Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > General Poker Discussion > Poker Theory
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #121  
Old 12-19-2003, 12:18 AM
Cyrus Cyrus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Tundra
Posts: 1,720
Default Correction

I apologize. The correct average winning percentage of my QQ vs AKs is of course approximately 54% (and not 65%).

The rest of the argument remains valid, IMO, calling for TT as the most preferred hand when the opponent holds either AKs or AA. It's slightly ahead of QQ and JJ.

--Cyrus
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 12-19-2003, 12:26 AM
Nottom Nottom is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Hokie Country
Posts: 4,030
Default Re: Correction

[ QUOTE ]
I apologize. The correct average winning percentage of my QQ vs AKs is of course approximately 54% (and not 65%).


[/ QUOTE ]

No need for apologies, I think most of us knew the true odds and it didn't really matter anyway as the rest of you post still follows.
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 12-20-2003, 02:13 AM
Ryan_21 Ryan_21 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 606
Default Re: The correct answer is 77

"77 with a board of 89TJQ will beat AA"

Im half in the bag right now, but even I can realize that 77 vs. AA w/ a board of 89TJQ is a split!

Ryan_21
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 12-20-2003, 02:55 PM
pankwindu pankwindu is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1
Default relative value of 76s vs. 65s

[ QUOTE ]
The crucial factor must be that it also reduces the ways in which AA and AKs can win be eliminating boards resulting in the low end A-5 straight. 76s also does this to an extent but not in as many ways as 65s.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can someone explain why 65s is better than 76s? My understanding from the above and other comments was that the main benefit of 65s was to give you the winning straight on a 2-3-4-5 board. But, 76s does this also, with slightly higher card values and still low enough to catch a winning straight on the high side...? So, what am I missing that makes 65s better than 76s?
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 12-20-2003, 10:40 PM
M.B.E. M.B.E. is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 1,552
Default Re: relative value of 76s vs. 65s

[ QUOTE ]
Can someone explain why 65s is better than 76s? My understanding from the above and other comments was that the main benefit of 65s was to give you the winning straight on a 2-3-4-5 board. But, 76s does this also, with slightly higher card values and still low enough to catch a winning straight on the high side...? So, what am I missing that makes 65s better than 76s?

[/ QUOTE ]
In this post, Bozeman points out that 76s wins more pots outright, but 65s has more ties which puts it over the top.

In particular, if I have 65 the tie board JT987 can come up 4^5 ways, but if I have 76 it can come up only 4^4*3 ways (i.e. 75% as much). Similarly if I have 65 the tie board T9876 can come up 4^4*3 ways, but if I have 76 it can come up only 4^3*3^2 ways (again 75% as much).

The extra ties that 65 gets more than makes up for the few extra wins 76 has (e.g. 76 will win against AA on the four boards J7655, J7644, J7633, and J7622, but 65 has only three corresponding boards: T6544, T6533, and T6522).
Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 12-21-2003, 12:25 AM
Nottom Nottom is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Hokie Country
Posts: 4,030
Default Re: relative value of 76s vs. 65s

[ QUOTE ]
The extra ties that 65 gets more than makes up for the few extra wins 76 has (e.g. 76 will win against AA on the four boards J7655, J7644, J7633, and J7622, but 65 has only three corresponding boards: T6544, T6533, and T6522).

[/ QUOTE ]

AA wins in all these cases, unless I am missing something obvious.
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 12-21-2003, 01:08 AM
M.B.E. M.B.E. is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 1,552
Default Re: relative value of 76s vs. 65s

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The extra ties that 65 gets more than makes up for the few extra wins 76 has (e.g. 76 will win against AA on the four boards J7655, J7644, J7633, and J7622, but 65 has only three corresponding boards: T6544, T6533, and T6522).

[/ QUOTE ]

AA wins in all these cases, unless I am missing something obvious.

[/ QUOTE ]
Oh yeah, you're right. My examples were wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 12-22-2003, 05:05 AM
Morbo Morbo is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 26
Default Re: Question

Uhm, wouldn't the correct answer simply be AA? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

EDIT: Ok, I figured it would be too easy so I read the original post again... [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 12-22-2003, 02:31 PM
BobK BobK is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1
Default Re: Question

This is perfect data for TT which appears to me to be the best.
Hope my math is the same.

Unpaired suited hands do much worse.

1712304 total possible boards per matchup type
One unit bet per board

_________Wins________Ties
AsKs____786350_______6244
TdTc____919710_______6244
P/L_____133360___________3 of 6 no common suit

AsKs____779838_______7703
TsTh____924763_______7703
P/L_____144925___________3 of 6 one common suit
Avg. P/L when AKs vs TT (133360 + 144925) / 2 = 139142.5 units avg. win


AsAh____1368728______5092
TdTc_____338484______5092
P/L____-1030244__________1 of 6 no common suit

AsAh____1379434______6471
TsTc_____326399______6471
P/L____-1053035__________4 of 6 one common suit

AsAh____1390140______7850
TsTh_____314314______7850
P/L____-1075826__________1 of 6 two common suit
Avg. P/L when AA vs TT (-1030244/6) + ((-1053035/6)* 4) + (-1075826/6) = -1053035 units avg. loss

Total possible boards 1712304 * 5 = 8561520

Overall P/L for TT vs. (AA or AKs)
(-1053035 * 6) + (139142.5 * 4) =-5761640 loss on 8561520 boards

Per board loss 5761640/8561520 = 0.6729692 units

So you're about a 2 to 1 dog if you don't know which hand they hold.

Bob

P.S.
Maybe someone can tell me how to columnize items without using the underscore?
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 12-22-2003, 08:47 PM
Cyrus Cyrus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Tundra
Posts: 1,720
Default Re: Table format

Try the "Code" button from the "Instant UBB code" table. It respects the spacebar, see:

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

Table Important Finding Less Important

1 0.568% 75k </pre><hr />
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.