need help w/ numbers from old GoT post

oreogod · #1 10-19-2005, 04:54 AM

Okay, so Im going to play the retard here (as Im sure this is retardely simple). I just need a little help because what Im punching in isnt working.

How did he get the numbers in Bold below? (from HERE):

[ QUOTE ]

I'm getting an immediate 15.5:1 on my call. Against a set, I'll river a winner once every 21 times, so I'm losing 5.5 BB's every 21 occurances, for an average of -.38 BB's per occurance. If he has 2 pair Queens and Jacks, I'll river a winner once every 5.5 times, so I'm winning 10 BB's every 5.5 occurances, for an average of +1.82 BB's per occurance. So if I only give my opponent this hand-set, my call is profitable if he has a set less than 82.7% of the time. Do you think it's higher than that?

If so, add in my implied odds. Let's say I give myself 2 BB's worth for hitting my set, and .5 BB worth for hitting my 2-pair (since I'd only check and call, and sometimes will still lose to a set). Reasonable estimations, in my opinion. Now that number goes up to 90.95% (-.19 BB/occurance and +1.91 BB/occurance, respectively). Do you think he have a set more often than 90.95% of the time here?? If so, add into the hand-set an AQ that is planning to check through the river unimproved, which is definitely a slight possibility.

[/ QUOTE ]

imported_ncray · #2 10-19-2005, 08:42 PM

In 21 occurrences you expect to:
1 time river a K and win a 16.5BB pot if opponent doesn't put any more money in (16.5BB-1BB to call = 15.5BB)
20 times not river a K and lose 1BB for drawing (-20BBs)
15.5BB - 20BB = -4.5BB every 21 hands. Hmm, it's not -5.5 but its close [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]. If you count implied odds, then the number gets further away from the -5.5BB.

As far as the -.38BBs per occurrence, I'm confused. 5.5/21=.261. Also, if he's misspelling "occurrence" he might also be making a few calculation errors.

As far as the 82.7%, that's the breakeven percentage for calling. .827*-.38 + (1-.827)*1.82 = about 0.

I think he just made some miscalculations, but I could be wrong. Also, bump. Hopefully more people can look over these numbers.

oreogod · #3 10-20-2005, 04:43 AM

Yeah...the -.38 was really screwing with me...I posted this question on #sstakes IRC and found out that -.38 number was wrong and supposed to be -.26...but you know its GoT posting it and he knows his stuff...so I was like wtf, how did he get that number.

Thanks for filling me in on the 82.7 percent number though. I figured it was something like that...supa simple. Thanks for the help.