|
|
#11
09-24-2005, 10:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A very tommy hand
I'm impressed.
One thing though, if K9o is a raise in the CO for you (I realize that this might be an oversimplification not considering who the button and blinds are etc., but anyway.. ), how come you hadn't raised in 2 hours? Surely some atleast equally good raising situations must come along pretty often if you raise that hand there. Are you so position sensitive that hands as good as big aces and such become limps or even folds because of the number of players behind? (limping would be pretty counterproductive in my mind if you're woried about position). Going through a pretty rough downswing, I appreciate the different view on the game that you offer. Any response will be great. 
|
|
#12
09-24-2005, 10:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A very tommy hand
[ QUOTE ]
I focused on trying to catch a pair on the turn [/ QUOTE ] love it! as to your logic in the hand, i noticed that you didn't calculate ANY possibility of your read being wrong and/or it being the opposite of what you thought it was. your classification system is interesting and i like it, although i dont entirely understand how you utilize it accross many situations (but i do see how the classification lends itself to such a use, i just dont entirely see it) but in your analysis, if your read would be wrong 5% of the time, i think putting that small bet in on the flop would be worth it because of the 6sbs already in there and such a small increase in probability of winning the pot right there due to your read being off is worth the POSSIBILITY of giving up .2sbs or so in expectation. i really doubt its much more than that given that the guy is honest. I know youve played live since the dinosaurs ruled the earth, but even their long term reign had a few bumps in the road....they're problem was they couldn't do anything even if they knew it was coming...but you're smarter than that [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] also, im of the opinion that reads dont follow a normal distribution. they follow discrete ones based on catagories and positives (read is right) and negatives (read is wrong) ... there is no need to see HOW right or wrong a read is (that is accomplished by taking the expected value given the mass on either side of zero), just that it is or it isn't in the binary sense. in this case, not assigning any mass to the <0 part of the distribution hurts your overall expectation if any mass is there that would cause yout o win a pot for a small postflop investment when a check gives the pot up a good part of the time (when focusing on hitting a pair doesn' work) Barron
|
|
#15
09-24-2005, 03:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A very tommy hand
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] not assigning any mass to the <0 part of the distribution hurts your overall expectation [/ QUOTE ] Good stuff. [/ QUOTE ] when you quote my statements like that are you being sarcastic or complimentary? i can never tell. Barron
|
|
#16
09-24-2005, 03:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A very tommy hand
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] not assigning any mass to the <0 part of the distribution hurts your overall expectation [/ QUOTE ] Good stuff. [/ QUOTE ] when you quote my statements like that are you being sarcastic or complimentary? i can never tell. Barron [/ QUOTE ] That wasn't sarcastic. -James
|
|
#17
09-24-2005, 03:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A very tommy hand
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] not assigning any mass to the <0 part of the distribution hurts your overall expectation [/ QUOTE ] Good stuff. [/ QUOTE ] when you quote my statements like that are you being sarcastic or complimentary? i can never tell. Barron [/ QUOTE ] That wasn't sarcastic. -James [/ QUOTE ] k, thanks. i trust your sarcasm detector. I only asked b/c the last time i made a fairly statistical post he quoted a 1 liner and said "good stuff" and there too i couldn't tell if it was a compliment or not. anyways, thanks james for clarifying, and to el d, i appreciate it. peace, Barron
|
|
#18
09-24-2005, 04:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A very tommy hand
[ QUOTE ]
to el d, i appreciate it. [/ QUOTE ] I'm sure he appreciates your appreciation. (What will James' sarcasm-o-meter read?) Regardless, my only reason for posting (it wasn't the above nonsense) was to likewise chime in with what Diablo said ... that was some good stuff there. Barron Vangor Toth BarronVangorToth.com
|
|
#20
09-24-2005, 06:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A very tommy hand
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] not assigning any mass to the <0 part of the distribution hurts your overall expectation [/ QUOTE ] Good stuff. [/ QUOTE ] "lol." there are a lot of really funny posts in this thread. i will leave it to others to elaborate.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
