|
|
#232
11-17-2005, 01:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Analysis
[ QUOTE ]
Numbers used below are: [150 = money put in preflop. 165 = money opp put in preflop + 15 blinds. 225 = money put in on flop. 67/26/7 are from Mason's post re: how these players will play post-flop] 67% of the time, AQ loses 150 26% of the time, AQ wins 165+225 = 390 7% of the time, AQ loses 150+225 = 375 = -100 + 101 - 26 = -25 67% of the time, JJ wins 165 26% of the time, JJ loses 150+225 = 375 7% of the time, JJ wins 165+225 = 390 = 110 - 98 + 27 = +39 [/ QUOTE ] I see several errors. First off, perspective. We are looking at the point in time that JJ has made it $150; who would you rather be the J making it $150 or the AQ calling $110? I believe the probabilities are also off, there is a 67% of no A or Q (6/50 * 6/49 * 6/48)and therefore a 33% chance of A or Q. 4% of the time a J will hit with the A or Q, meaning AQ will only win 29% of the time an A or Q flops. AQ loses $110 if flop misses, wins $390 when flop hits and no J, and loses 335 when flop hits and J. JJ wins $165 when flop misses AQ, loses $375 when flop hits AQ with no J and wins 390 win flop hits AQ and J hits. So through rounding we have: EV AQ = .67(-110) + .29(390) + .04(-335) = 26 EV JJ = .67(165) + .29(-370) + .04(390) = 18 So 26 > 18, so AQ is better! There is also the added fact that many players can not let go of JJ so easily and can't believe AQ hit the flop (especially the Q!) and is more likely to bet or check call the turn for added EV for AQ. 
|
|
#233
11-17-2005, 01:49 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Analysis
Hi Rococo:
No. You need to reread my analysis and you'll see that I do account for Player B (who holds the jacks) using a better strategy. best wishes, Mason
|
|
#235
11-17-2005, 01:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Analysis
[ QUOTE ]
I ask you one more time. Please explain your rationale for preferring AQs to JJ given the constraints and assumptions that you laid out. [/ QUOTE ] I give up. All I can say is that you need to reread the analysis I gave. That's the best I can do. best wishes, Mason
|
|
#236
11-17-2005, 01:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Analysis
Your response is so off-base I won't even bother to actually address it. Here's a hint: Figure out what the question that is being posed asks (hint 2: both Mason and I have stated what this question is), since you don't even have that right.
|
|
#237
11-17-2005, 02:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Analysis
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I ask you one more time. Please explain your rationale for preferring AQs to JJ given the constraints and assumptions that you laid out. [/ QUOTE ] I give up. All I can say is that you need to reread the analysis I gave. That's the best I can do. best wishes, Mason [/ QUOTE ] That's the best you can do? You don't even compare how AQ fares against JJ! Did you read my second analysis, Mason? Can you please explain anything that is incorrect about either my description of your well-defined problem or the EV calculations I provided? I will ask one last favor of you. If you don't understand why I and other people are confused about your analysis, I would invite you to ask Ed and David to provide their take on the question you posed. Frankly, I would be very surprised if either of them believe that AQs is preferable given the question you posed and the assumptions you laid out. However, it is clear that either you or I are off-base on this issue. Whatever they show to be correct, they will be able to provide an explanation that helps either you or I understand where we are off-base. Seems like that explanation would benefit all users in this forum. All I am asking for is some rational mathematical based discourse on the situation you posed. Is that fair, Mason? Can you request that your colleagues writing an NL book answer the question: Given the assumptions Mason has laid out regarding post-flop play of these players (in his Analysis post), if AQs has raised then called a reraise by JJ preflop (and both players have chips remaining), which of these hands is now better to have, and what are their relative EVs? Thank you.
|
|
#238
11-17-2005, 02:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Analysis
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I ask you one more time. Please explain your rationale for preferring AQs to JJ given the constraints and assumptions that you laid out. [/ QUOTE ] I give up. All I can say is that you need to reread the analysis I gave. That's the best I can do. best wishes, Mason [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I only read the beginning of our Masked Man's friend post. So I don't know anything about the second set of equations. [/ QUOTE ] is this whole thread some sort of sick joke?
|
|
#239
11-17-2005, 02:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Analysis
Seriously. In the time it took him to post about not having read the end of the post he could have read the end of the post.
|
|
#240
11-17-2005, 02:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Analysis
[ QUOTE ]
i figured it out! i did an ev calc and finally solved this problem! first of all, we have to adhere to the scenario mason described. forget about the preflop call AQs has already made. given that there's $315 of dead money by default in the pot, AQs has HUGE ev from the flop onward: AQs will put money into the pot when behind only 7% of the time! and only $225 when he does so. HOWEVER, he'll be ahead 26% of the time, in which cases he'll win the $225 AND the $315 in the pot! the other 2/3rds of the time he'll simply fold and not lose another cent! [ QUOTE ] When I worked for Northrop, and we were interested in blowing up the Soviet Union, I used similar techniques many times, and we weren't concerned with no limit poker, but we were concerned with real no limit. [/ QUOTE ] i'm amazed any of us are even alive at the moment. [/ QUOTE ] i was mocking mason's analysis with this post, but it's becoming clear that it probably reflects his thought process accurately. it seems like he looked at the ev for AQs and saw that it was positive, so there ya go, it's profitable! but he apparently didn't realize that JJ has GREATER EV in the situation. how can both hands be +ev? because he magically created a pot of $315 in dead money. he asked us to ignore how it got there, so slong and diablo did just that, but proved that JJ would STILL be more profitable given that scenario. now mason says he gives up on explaining, meanwhile also saying he didn't even read diablo's 2nd set of equations. wow, just wow.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
