another example - sorry to bring it up again.

[microlimitaddict]

the previous thread seemed to stray a little bit from my initial premise (that's okay....that's what message boards are supposed to do) and I thought of another, potentially more convincing, example. I submit it with all due respect to Jimbo and other nay-sayers who certainly know whereof they speak and clearly have significantly more poker knowledge than yours truly. I am a newcomer to the game, and have admittedly little experience dabbling in this stuff yet still remain convinced there may be alternate theories out there. for those who tired of this topic on this first go-round i sincerely apologize and humble ask for your indulgence.

Okay here goes -

Scenario -
3 players at table
AK, 77, pre-flop fold

conventional wisdom tells us that there are 3 A's remaining in the 50 unknown cards. But is this really the case?? Can we safely assume that the pre-flop fold did not have AA?? He/she had just one A at the most. Thus, what I call the "realistic" odds are now converted to 3 A's among 49 remaining cards to be considered.

The examples in the previous thread that looked at 10 hand HE and 20 hand HE are interesting. But, in fact, I believe that the fewer hands there are on the table, the more each fold tells us. Indeed, if in a 20 handed game we saw 18 folds, there would be a decent chance that all the A's and K's went down with the folds because there is far more room for them to be distributed.

But in a 6-handed game with 4 hands folded...it is pretty unlikely that all the A's and K's are gone because that would mean someone folded AA or KK.

And in a 3-handed game....the 1 fold is pretty easy to make some adjustments to calculations.

Anyway, enough rambling for now...I have convinced myself that it is a somewhat valid theory worthy of further exploration (imo). Naturally, all viewpoints welcome, including those contrarians who think i am a total nut-ball.

[Jimbo]

"Anyway, enough rambling for now...I have convinced myself that it is a somewhat valid theory worthy of further exploration (imo). Naturally, all viewpoints welcome, including those contrarians who think i am a total nut-ball. "

Let me see if I understand what you are saying. You read the entire other thread and yet you believe your theory still has merit because there are now only three players? All I can say is, Praise the Lord for poker and pass the chips!


PS: What sites and at what limits do you play?

[Jimbo]

OK, I just had an idea. Suppose you were playing holdem 22 handed. Now everyone folds except you holding AK. Does this mean that it is more likely that the 5 remaing cards are aces and kings? Suppose all 22 players call and you hold AK. Does this make it less likely that there are no aces or kings left in the deck?

[lorinda]

One interesting aspect of mongeron's hands is that there were indeed less aces and kings on the flops in hands where he called.

There wasn't a huge difference, but it was noticable.

Lori

[microlimitaddict]

i think the 22 handed game is a less relevant example...but to answer your question, yes...i do believe the fact that all the players called or folded does tell you something.

However, as stated previously, I believe the fold from the 3-handed example carries with it far more interesting information than the 22-handed example. Yes, I believe that the 3-handed situation does indeed prove something.

To reiterate - unless you want to assume that the player who folded would indeed toss AA in the muck then I find no reason why we should assume a remaining pack of 50 cards. Yes, the AA in the muck is indeed a possibility that the computer simulations are forced to recognize. But I submit that the more "realistic" odds would recognize that a player is, in the very least, extremely unlikely to fold AA.

again, i only dabble in this whole math bit and consider myself quite the amateur in the field (as well as at poker....although i have placed in 5 of my last 6 sit-and-go's....which is very possibly an accident although I am hoping it isn't).

basically, under my theory, the Ace is the card that gets folded the least.
and the 7 is in a group of cards that gets folded more frequently.

i would be willing to bet that if you were able to analyze the folded hands at almost any HE table at any limit that you would find more 7's thrown into the muck than Aces. If this is true, then each fold represents a slightly greater chance that there is an Ace remaining in the pack.

Lets say that a study of actual hands...or of some variety of computer simulated "typical" play were to show a small difference - say 20% of all Aces see the flop compared with 15% of all 7's. Even this is information that I find interesting.
Obviously, it would be difficult to do a study of actual hands or simulated play to any degree of accuracy. But still, I find it hard to believe there are many tables out there where the Ace is folded as frequently as a 7.

I am playing micro-limit stuff only on PokerStars for now.

Thanks again for reading. I hope I have provided some material and ideas that, in the very least, is not completely uninteresting.

[Jimbo]

You just have to love your persistence. Suppose I agree that 7's are more likely to be folded than Aces. Now what? You are implying that aces are more likely to be dealt than 7's which I cannot agree with. In fact in your 3 person example where you have an ace in your hand and your opponnent has 7's it makes it less likely that an ace is dealt not more. I agree noone is likely to fold AA but this means nothing. Below is why:

<pre><font class="small">code:</font><hr>

Hands containing an ace that will probably fold:

A2o A3o A4o A5o A6o A7o A8o A9o A6s A7s A8s A9s

Hands containing an ace that will probably call:

A2s A3s A4s A5s AJo AQo AKs ATs AJs AQs AKs AA




The one hand that may go either way:

ATo

</pre><hr>

Now count the possible numbers of Ax hands that will be folded and the number of Ax hands that will call. Do you see a trend here? If so you should now know one reason why your theory is unsound other than being a mathmatical fallacy in and of itself.

[microlimitaddict]

i don't want to misinterpret your point. there may be something to your chart-type-thing than i'm not seeing.

hands with 7's that one expects to be kept include
77, A7s, 67s, 78s - certainly there are far fewer 7's hands kept than Ace hands.

Anyway, I think we'll both agree that this argument is getting a little silly and that one of us is not terribly likely to persuade the other. perhaps we should not belabor the point any longer and simply 'agree to disagree' as the saying goes.
the fact that noone else has jumped into this is indicative of the lack of interest or agreement with my theory.


by the way - as i'm typing this i'm playing in a game online...guess what hand i just got dealt...
77!!!
har har har.

thanks for a lively discussion.

[BamaGambler]

My thoughts are it doesn't really matter. You would be better off trying to read your opponents hand, then trying to decide how many cards are still in the "deck" for your odds calculations. These adjustments micro discusses would only come into play for extremely close calls. Extremely close calls should be made on judgment. With all that being said I think micro makes a couple of valid points. Also note AK goes up in value because of other reasons when played shorthanded. For example, you might win without improving.

[Jimbo]

"Also note AK goes up in value because of other reasons when played shorthanded. For example, you might win without improving."

Not when your opponent has 77 as in the original posters' example.

[pudley4]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
Can we safely assume that the pre-flop fold did not have AA??

[/ QUOTE ]

Can we safely assume he didn't have KK too? Ok, so a K is now 3/49 instead of 3/50.

But what about QQ? Or JJ? Or even 22? In fact, in a 3-handed game, since a pocket pair is a strong hand, can't we "safely" assume he didn't have any pair? So by your logic, any card (other than A or K) would have 4/49 odds. But there are 50 unknown cards - where did the extra card go?

Also note that your other opponent already has 77, so really you should have stated the remaining number of cards as 48 (or 47) as opposed to 50 (or 49).