#1
|
|||
|
|||
For Those Who Enjoy Meaningless Semantic Debates
Thank you in advance for being a nerd with me...
Here we go: Flop is 3TJ rainbow. I have QK. I end up pushing all-in, and my opponent calls with AJ. No flush draws on the flop. Given my correct inclination that I had 14 outs to the best hand, I was insulted by his insinuation that I got "lucky" when I won the hand. A polite altercation ensued. He insisted that I needed to 'catch' in order to win. The way I see it, HE needed to catch cards-that-missed-me, which, in this case, were the minority. Basically, the fact that the first 5/7 of his Hold 'Em hand would make a higher-ranking Stud hand than mine is meaningless, since we were playing Hold 'Em. Right? So, who, would you say, was "ahead" at the time? Thank you for feeding my geekery. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: For Those Who Enjoy Meaningless Semantic Debates
and my ego. because you will only reply if you agree.
jk jk god i'm a loser |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: For Those Who Enjoy Meaningless Semantic Debates
Sorry, you lose:
Holdem Hi: 990 enumerated boards containing Ts 3d Jh cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV Js Ac 526 53.13 464 46.87 0 0.00 0.531 Qs Kc 464 46.87 526 53.13 0 0.00 0.469 He'll win 53.13%, you'll win 46.87%. Even if he had a two instead of an Ace, it would still only be 50/50. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: For Those Who Enjoy Meaningless Semantic Debates
'Ahead' in my opinion would mean who at a certain point is winning the hand. At the point in question he is ahead with a pair of Jacks to your King high. In the same way,
Kh Qh is not ahead of 2c 2d on a board of 10h Jh 10s, despite being a 71.465% favourite. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: For Those Who Enjoy Meaningless Semantic Debates
You have only 13 outs and he will usually have a redraw of at least 3 cards.
Mack |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: For Those Who Enjoy Meaningless Semantic Debates
[ QUOTE ]
He insisted that I needed to 'catch' in order to win. [/ QUOTE ] Let him win the verbals. You concentrate on winning the pots. Continue to feed his ego. He'll feed the pot. To me, that's a win-win situation. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: For Those Who Enjoy Meaningless Semantic Debates
[ QUOTE ]
I was insulted by his insinuation that I got "lucky" when I won the hand. [/ QUOTE ] Whenever your opponent is all-in and not drawing dead, you need to be lucky to win. You expected to get less than the whole pot. It doesn't make much of a difference if you have a slightly favorable coin-toss or one that is slightly unfavorable. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: For Those Who Enjoy Meaningless Semantic Debates
you were behind, but not by much. Who cares what he says though?
pokenum -h kh qc - ac js -- jh td 4c Holdem Hi: 990 enumerated boards containing 4c Td Jh cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV Qc Kh 464 46.87 526 53.13 0 0.00 0.469 Js Ac 526 53.13 464 46.87 0 0.00 0.531 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: For Those Who Enjoy Meaningless Semantic Debates
Pzhon is right: you are lucky on EVERY hand you win at showdown. So yes, you were lucky.
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: For Those Who Enjoy Meaningless Semantic Debates
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] He insisted that I needed to 'catch' in order to win. [/ QUOTE ] Let him win the verbals. You concentrate on winning the pots. Continue to feed his ego. He'll feed the pot. To me, that's a win-win situation. [/ QUOTE ] Touche |
|
|