On the fly thinking -- out counting exercise

actually closer to 6.5 didn't see the doube gut shot

1)6/4.25
2)10/10
3)4.5/6
4)7/7
5)15/14
6)6.5/6.5
7)13.5/15
8)4.5/3.5
9)9/8.5
10)5/5
11)4/5
12)1.5/1.5
13)2/1.5
14)2/2
15)8/8
16)5/5
17)3.5/3.5
18)4/4
19)5.5/1
20)3.5/3.5


Most overcards are subject to reverse domination or str8 domination (where your OC completes a str8).
Short hand discounting*
R = Reverse domination
S = Str8
F = Flush (most are auto)

1) 2[T], 1.5[BDFD] .75[A]*R\S = 4.25 outs
2) 3.5[9], 3.5[A], 3[KQ]*R\F\S = 10 outs
3) 2[9], .5[T]* S, 3.5[Q]*S(AT) = 6 outs
4) 3.5[6], 3.5[2] = 7 outs
5) 9[[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]], 3[K], 2[AQ]*R\S = 14 outs
6) 2[3], 3[Q], 1.5[FD] = 6.5 outs
7) 9[[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]], {2x.5}1[SD], 5[AK]*R = 15 outs
8) .5[FD], 1.5[SD], 1.5[J]*S = 3.5 outs
9) 4[J], 4[6], .5[8]*S = 8.5 outs
10) 2[T], 2.5[J], .5[SD] = 5 outs
11) 3.5[2], 1.5[FD] = 4 outs
12) 1.5[5] = 1.5 outs
13) 1[SD], .5[FD] = 1.5 outs
14) 2[4] = 2 outs
15) 4[T], 4[5] = 8 outs
16) 2[5], 1.5[A]*R, 1.5[FD] = 5 outs
17) 3.5[4] = 3.5 outs
18) 4[T] = 4 outs
19) Interesting. If already behind, villian has QQ,JJ,44,QJ,Q4. Best case scenario, villian holds 44, or 2pr.
Hero has 0 outs in 2/5 and 2 outs 3/5. I said 1 out
20) 1.5[FD], 2[K] = 3.5 outs

[aargh57]

1) 6.5/6
2) 7/10
3) 6/5.5
4) 7/7
5) 11/10.5
6) 6/5
7) 12.5/12.5
8) 2.5/2.5
9) 8.5/8
10) 4/4
11) 2/4.5
12) 2/2
13) 1/1
14) 2/2
15) 7/7
16) 6.5/6
17) 3/3
18) 4/4
19) 5.5/3 (assuming we're behind)
20) 3.5/3.5

How about 2nd or bottom pair? I usually assign about 4.5 outs to 2nd pair with an overcard but have more trouble estimating when I don't have an overcard. I understand that the texture of the board has something to do with it too. A hand like #1, I assigned 4.5 outs to the 2nd pair + overcard but in #3 I only assigned 2 as any T puts 4 to a strt on board. How about #6? I only gave the bottom pair and Q kicker as 4 outs. Is this too low? Too high? (Note, the numbers don't match my answers as I'm only talking about counting the pair and kicker not other draws)

[bottomset]

lets see how bad bottomset is at this, no thinking, just the first # i come up with ... should be a good display of why Im not good at teh game

ok nevermind, bottomset thought it was a counterfeiting out counting excercise, and also can't keep track of 20numbers in his head at the same time, and scrolling sucks

hand1: you got the best hand

when i get back home Ill do this for real

[Greg J]

In general something I have seen on this post is not counting enough for back door draws to the nut flush. See page 66 and 67 in WOHEP (King Yao's book). It gives a great explanation. You can give 1.5 for second and third nuts and 1.0 outs for lower bd flush draws.

Other common situation is when you have mid or bottom pair. Quick and dirty analyses can give you 5 outs here, but be wary of connectedness, as hitting your other card can make for straight possibilities or straight redraws.

