math quiz

[locutus2002]

1. Villain folds hero wins 4K.
Villain calls hero hits str8 15% of the time and wins 10K and 85% of the time loses 4K. Net -2K.
villain folds 33% of the time to break even.

2a. Who knows. hero calls 6XBB to win 7XBB and has to be 46.5% in the hand. roughly a big hand like KQ. (tight range)
2b. Not so tight a range ~QT
3a. Hero calls 4K to win 7K and must be 36% in the hand or have an avg of 17 outs against entire range.
2/3 of the time we have 3 outs and 1/3 of the time we have 43 outs, don't call. ~15 outs. Don't call but its close.
3b. Hero needs 17 outs. 1 out ~2% (1/50) so add 4%. Villain must have middle pair 37% of the time and top pair 63%.

this is of course way too complicated for at the table calculations, you would have to have a great read on villain to even consider him having top pair more frequently than middle pair when you hold a king.

the table dynamics counts for much more than than a few percent, so I wouldn't waste my time on these details. It's close enough to be a call in the first case inspite of the unlikely circumstances.

[gobboboy]

I don't think this quiz is very indicative of what you use for poker. No one will ever calculate this much at the poker table and if they are, I don't suspect they are close to expert players. Despite what we say, math is not nearly as important as experience and good instincts in NL tournament play. There are too many factors which we can't account for, which is one reason why there aren't any computers which can play NL Holdem efficiently.

I looked at the questions and thought about my answers, but there were too many variables which you can't account for in numbers. Especially since most of us never think about the answers to questions like this in the heat of the moment (prove me wrong, please, but I've NEVER run the numbers in depth during a decision).

Don't take this the wrong way, but this thread is just going to be us patting ourselves on the back but at the table you'll get a completely different answer from 95% of us.

[Exitonly]

Er. I think i completely disagree with you. This isn't serious math, and i doubt these problems were meant for you to get a pen and paper and figure them out... you have to practice doing the math so you know it quickly when you ahve to apply it at the tables.

You're right that when you're at the table you're not going to break down his hand range, and solve for how often he has to fold for you to breakeven. But how else are you supposed to practice? If you can solve these problems quickly, then you'll sure as hell be able to have a 'feel' at the table for what you should be doing.

And, if you suck at doing these problems, then you're going to suck going with your gut at the heat of the moment.

[gobboboy]

Yes, we do use the basic outline of it, and I do think about their hand range and I do use the simple calculations which you think about. But at the same time we usually have guidelines based on math that allow us to take shortcuts.

If we're getting 2 to 1 on a push with a hand like 66, we automatically assume we're getting close to the correct odds. Maybe in my post it comes off as if I'm saying we never use math, but all I'm saying is that we almost never think about it indepth at the table. Even our discussion of it here is tainted because we don't have the adrenaline rush that we have at the table.

[Exitonly]

And the more math you do like this, the more practice you get, the more decisions become automatic, like the 66 w/ 2:1 odds.

i forgot where iw as going with this, because i got distracted. But anyway. Yea.. practice makes the harder decisions more automatic.