Re: KJs in the monkey house
 

[ QUOTE ]
Which is why I asked if I was missing something. Versus their range of hands, I see the difference as about 1.5% in having either hand against their range

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't get it. Here:

With KQ you are AHEAD of their range more often. Which in turn brings down their edge. Therefore, the margin is wider w/KQ vs their range, than w/KJs, look back, AGAIN.

Re: KJs in the monkey house
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Which is why I asked if I was missing something. Versus their range of hands, I see the difference as about 1.5% in having either hand against their range

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't get it. Here:

With KQ you are AHEAD of their range more often. Which in turn brings down their edge. Therefore, the margin is wider w/KQ vs their range, than w/KJs, look back, AGAIN.

[/ QUOTE ]

Looking back:

[ QUOTE ]
Hand 1: 28.7484 % [ 00.27 00.01 ] { AA-22, AKs-A2s, KQs-K8s, QJs-QTs, JTs, AKo-A2o, KQo-K9o, QJo-QTo, JTo }
Hand 2: 19.6655 % [ 00.19 00.01 ] { random }
Hand 3: 19.6635 % [ 00.19 00.01 ] { random }
Hand 4: 31.9227 % [ 00.31 00.01 ] { KJs }


For what it's worth I call w/KQs here:

Hand 1: 27.9476 % [ 00.27 00.01 ] { AA-22, AKs-A2s, KQs-K8s, QJs-QTs, JTs, AKo-A2o, KQo-K9o, QJo-QTo, JTo }
Hand 2: 19.3093 % [ 00.18 00.01 ] { random }
Hand 3: 19.2785 % [ 00.18 00.01 ] { random }
Hand 4: 33.4646 % [ 00.32 00.01 ] { KQs }

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course KQ is ahead more often. I wasn't disputing that. That wasn't what I was asking about. Obviously KQs is better than KJs. By your numbers it's better than KJs by 1.5% versus the field. My argument is that KJ is ahead enough on it's own, (over 25%) given their(the fields) range, to see the flop versus these 3 opponents. Based on your numbers, it is.

My question was whether I was reading the 31.9% number right for KJs. Meaning you're ahead of their range(all 3 opponents) that % of the time as far as pot equity.

b

Re: KJs in the monkey house
 

bernie,

sounds like joe is emphasizing the amount of equity that opponents lose as well as the equity you gain, kind of like how an interception returned for a touchdown is more than a 7 point swing, because not only did you gain points, I lost what could have been a field goal or touchdown. so in that sense, you're reading it right but joe is saying that's not the difference between them.

Re: KJs in the monkey house
 

[ QUOTE ]
sounds like joe is emphasizing the amount of equity that opponents lose as well as the equity you gain, kind of like how an interception returned for a touchdown is more than a 7 point swing, because not only did you gain points, I lost what could have been a field goal or touchdown. so in that sense, you're reading it right but joe is saying that's not the difference between them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like your analogy, well done!

Re: KJs in the monkey house
 

[ QUOTE ]
I like your analogy, well done!

[/ QUOTE ]

But this doesn't make sense (at least to me). I understand all of Bernie's last few posts, but none of yours, after the Pstove post.

Your equity with KJs is 31.9%. This means if everyone was all-in, with a $100 pot, your EV would be $31.90.

Your equity with KQs is 33.4%. This means if everyone was all-in, with a $100 pot, your EV would be $33.40.

Your EV is $1.50 higher with KQs, or 1.5%. You don't get to pocket an extra 1.5% of EV (totalling 3%) just because everyone else is worse off under your KQs. There is no "greater than 7 point swing" analogy here, when we are already talking in terms of equity.

Still confused,

alThor

Re: KJs in the monkey house
 

[ QUOTE ]
Your equity with KJs is 31.9%. This means if everyone was all-in, with a $100 pot, your EV would be $31.90.

Your equity with KQs is 33.4%. This means if everyone was all-in, with a $100 pot, your EV would be $33.40.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the problem with usuing PStove is that we aren't all in preflop and we can make up the extra postflop w/position and excellent postflop play.

Re: KJs in the monkey house
 

[ QUOTE ]
This is the problem with usuing PStove is that we aren't all in preflop and we can make up the extra postflop w/position and excellent postflop play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which goes for both hands. Imo, KJs isn't that much tougher to play in this situation postflop than KQs.

But this also doesn't mean that KJs is -EV to play in this spot. It just means KQs is better.

b

Re: KJs in the monkey house
 

[ QUOTE ]
KJs isn't that much tougher to play in this situation postflop than KQs

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true, however we do increase our chance of domination with KJ versus KQ and that increases our reverse implide odds postflop. With either hand if you hit a pair your going to see it through on this table, the preflop price makes it correct to do so the majority of the time.

KQ dominated by AK(12),AQ(12),AA(12),KK(6),QQ(6) [48 hands]
KJ dominates by AK(12),AQ(16),AJ(12),KQ(12),AA(12),KK(6),QQ(12),JJ (6)[88 hands]

This means that we go from roughly 4% of hands dominating us to 7%, so let's liberally say that this yokel is 3 betting with the top 10% of hands, can you see how bad of shape we are in?