 0.00 0.141
Ks Kc 323 35.77 580 64.23 0 0.00 0.358

Is it just me, or does the fact that Ah3h's %win actually increases a little seem counterintuitive?

[AceHigh]

"Ah3h's %win actually increases a little seem counterintuitive?"

You made the deck richer in hearts, by taking out 2 non-hearts. Make 1 of the K's the of hearts and see what happens.

[Homer]

No, it makes sense to me. In the first case A3h is behind to top-pair of Q's, and has 3 Ace outs and 7 heart outs (10/45 cards improve the hand). In the second case it is behind no differently than in Hand 1 (it doesn't matter if it is behind to KK or Q9) and has the same number of outs, but there are two less "bad" cards in the deck (10/43 to improve now as opposed to 10/45 in Hand 1).

Make one of the K's a heart and see what happens.

-- Homer

[Ulysses]

You made the deck richer in hearts, by taking out 2 non-hearts.

Duh. [img]/forums/images/icons/crazy.gif[/img] Thanks.

[bugstud]

gutshots are outs, too