Math, EV and Middle Pair Options (long)

[iceman5]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Here's my take on you fim...your some college professor who teaches at some so-so school (most likely a state school) and has a chip on your shoulder because you didn't have the intellectual acumen to make it to the big time. And your right ..most of your posts are destructive. Don't worry though I'll probably end up the same way...I pick my dissertation committee in the fall...

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of you need to chill out. He acknowledged the fact that he was a dick in another post. It seems like he is trying to move on and be more constructive now. He writes a very informative, educational post and you guys still give him [censored]. Give it up already. What more do you want from the guy? If you have beef with a specific post or disagree with a certain poster, just ignore them, either by not reading their stuff or by clicking the ignore button. Don't flame them in the forum (this isn't OOT), it's a waste of everyones time and contributes nothing.

/rant over

[/ QUOTE ]

If anyone thinks "muckmaster" is me, you are 100% wrong.

[Marnixvdb]

[ QUOTE ]
At a table where there is little PFR'ing, lots of limping and tight play against raises, then raising is clearly best as you will not get paid when you do flop a set, and when you are getting called in an unraised pot they are likely drawing to hands that beat yours. This is not what you want. When they're playing tightly the value of the continuation bet especially goes up, so raising pairs, especially with position, seems like the way to go in weakloose and weaktight games.


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with what you say, but the first sentence of this conclusion seems to lack a nuance.

I think this is what you were getting at, but correct me if I'm wrong: Your sets won't pay off if you limped your pair PF. Often, a set will neither pay off if you raised and flopped it, but at weak tight tables, your hand only starts to really matter as soon as you get played back at on the flop. PPs, SCs etc can make postflophands that stand up against the typical range of hands of weak/tight players who play back at you on a flop. Therefore, raising them PF will have tremendous value on later streets in the big pots. The reverse is true for good TPGK hands, with which you will always want to play smaller pots on weak/tight tables.

On another note: raised pots contain much more information on your opponents hand range than unraised pots, which also adds to the value of raising liberally PF (under the right conditions).

Marnix

[fimbulwinter]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's my take on you fim...your some college professor who teaches at some so-so school (most likely a state school) and has a chip on your shoulder because you didn't have the intellectual acumen to make it to the big time. And your right ..most of your posts are destructive. Don't worry though I'll probably end up the same way...I pick my dissertation committee in the fall...

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a very bipolar post. I dont know if calling me a state school professor was meant as an insult or a compliment. GL with your dissertation.

fim

[coltrane]

speaking of state school professors (oh what a horrible insult), did you see my boy J.Diamond has a new 3-part PBS special?....love that guy......don't you? [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]


PS - haven't done more than glance through the math yet, but nice post....it's great to see people take initiative toward original thought (you must be learning from Diamond [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] )

[Dommer]

I think I must be an idiot because I don't think I could do this at all on the fly at a poker table for a particular situation. Hell it's hard enough trying to do it just sitting here and thinking up numbers to plug in, I have no idea if I'm putting in the right numbers. Is analyzing situations like this mathematically required to be a good poker player? I don't do this at all, and if I'm supposed to, well I guess I have my work cut out for me.

Nice post though, just a bit over my head =(

Maybe someone has some real life examples where they have used ev calculations like this to determine what to do?

[fimbulwinter]

[ QUOTE ]
speaking of state school professors (oh what a horrible insult), did you see my boy J.Diamond has a new 3-part PBS special?....love that guy......don't you? [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]


PS - haven't done more than glance through the math yet, but nice post....it's great to see people take initiative toward original thought (you must be learning from Diamond [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] )

[/ QUOTE ]

PBS would give a guy like that a special. ugh, praise the merits of the centrally controlled economy. logic be damned.

fim

[jhall23]

[ QUOTE ]
I think I must be an idiot because I don't think I could do this at all on the fly at a poker table for a particular situation. Hell it's hard enough trying to do it just sitting here and thinking up numbers to plug in, I have no idea if I'm putting in the right numbers. Is analyzing situations like this mathematically required to be a good poker player? I don't do this at all, and if I'm supposed to, well I guess I have my work cut out for me.

Nice post though, just a bit over my head =(

Maybe someone has some real life examples where they have used ev calculations like this to determine what to do?

[/ QUOTE ]

I pretty sure the point here is to do the analysis of these types of things before hand so that you have some idea when the situations comes at the table. I don't think many (any?) people are doing this type of in depth analysis on the fly in a game, especially online when you have 30-100 seconds to make a decision. But having done them before hand you can have a idea of what game conditions you are looking for in order to see whether you would prefer to raise/limp etc.

[cortjstr]

i wouldn't worry about it too much dommer, all us new guys are killing ourselves learning the math while the old salts (who can barely balance their check books) go home with all our money. LOL [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[imported_bingobazza]

[ QUOTE ]
I think I must be an idiot because I don't think I could do this at all on the fly at a poker table for a particular situation. Hell it's hard enough trying to do it just sitting here and thinking up numbers to plug in, I have no idea if I'm putting in the right numbers. Is analyzing situations like this mathematically required to be a good poker player? I don't do this at all, and if I'm supposed to, well I guess I have my work cut out for me.

Nice post though, just a bit over my head =(

Maybe someone has some real life examples where they have used ev calculations like this to determine what to do?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is a great post, thankyou Fimbulwinter.

It has given me a lot of things to think about and work on. Dont feel bad Dommer, I dont think that many people do these calculations in the heat of battle on more than an intuitive basis, which probly leads to many errors (but Im sure some do the figures). Ive come to the conclusion that these calculations are very useful to do away from the table when looking at situations that routinely give you decision making headaches, and I have (slowly) started to learn to do them myself. I got along very nicely for a long time without doing the calcs, but do feel that its -EV at higher limits to not be familiar with them.

Fims post is an excellent example of a situation where it will pay to know the calculations and its very well put across. Credit due here.

Bingo

[fnord_too]

[ QUOTE ]
I think I must be an idiot because I don't think I could do this at all on the fly at a poker table for a particular situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

I still have not sat down to read the OP in earnest, (I want to have a block of time where I can think about it. I ought to print it out and take it to the head with me.) But....

Most of the math you do in analysis away from the table you would never do at the table. You do it away from the table to understand things better and to build an intuition you can use in the game. No one does deep mathematical analysis while playing, but a lot of people do it away from the table and apply the new insights when they are in the games.