The Mathematics of Poker

[Pirana]

This book is definitely not for the average poker players, but it is excellent for those who can comprehend it. I noticed an error on the top of page 18:
p(A & B & C) = (11 / 245) * (9 /48)
= 33 / 3920 (not 4020).

I have a question about equation 3.2 on page 36. I don't understand how the numerator "p(A | B) p (B)" was arrived at. Shouldn't the numerator be
p(A) p(B | A)?

[Jerrod Ankenman]

[ QUOTE ]
This book is definitely not for the average poker players, but it is excellent for those who can comprehend it. I noticed an error on the top of page 18:
p(A & B & C) = (11 / 245) * (9 /48)
= 33 / 3920 (not 4020).

I have a question about equation 3.2 on page 36. I don't understand how the numerator "p(A | B) p (B)" was arrived at. Shouldn't the numerator be
p(A) p(B | A)?

[/ QUOTE ]

The 3920 error will be in the next errata which will be posted on the website real soon now.

Both p(A)p(B|A) and p(B)p(A|B) are equal to p(A and B) and therefore to each other.

[Galwegian]

Question for the authors: Why did you not include a more extensive bibliography? It would be very useful for people that want to think seriously about the theory and would like to know what has and has not been done in this field. There must be a lot of game theory papers out there that would br of great interest to someone that has mastered the material in this book.

[7csCB]

A while back one of the others stated the book would likely be available though Pokerstars' FPP store.

Is this still in the works?

Thanks

[DanoMak]

I looked today and saw it for 1000 FPPs, surprisingly less than most of the books available.

[7csCB]

Thanks.

Hmmm...That's weird. It's available to order, which I did. But it's not on display at the FPP books link,

http://www.pokerstars.com/fpp/store/books/

[BigBroither]

I have a question, too. I don't understand the bottom of page 124. It seems like Y's pot equity - when Y is called - is rated as 3/5 and X's as 2/5. But I don't get it, as X is in the pot with better hand, shouldn't it be 3.5/5 for X and 1.5 for Y?

Before the last equations it is even said "would be able to beat it", but after the calculations show that Y wins every time he pushes with 0.3 and better, while in reality he wins only 50% of those jams.

Nobody seems to have noticed that so far, so it's probably just a blackout on my part and I don't see the light. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[kidpokeher]

[ QUOTE ]
I looked today and saw it for 1000 FPPs, surprisingly less than most of the books available.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the heads-up. Just ordered it.

[scorer]

Yep, thanks for the heads up on pokerstars for this book..

[Jerrod Ankenman]

[ QUOTE ]
I have a question, too. I don't understand the bottom of page 124. It seems like Y's pot equity - when Y is called - is rated as 3/5 and X's as 2/5. But I don't get it, as X is in the pot with better hand, shouldn't it be 3.5/5 for X and 1.5 for Y?

Before the last equations it is even said "would be able to beat it", but after the calculations show that Y wins every time he pushes with 0.3 and better, while in reality he wins only 50% of those jams.

Nobody seems to have noticed that so far, so it's probably just a blackout on my part and I don't see the light. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

In that section we're discussing the threshold hand x. So in the example there, where Y jams with 50% and X jams 30%, when X is at his threshold (in this case 0.3), then Y wins all those hands.

If we were talking about the equity of the game or something, you'd be right - when both players are below 0.3, they would each win 50%. But we're talking about making X indifferent at his threshold hand. Hence Y always beats him when below this hand.

Jerrod