prop bets

[RydenStoompala]

To quote your avatar...

"Do it...Do it"

[RydenStoompala]

I played in a sleepy home NL game that got much better when the host took $5 from everyone, winner takes all, pot going to who gets caught with the worst bluff of the night. You had to be called to win. As expected, a 7-2 off suit won the pot betting half a stack into trip kings. Since it was a $20 buy-in, unlimitted rebuys, and there were 12 of us, it created a lot of weird action. I myself did not try for the $60 pot but did make a lot from those who wanted it. Mind you, I was the only sober person in the room.

[rogue]

[ QUOTE ]

Your forgetting that thisprop bet is specific to seeing the flop, therefore your statement is not applicable.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure the bet only happens when we see the flop. But in general we will see more flops when people have the high cards in their hands. It is kind of like counting cards. Mathematically, the lowered chances of a AKQ coming because people have those cards in there hands is offset by the other times people don't have those cards, and the chances are even higher. However if we cut the flops out where people have low cards, the distribution would get slightly tilted away from AKQ.

If you rabbit chased every time there wasn't a flop, the percentages would be exact.

It would be interesting to see someone calculate the number of times a AKQ vs a 234 came on the flop in all of their hands in PT.

[youtalkfunny]

[ QUOTE ]
Will a 2, 3, or 4 hit the flop?
Your marks will like to have the "no".
The "yes" is favored.
Grab up all the even-money that you can.

[/ QUOTE ]

750 posts, and THIS is my most celebrated?

I feel so empty.

[Derek in NYC]

This bet needs to be made before the deal begins. If the mark is allowed to know his own hand contains a 2 and 3, for example, he enjoys a slight statistical edge.

[TomCollins]

TT, you are incorrect. Here is why.

Suppose you have a game. The deck is played with 12 card (AAAA KKKK QQQQ) Each player is dealt one card. If either player "stays in", then one card is dealt face up. If it is an ace, you win, if it is a non-ace, your opponent wins. He pays you 2-1.

This is a fair game if you stay in every hand.

However, suppose that you and yourr opponent only stayed in if you had an ace. In this case, your odds of hitting an ace decrease tremendously. There are either 3 aces or 2 aces left (depending if you both stay). The odds of seeing the flop is:

42% = No one has an ace
9% = Both have aces
49% = Exactly one has an ace

Of these cases, only case 2 and 3 apply.

So of the times you "see the flop" (i.e. a bet is valid), an ace only hits

(9/58)*2/10 + (49/58)*3/10 = 29% of the time. So your odds of winning decrease from 33% to 29%.

So if you are more likely to see a flop with a given distribution, it does affect the deck. But since about 99% of all hands in low-limits see flops, it is not even a tiny factor.

[Luv2DriveTT]

Unless I don't understand, your argument doesn't seem relevent. Can anyone else make heads or tales out of this?

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[edtost]

read the last sentance and move on......

[TomCollins]

My point is, if the times flops are seen, there are fewer high cards in the deck (more lower cards), this certainly is SOMEWHAT of a factor.