|
|
#91
06-08-2004, 08:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Simple question with simple answer.
[ QUOTE ]
The general excoriation of said theory had me concerned. [/ QUOTE ] Vaingloriously and pusillanimously excoriated, indeed.... [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] 
|
|
#93
06-08-2004, 08:42 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Simple question with simple answer.
[ QUOTE ]
Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The general excoriation of said theory had me concerned. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Vaingloriously and pusillanimously excoriated, indeed.... [/ QUOTE ] Let me rephrase: Damn. That sh*t was wack, yo.
|
|
#94
06-08-2004, 09:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Simple question with simple answer.
I would guess that David's reasoning has something to do with the likelyhood of a 7 helping someone else out being more than a 4 helping an opponent. However I think if you ran the simulation with one or two Axs hands with x being between 2 and 5 you would see different results. However I suppose there is a flip side to that, being that you will make a straight at times when someone holding Ax will make two pair and get paid off nicely. But that is assuming you will have the odds to draw to a lot of gutshots. I'll be interested to see his further comments but I'll reserve judgement until then. For now I think I'd rather 77.
|
|
#95
06-08-2004, 09:38 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Simple question with simple answer.
See my posts for the answer.
Your post is truly pathetic. Not only don't you find any valid argument but you bash other people for not finding one but trying. In my first post, I said that I thought 77 was still better mainly due to a better showdown equity, but now I think David might be right about 44 being at least equal against limpers who are loose but not insane on the flop.
|
|
#96
06-08-2004, 10:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Simple question with simple answer.
Because you have the same chance of making a set with 44 and 77 and the chances of set over set are so low as to be negligible. Also with both the chances of overcards are large when a set is made, this will mean you should get plenty of action from worse hands in both cases.
|
|
#97
06-08-2004, 10:49 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Simple question with simple answer.
[ QUOTE ]
If a few people are already in, I would not prefer two sevens to two fours. Some would play the higher pair only but they would be wrong. What is the MAIN reason fours are at least as good? [/ QUOTE ] I hate to argue with semantics, but it never seems that David is arguing that 4s are better than 7s. I believe he is just arguing against those people that would only play the 7s and not the 4s. Therefore, I believe the main reason that 4s are as good as 7s is that you are playing these hands for their set value and almost nothing else in a large multi-way pot, so 4s = 7s. matt But, I have to admit I'm really curious to see David's answer if 4s >= 7s, it could have something to do with [ QUOTE ] The likelyhood of people having two overcards to the flop is significantly better if a 4 falls on the flop vs a 7 [/ QUOTE ] or [ QUOTE ] the only place i can see 44 being better is that there is a better chance (although still small) of 77 being an overpair and it costing you a few extra bets if you try to gun it out [/ QUOTE ] but I don't like either of those answers completely either.
|
|
#99
06-08-2004, 11:54 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Simple question with simple answer.
I think that it is a given here that we are playing both 44 and 77 for the set. But, in the instances that we do make our set, the 7 being on the board is more likely to make other players a straight than a four being on the board. Thus, the fact that the 77 will give you an overpair more often than the 44 is offset by the fact that you will be losing the set of 7's to a straight, being that there are far more cards that people enter pots with that can utilize a 7 to make a straight than a 4. Thus, I would not prefer having either two cards more IF "a few people are already in." But if it were to be heads up, I'd take 77 over 44 any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
-TiK long time lurker, first time poster.
|
|
#100
06-08-2004, 11:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Simple question with simple answer.
[ QUOTE ]
The fact that people are less likely to play a four than a seven doesn't make it more likely that a four will flop! [/ QUOTE ] If many people are already in AND people are more likely to play a hand that contains a 7 than a hand that contains a 4, you ARE more likely to flop a set of 4s than a set of 7s. The increased odds are too small to have any practical value, but they do exist.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
