Beginner's Poker FAQ - Ready For Review

[SheridanCat]

Again, thanks pzhon for the excellent comments.

[ QUOTE ]

http://twodimes.net/h/?z=774083
pokenum -h 5h 4h - 5d 4d -- ad 7h 6h 3c
cards EV
5h 4h 0.602
5d 4d 0.398

On that board, 54 with at least one heart is the nuts because it is equal to or better than any other hand. 5d 4d is not the nuts because it could be significantly behind.


[/ QUOTE ]

I understand what you're getting at but the point is we're talking about "the nuts" at a given point during the deal. Of course, the hand with the hearts has a significant chance of improving to the nuts on the river, but on the turn it's not the nuts. It's a draw at a better hand but even if it improves to a flush on the river it still may not be the nuts.

We're just trying to define the nuts, not draws at the nuts. We are crystal clear in the FAQ that over the course of the deal what the nuts is changes. I fully understand that to say something is "the nuts" on the flop or turn is a bit nonsensical since there are cards to come, but people hear the word used that way all the time on television broadcasts, so it might be nice for them to really understand what they're hearing.

[ QUOTE ]

I think there should be some mention of analyzers such as Two Dimes and Poker Stove. I'm a mathematician, and I don't bother to do the calculations myself. I use these excellent tools.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, for sure. That was in the original set of questions posted on this forum but I left it out somehow. I'll add it today.

[ QUOTE ]

Sorry, but although that is common advice, it is weak-tight and wrong. A maniac is essentially posting an extra blind, and more blind money means there is more reason to get involved, not less, even if you can't steal the blinds.


[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, I give. After spending some quality time with PokerStove last night, I agree with you. I'll modify my answer.

Regards,

T

[SheridanCat]

Thanks for the comments, Mason.

[ QUOTE ]

I think that's the best way to do it. There are some things in your FAQ which are probably not appropriate for us to endorse, and there are some things which we for sure don't agree with. (An example of this is your endorsement of the Omaha 8 book by Tenner and Krieger.)


[/ QUOTE ]

One day I hope to understand why you rated the Tenner/Krieger book so low. I understand the words you use in your review about it being "unintelligible" but I don't see what is unintelligible about it. Maybe its the years I spent studying philosophy mumbo jumbo finally paying off.

[ QUOTE ]

However, feel free to post it every now and then, but just make sure to note that it is your work and not an official Two Plus Two document.


[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough, Mason. Thanks.

Regards,

T

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
Again, thanks pzhon for the excellent comments.

[/ QUOTE ]
You are welcome.

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

http://twodimes.net/h/?z=774083
pokenum -h 5h 4h - 5d 4d -- ad 7h 6h 3c
cards EV
5h 4h 0.602
5d 4d 0.398

On that board, 54 with at least one heart is the nuts because it is equal to or better than any other hand. 5d 4d is not the nuts because it could be significantly behind.


[/ QUOTE ]

I understand what you're getting at but the point is we're talking about "the nuts" at a given point during the deal. Of course, the hand with the hearts has a significant chance of improving to the nuts on the river, but on the turn it's not the nuts. It's a draw at a better hand but even if it improves to a flush on the river it still may not be the nuts.

We're just trying to define the nuts, not draws at the nuts. We are crystal clear in the FAQ that over the course of the deal what the nuts is changes. I fully understand that to say something is "the nuts" on the flop or turn is a bit nonsensical since there are cards to come, but people hear the word used that way all the time on television broadcasts, so it might be nice for them to really understand what they're hearing.

[/ QUOTE ]
You keep mentioning draws at the nuts. I haven't said that, and it shouldn't be a part of the definition of the nuts.

The nuts on the turn means a hand that is ahead or equal to any other hand.

I don't understand why you say 5h 4h isn't the nuts, but other 54 hands are the nuts. That makes no sense. Typo? I say 5d 4d is not the nuts on the turn because it is behind 5h 4h. No hand is ahead of 5h 4h on the turn. (This would be true if it only had a flush draw, not a draw to the straight-flush. It would still be the nuts on a board of Ah 7h 6c 3d. So would 5h 4s.) That makes it the nuts on the turn.

The fact that 5d 4d would be tied or ahead of all hand if the game ended after the turn does not make it the nuts, as the game doesn't end on the turn. While the mistake of treating it as the nuts would not be so serious, it would be a big mistake to treat Ad 4d as the nuts on a board of Ks Qs Jc Tc.

Whether you believe me and Two Dimes or not, your example is flawed. There are clear examples showing what the nuts means. Why not include one of those?

[RJT]

Have 2 ideas.

1)Maybe we can all monitor this thread to make sure that it is always near the first few pages of new posts. To do this when one of us sees that it is getting further back in position, we can just send a reply saying "just updating to head of the line" something like that - then it gets to first page. We don't have to keep it front and center. Although, I think it would be a good idea to usually have it on the first page; others might not agree. If we all monitor it, Cat doesn't have to take on all the responsibility. She has already gone above and beyond the call of duty.

2)Cat, can you think a way to note when you have added or edited your FAQs? This way we can see new items. Perhaps, in the index in parenthesis (e.g.updated x/xx/05).

RJT

[Joe B.]

why can this faq be sticky on top in this forum.

the micro limit faq they sticky it in the micro limit forum

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
why can this faq be sticky on top in this forum.

the micro limit faq they sticky it in the micro limit forum

[/ QUOTE ]
First, 2+2 isn't planning to publish a book on microlimits. I believe Ed Miller is writing a book for beginners.

Second, the microlimit FAQ contains less material, and much of it concerns things like posting guidelines.

Third, as Mason Malmuth said, 2+2 does not agree with or endorse much of the content in this FAQ, for example, the book recommendations.

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why can this faq be sticky on top in this forum.

the micro limit faq they sticky it in the micro limit forum

[/ QUOTE ]
First, 2+2 isn't planning to publish a book on microlimits. I believe Ed Miller is writing a book for beginners.

I believe 2+2 does not endorse much of the content in this FAQ, for example, the book recommendations.

[/ QUOTE ]


See this thread for details.
Link

[larrondo]

Great job.

I'm told the Omaha/8 section of super system 2 is quite good, as well. Perhaps it's worth a mention, since there is so little good writing about that game.