[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
Very interesting

I think these rankings paint a far more accurate picture of what hands are good calling hands.

How hard would it be for you to rank vs a random chance of a slightly more refined list of possible opposition hands

I'd actually like to take some hands like A2o-A6o off the list and add some hands like KQ, KJ, and suited broadway cards


[/ QUOTE ]

Dirt simple. Give me any list, I'll give you the rankings.

[ QUOTE ]

Also, does this list take into account the greater likelihood that your opponent is holding AK than a pair, etc...


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes it does. This was slightly tricky to get right and there's still one point which seems "wrong" to me but it's the only way I can the probabilities to sum to unity (which is of course a necessary condition for it to be correct)

Here's the case I'm confused by: when you hold an offsuit non-pair hand and your opponent holds a suited hand that matches both of your cards in rank, how many different hands can he be holding?

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
* There aren't many hands which have a win pct > 50% against a random pair or ace! The only "winners" are: AAo, KKo, QQo, JJo, TTo, AKs, 99o, AKo, AQs, 88o, AQo, AJs, 77o, AJo, 66o, ATs, 55o, ATo


[/ QUOTE ]

This is a very powerful point. I think that this point almost comes close to a suggested calling requirement against shortstacks pushing on the bubble

Good Post
Brad S

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks. Glad you got something out of it.

eastbay