|
|
#2
04-17-2005, 09:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Mason e-mail
Site operator = scumbag.
enough said. 
|
|
#4
04-17-2005, 09:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Mason e-mail
[ QUOTE ]
Modified Hold'em Hand Groupings: Group 1: AA KKQQ JJ AKs Group 2: TT AQs AJs KQs AK Group 3: 99 KTs QJs KJs ATs AQ Group 4: A8s KQ 88 QTs A9s AT AJ JTs Group 5: 77 Q9s KJ QJ JT A7s A6s A5s A4s A3s A2s J9s T9s K9s KT QT Group 6: 66 J8s 98s T8s 55 J9 43s 75s T9 33 98 64s 22 K8s K7s K6s K5s K4s K3s K2s Q8s 44 87s 97s Group 7: 87 53s A9 Q9 76s 42s 32s 96s 85s J8 J7s 65 54 74s K9 T8 76 65s 54s 86s [/ QUOTE ] 53s is stronger than 86s and 54s? 54o is stronger than 54s? No wonder I'm such a bad poker player
|
|
#5
04-17-2005, 09:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Mason e-mail
[ QUOTE ]
53s is stronger than 86s and 54s? 54o is stronger than 54s? No wonder I'm such a bad poker player [/ QUOTE ] ni han
|
|
#6
04-17-2005, 09:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Mason e-mail
[ QUOTE ]
All I know is that the 2nd chart ranks KTs waaaay too high. [/ QUOTE ] I hate talking about poker here and I know you might not believe me because of the original HEPFAP charts, but KTs is actually a better hand than JTs. EDIT: Btw, these second charts clearly put hands they put in different groups in random/swapped places, regardless of what the site says.
|
|
#7
04-17-2005, 09:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Mason e-mail
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] 53s is stronger than 86s and 54s? 54o is stronger than 54s? No wonder I'm such a bad poker player [/ QUOTE ] ni han [/ QUOTE ] Group, look it up in the dictionary.
|
|
#8
04-17-2005, 10:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Mason e-mail
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] 53s is stronger than 86s and 54s? 54o is stronger than 54s? No wonder I'm such a bad poker player [/ QUOTE ] ni han [/ QUOTE ] Group, look it up in the dictionary. [/ QUOTE ] At the top of the page [ QUOTE ] The hands are listed in groups from strongest to weakest. Also within each grouping, the stronger hands are listed first so in Sklansky Group3, 99 is supposedly stronger then AQ [/ QUOTE ]
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
