Player Discussion

[Wayfare]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm sorry, but I have had enough. I'll let others elaborate.

MM

[/ QUOTE ]

Mason, no-one is going to elaborate, because no-one has a f'ing clue what you are getting at.

JG

[/ QUOTE ]

[voltron.]

Even if you guys could agree on EV calculations, how would they even answer the question of which hand is worth more? All this doesn't seem like an accurate way of evaluating a NL hand anyway.

Mason's attitude towards everyone in this thread is awful, he is not making himself look good here.

[El Diablo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm sorry, but I have had enough. I'll let others elaborate.

MM

[/ QUOTE ]

Mason, no-one is going to elaborate, because no-one has a f'ing clue what you are getting at.

JG

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I elaborated in detailed and showed exactly what Mason was getting at and where he got tripped up in his analysis.

What Mason got right was that given a certain set of simple assumptions, it is better (more +EV) for AQs to call than to fold.

However, Mason erred in extrapolating from that into believing that that fact made AQs a preferable hand to JJ in this specific situation.

Mason did half the work in his analysis. He figured out that AQs was +EV of 15. However, the conclusion he reached, that this made AQs better than JJ, is flawed. This is because he forgot about the fact that both of these hands can be +EV in this situation given the dead money in the pot. So, while AQs is +EV, JJ is still more +EV, and thus the better, more profitable hand, which the player should prefer to have.