[bottomset]

[ QUOTE ]
Other common situation is when you have mid or bottom pair. Quick and dirty analyses can give you 5 outs here, but be wary of connectedness, as hitting your other card can make for straight possibilities or straight redraws.



[/ QUOTE ]

yeah but simplifing this to imply that you are always behind isn't the way to go either.

its often teh best hand, especially if the pot is shorthanded, mainly in steal-raise vs blind battles

so what usually happens is that, you have the best hand a % of the time, and trip/2pr outs

so much determining how many outs you have, is dependent on the action, and players involved that blindly saying you have 7outs with ATh, on a KxTx5h board isn't really gonna help players much, I don't believe

[Greg J]

[ QUOTE ]
that blindly saying you have 7outs with ATh, on a KxTx5h board isn't really gonna help players much, I don't believe

[/ QUOTE ]
I think this is a mischaracterization of what I am trying to say (though not a willful or disengenous one).

There are certainly many times when you are ahead here -- I won't debate that. The exercise was based on a simple assumption, and I don't think that suspending other considerations and making this one assumption is a big deal. It seems you do, however, which is cool (or am I misunderstanding you). I'm just saying "pretend you are behind to top pair or better," which I think is rather harmless. However, if you are right this entire excercise of mine is totally worthless.

[bottomset]

ok its not worthless, i looked back through the thread, and I think a bunch of ppl really are getting something out of this, its prob worthless for me since its too simplified

you said top pair or better .. well the number of outs you have is dependent on the hand range the villian has, and since the "or better" part will always decrease your number of outs in these situations .. like someone having top and bottom pair .. makes a naked midpair really only have 2outs for trips

so lets say that the hand range TP, top2, bottom2, top/bottom, and 1-3sets .. thats the full range of TP or better, if ignoring preflop action .. given preflop action you can elimnate some of the above, say villian raises UTG(10handed), you can eliminate hands like K2o, 22, T5s etc

so you might get a hand range down to say AK, KQ, KK, TT(again assuming that villian won't bet a hand like AQ, AJ .. but since we are ignoring the times we are ahead, i'll play along)

so with AT look at how it stands up against the hand range, KT5 rainbow, with a bd flush draw

AK: 2T outs, BDflush draw so 3.5 there are 9combos of AKleft

KQ: 2T outs, 3Aouts(but that gives a gutshot redraw), BDflushdraw prob say: 5.5outs or so ... 12combos

KK: up [censored] creek, just running A or T's for a boat/quads, and the BDflush draw which is severly weakened with a set out there, AT is worth 1out or so .. 3combos of KK

TT: still in horrible shape, running A's, and the BD draws again worth about 1out .. only 1combo

so (9 x 3.5) + (12 x 5.5) + (3 x 1) + (1 x 1)/(9 + 12 + 3 + 1) gives you 4.06 outs vs that hand range

still simplified, but a better idea of how much more to this there is

[homebrewer]

Fun thread!

A couple of observations:

1. In counting the outs, it is not necessarily the number that you come up with, but how you come up with them. I can’t really tell if my 7.5 outs are truly equivalent to your 7.5 outs. But, some of the discussion by Greg and others are clarifying this for me.

2. There seems to be few cases overall where the number of outs counted “on the fly” (OTF) is less than the number of outs counted under careful consideration. I’m a little surprised. My initial thoughts about this would be that the OTF outs would be a bit less than under careful consideration (CC) (i.e., CC > OTF) because one would find hidden out more readily. This doesn’t appear to be a common trend. But, IF there is a trend, it seems to be going in the opposite direction (i.e., OTF > CC). What does this mean? 1) Is it that we’re initially overestimating outs on a systematic basis? That is, are we optimistic about the probability of making our hands?

3. In many cases the number of outs OTF = CC outs. Are your outs the same outs OTF and under CC? When you initially count outs are they the same outs OTF as CC? For example, you could be overestimating OTF outs and still reach the same number of outs under CC because you are now discounting your initial estimate but now include those back-door and/or hidden outs. Or, is it simple. You get the same number because you’re just that good and/or consistent?